Forum

Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: 17-40 appears far superior to 16-35 II in your data  (Read 382 times)
arslens
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« on: February 11, 2014, 07:54:08 PM »

This a comment for this page on the website
Your data (plots) show that, contrary to expectations based on previous photographers' reviews, and contradicting your own words in the review, the edge-to-edge sharpness of the Canon 17-40 far exceeds the 16-35 II at any aperture and fl they have in common (ie, f/4 and smaller). In fact, the 17-40 performs almost as well as the famous Nikon 14-24, on comparable bodies, at any fl and f/# they have in common, while the 16-35 II is clearly inferior to these two lenses, based on your sharpness results (using your comparison tool). There are some issues with vignetting and lateral chromatic aberration in the 17-40, but those are easily corrected in software these days, while sharpness cannot (easily) be improved in post.

These results on the 17-40 are surprising based on what has already been written in the past, comparing the 17-40 to the 16-35 (II). In fact, your own review (text) that accompanies your plots basically overlooks the data, choosing instead to echo previous reviews -- which, again, are inconsistent with your data. I am puzzled that you would not speak to your own findings (data).

I don't understand your reply to "Smokes the 16-35?" above. That person has a valid point. In response, you imply that any f/2.8 lens automatically gets a higher score than a similar f/4 lens, which doesn't make sense.
Logged
Sophie
DxOMark Community Manager
Full Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 220


« Reply #1 on: February 24, 2014, 05:53:12 PM »

Dear Arslens,

Thanks a lot for your contribution to this forum and your interest in DxOMark.
The 17-40mm is  superior in sharpness uniformity and that is what we reported in our review. Please have a look at our comparison here: http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-17-40mm-f-4L-USM-lens-review-Popular-high-performance-option/Canon-EF-17-40mm-f-4L-USM-versus-Canon-EF-16-35mm-f-2.8L-II-USM

What Emilie tried to explain in her previous post is that overall scores are closer because the 16-35mm II is brighter.

Hope this clarification will satisfy you.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to: