Canon 16-35 II best wide angle lens?

Im ready to upgrade my 17-40, its about time, i think that was my first lens i ever got. loved it but just ready for something new.

Is the 16-35 II the best out there?

i have a 5D mkIII

Did you enjoy the 17-40?
if so, the 16-35ii is sharper corner to corner. the 16-35 is a great lens... but it just never did anything for me. I loved the 24ii but that's just based on how i shoot.

What's wrong with your 17-40? What do you want out of a lens that it doesn't do for you? The Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L, 14mm f/2.8L II, and 16-35mm f/2.8L II are all great lenses. But they all do different things better than each other.

Sounds like a bad case of "gas" (gear acquisition syndrome). The best is a Nikon 14-24 with an adapter---if you're willing to do everything manually. If not, yes, the 16-35 is an underrated excellent wide angle for a full frame Canon.

my 17-40 is way too soft om the edges, used it today and was really disappointed

I'm sure you were expecting this, but primes are your best answer if you feel your corner sharpness is compromised. I don't think many wide zoom lenses will get "that" much more corner sharpness to justify an upgrade; assuming thats your only reason for needing a new wide-zoom.

spend $400 on the Samyang 14 2.8. No way I would pony up the cash for the 16-35 when there are better (less convenient though) options. Of course, if you require a zoom then its a different story..

DonJuanMair wrote in post #16436286
my 17-40 is way too soft om the edges, used it today and was really disappointed

My 16-35 II is similarly soft in the corners as my 17-40 was. With that said, I would not recommend the 16-35 II if you are after sharpness. You'll want the more expensive 14L II or 17L TS-E.

I never understand why people worry about corner sharpness. How often do you place an important subject in the corner of your frame at 16mm? Probably not too often and even then, you'll only notice it at 100% crop

i would never use a 16-35 to place an important subject id use it for landscapes and interiors only, hence the reason for wanting corner to corner sharpness.

Ill have to give the 17mm TS some thought then

DonJuanMair wrote in post #16436210
Im ready to upgrade my 17-40, its about time, i think that was my first lens i ever got. loved it but just ready for something new.

Is the 16-35 II the best out there?

i have a 5D mkIII

I believe so. here's a read that might interest you.

http://www.dpreview.co​m/forums/post/52456916

There is no "best" wide angle lens. The Nikon 14-24 is the "best" zoom in terms of IQ, but doesn't AF on Canon. Since your "best" IQ lens isn't going to have AF, I'd argue the Zeiss 21mm is the "best" wide angle for Canon. If you want AF (or "versatility" or "weather sealing"), the 17-40. The 16-35 is only good for f/2.8. I'm not even sure it's good for that, relatively speaking.

17-40 rules!

LostArk wrote in post #16436618
Since your "best" IQ lens isn't going to have AF, I'd argue the Zeiss 21mm is the "best" wide angle for Canon.

Hard to argue against this if it's corner-to-corner sharpness you're after.

DonJuanMair wrote in post #16436462
i would never use a 16-35 to place an important subject id use it for landscapes and interiors only, hence the reason for wanting corner to corner sharpness.

Ill have to give the 17mm TS some thought then

Post some examples of your dissapointing corner sharpness please?

I've tried most of the wide options for Canon, since I'm primarily a wide shooter.. and I will tell you this, the best ultra wide lens for Canon (and arguable on other platforms as well) is the 17 TS-E.

It's amazingly sharp, extremely versatile and can get wider than just about anything out there if you want to do some shift panos.

My only gripe is the flaring which can be pretty bad in intense lighting.

I sold my copy of the 16-35 II because it was too soft (especially in the corners). I use wide angles for landscaping only, so never needed a zoom or AF. I now replaced it with the Rokinon 14mm, Zeiss 21mm and TS-E 24 II.