Canon 16-35 F/4L IS for Weddings

Hello everyone,
Has anyone used or uses the Canon 16-35 F/4L IS for weddings? What are your thoughts on it?

I currently own the efs 10-22 and use it a lot for real estate photography and sometimes use it for weddings—pretty rarely now though because I just use the 24-70 f/2.8L II.

My focal length for weddings currently covers 24-200mm and I have rebel crop cameras as well that I can use the 10-22. I am wondering it this lens would be a good investment or not for me... would like to hear people's thoughts who have used this lens for weddings.

It really depends on whether or not you plan to use the lens without a flash when indoors or not. There have been plenty of times I use my 16-35 F2.8 in dark churches at F2.8. I'd considered the switch but as sharp as the lens is I can't afford to lose F2.8.

I use the Nikon version, so I can comment only on the F4 IS/VR aspect. I find F4 fine, for both focus and shutter speed. In dark churches when I want a wide shot it's no problem, partly because of the VR, I just take a few at 1/30 to 1/50th to make sure the people are still enough in at least one. I don't use it so much at reception, but they're usually so dark ambient isn't an option even if I was shooting F0.5. Fortunately I understand flash and use it extensively at receptions.

I have one and occasionally us it during receptions for dance floor photos. With flash it's fine. IMO it performs better than my old 16-35 f/2.8L II did.

I sold my f2.8 mk1 and replaced it with this lens. I use it for wide church shots, dancing shots, where I mostly at f5.6. I also use it for venue shots as well. The IS really helps in this case since I don't carry tripod.

Interesting comments everyone. Thank you!
I understand flash pretty well as well, so I am sure this lens would be a great addition. I'll think about it

Good to hear. Ordered this lens for my kit for real estate work, glad to hear that it might be useful every now and then for weddings. Thanks for asking the question, Joel and thank you Peter, Tim, Tim, and Sonny for your answers.

Always disappointed in the 17-40L and the 16-35 2.8 II. I don't care what anyone says, both just aren't sharp enough.

I've been eying this one for a while, mainly for dancing at receptions. I usually shoot them at f4 anyway, and like the distortion.

Plus it would double as a killer landscape lens.

I had a loaner for a week and had a chance to shoot a military ball, and it was fantastic. As sharp as my 24-70 II. IS definitely helped in the darker reception environment and my higher ISO shots cleans up fine in post.