question about 16-35 f/4 IS

I wanted to get everyone's opinion on this lens. I am a portrait and wedding photographer, but would like to try and do some landscape shots on the side. But, in order for me to justify the purchase, I would need this lens to be able to be used for my main business. I really don't see it being used for general portraiture, but I am wondering how this lens would perform for extra large group shots when my 24-70 isn't quite wide enough, or to get that general super wide angle view of the reception. I am also considering the Rok. 14mm for that, but I think the 16 would be plenty wide enough. Also, how would it compare against my 24-70 from 24-35mm? This would be for situations where I am supplementing the lighting, or outdoors where f/4 would be plenty.

It is super sharp, and for group shots, usually one must have more depth of field than even f/4 offers, so your stopping down, so f/2.8 lenses need not apply.

I just did a series of group shots for a class photo, and using this lens = less distortion in the corners than 24mm used to offer on my 24-70mm L mark 1.

Which 24-70mm do you have? With my Mark1, I found that 24mm was almost useless for group shots as anyone in edges was heavily distorted.

It will do a bang up job for that purpose and it's a killer wide angle for everything else as well.

It is indeed a great lens; you get a lot more from 16-24 that will work for the group shots you describe. Sometimes I feel like 16 is a little too wide, but any minimal distortion can be fixed/adjusted in post. I have the 24-70 v2, and I think the 16-35 is on par with it in the 24-35 zone, maybe even a little better at 24 as CyberDyne suggested because that's in the sweet spot of the 16-35. And the IS is nice to have too. I don't think you will be disappointed.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #18021379
Which 24-70mm do you have? With my Mark1, I found that 24mm was almost useless for group shots as anyone in edges was heavily distorted.

I have the Canon 24-70 f/2.8 II.

It is hard to find a post not showing love for that lens.
I'm considering it even though I have a 16-35 f/2.8L II which I like and don't use all that much.

I've ultra wide group shots should be rare, and I'de wait for the 16-35iii rumored, you should really get a 2.8 lens. How often is 24mm not wide enough for groups? You'de be introducing some serious distortion if 24 isnt wide enough, even at 24mm, I'de shy away.

You should look into the 15-30 f2.8 tamron if you must have a group photo lens, I find 2.8 plenty of DOF when shooting wide angle. Sharpness wise, it isnt an issue with the 16-35 f4, it's very sharp across the frame wide open.

supposedly the 16-35iii is about to come out in july or something.

I just took the 16-35 4IS out of the bag I use for clients. I was doing this WA zoom, the 70-200 2.8 II and a Zeiss 50/2 Makro for a couple years (before it was the 16-35LII and a 50L). I don't use wider than 24mm with people, so I flipped in my Zeiss 25 and a 35 instead. It couldn't have been a better decision