Canon EF 14mm II vs 16-35mm II wide angle lens comparison

Comparison of Canon’s two top of the line wide angle lens

Comments

Ken Korsh says:

Great presentation !
what is your opinion of the 14mm II VS 14mm (NOt the upgraded model)
sharpness, contrast, etc.
thanks

Ponti Ramanta says:

or if you were a videographer.
for videomaking purposes, every f stop wider is critical in low light condition especially in run & gun environment, because the shutter speed is limited on 1/30 as the lowest, and most cinematic videographer use fixed shutter speed 1/50 @25fps or 1/48 @24 fps via magic lantern

Bill Fraser says:

The end of the lens at the camera end.

Nick Murray says:

I think there is so many amazing things you can do with a wide angle. I am never without one. If you can afford one get it. You will love it.

Andrea Mangano says:

You forgot to mention that the 14mm is a RECTILINEAR wide angle lens. The 16-35mm isnt. That’s great for architecture because maintain lines straight.

GuillaumeErard.com - Aikido and Budo in Japan says:

Very helpful thanks. Given that I use my wide angle (17-40) mostly for Glidecam work, the zoom is not really useful for me (not mentioning having to rebalance the whole thing if I do zoom) so a prime seems like the best option, especially if it is lighter than the 16-35. The price however…

John Smith says:

A sharpness test of the corners would have added some value. You like wider, that’s all we learned.

Sara Salman says:

Hello Nick, what do you think of the 20-105mm?

Stephen Shi says:

dont know you are a camera guy too

jonnyf88 says:

That shot of the Eiffel Tower was absolutely PHENOMENAL.

shayma. says:

what about using the 14mm for film? do you think it’s a good choice?

Olegasphoto says:

there is also the samyang 14mm f2.8 which is way more accessible and offers similar quality. here’s my review in russian: http://olegasphoto.com.ua/index.php/obzor-samyang-14mm-f2-8-if-ed-mc-aspherical/

Giutubo Spatubo says:

The biggest down side of the 14mm is the filter holder on the back. Can’t even fit a cir. polar. That’s a deal break for me.

mod2013 says:

Thx for the comparison!

santora1957 says:

The only filter I like using, are UV or clear filters, for the sole purpose of protecting the lens.  Especially when I’m shooting around water.

NathalyCalle says:

excellent clear and detail review/comparison…thanks

Dylan Tramp says:

Hey nick i am looking to pick up a wide angle lens for myself, preferably a zoom but it isn’t a hassle, though i want to try and pick up one thats in the 500-700 price range, if anyone can help me out that be awesome.

Jan Plexy says:

I got both lenses, but they are poor compared to Nikon’s 14-24

GO TO ACTIVE CHANNEL CALLED MELCLAND says:

Is this the widest lense for canon with 2.8 aperture?

deb0atl says:

Not a single comment about image quality.  IQ is the biggest determining factor in choosing one of these lenses.  I own both and while I love the versatility of the 16-35, it can’t touch the 14mm prime’s sharpness at ANY aperture.

Joel Smith says:

very useful thank you

Koca Metallec says:

What about image quality ????

Sam D'Cruz says:

i have the 17-40 – very sharp, incredible lens. dont see the value of the 16-35 or 14 (unless you were specifically only shooting events and need the 2.8). when im shooting wide im almost never at the lowest F number. generally more around the F6.3 to F11

Pixelens Photography says:

Hi Nick, If i need to pick up a lens for both video and photo purpose for a cinematic wedding/ couple shoots which one is preferable? And if only video purpose? on mark 3

Big Shot Graffix says:

Thanks! very helpful comparison

Ponti Ramanta says:

EF 14mm f2.8L (mark I & II) and EF 16-35 f2.8L (make I & II) ARE rectilinear lenses, while EF 15mm f2.8 and EF 8-15mm f4L are fisheye/non-rectilinear lenses.

Prue Nevins says:

Hi Nick I enjoy your posts so much. If you could have only 1 wide angle lens what would it be? 

Sam D'Cruz says:

with the great high iso performance now this is less of an issue as it was a few years ago

Urban Exploration Finland with Janne Flinck says:

Im very beginner, so dont get mad, but why not just get fisheye?

Clover Carroll says:

great review thanks for doing it.

lafont720 says:

Considering that it is a prime lens does the 14mm do better with barrel distortion and sharpness in the edges than the zoom at 16mm? I would hope so for the extra 800. 

Laurie Meageski says:

great share

Robert Sheehan II says:

Speak louder or mix your audio better. I’m sure not going to watch a video I can’t hear.

Nick Murray says:

The prime has it over the zoom in sharpness. Still the 16-35 is very sharp in the center of the frame

Alejandro Pastrana says:

hey, how about the 8-15 mm ? is it too extreme?

Arsen Zahray says:

how do those lenses compare in terms of image quality?

Colby Stewart says:

Thank you for this great video. Going on a motorcycle touring trip next month. Would you recommend a wide angle lens; or is it just a matter of choice?

Johnston Creative says:

Great video. Thank you

Karissa Pukas says:

This was fantastic! Thank you very much for this!!

 Write a comment

*

Do you like our videos?
Do you want to see more like that?

Please click below to support us on Facebook!