Canon EF 16-35mm f/4 IS USM 'L' lens review with samples (Full-frame and APS-C)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 24 сен 2024
- Dear everyone. Here is my gift to you: one review of what is probably Canon's best ultra wide-angle lens (for full-frame cameras). How good really is it? And how does it compare to the Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8 VC USD?
Find it here (Amazon affiliate link):
geni.us/canone...
If you've found this or other videos I've made to be helpful, then support me on Patreon! www.patreon.co...
My own Canon 70D had to be sold as I was saving up for my wedding/ honeymoon...for this review I borrowed my mother-in-law's, hehe.
All pictures and footage shot by me on Canon 6D and 70D cameras.
Equipment I use to make my videos (Amazon affiliate links):
Canon EOS R5: geni.us/CanonE...
Canon EF-RF Adaptor: geni.us/CanonE...
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 'Art': geni.us/Sigma5...
Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 IS STM: geni.us/CanonR...
Marumi Fit and Slim CPL Filter: geni.us/Marumi...
AudioTechnica AT2020USB+ Microphone: geni.us/AT2020...
Rode Smartlav+ Microphone: geni.us/RodeSm...
Rode SC3 adapter: geni.us/RodeSC...
Zoom H1n Recorder: geni.us/ZoomH1...
DJI Mini 2 Drone: geni.us/DJIMin...
Music:
'Opportunity Walks', Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0
creativecommons...
I still use this beast for architecture. It works wonders in hot countries where low light is not an issue. The only thing to know is that this is NOT a portait lens. In lightroom, the subject may not be detected via AI too. But this is my go-to lens for architecture. Even in 2023, it is so sharp. There is not much between this and its RF successor.
You’re my go to guy for lens reviews. Those test charts really help.
Really enjoy all of your lens reviews. Very informative.
Hello Christopher, thank you for all the reviews and all the bases you cover from large to small and cheap to cheerful.
The flare test result was a big surprise for me. I have had this lens for almost two years and I have never had any issues with flaring or loss of contrast even when the sun is in right in the frame. Infact, I have seen this lens producing some very minor ghosts only in less than ten pictures!
Yes I agree, subjecting it to direct sunlight whilst videoing isn't really a true test of this lens! Also the distortion and vignetting you talked about is not that bad at all!
+Woodgate Photography Why would using it on a sunny day while filming not be a true test for this?
+redtails Because it's not a photo, it's a video
Woodgate Photography Are you saying a lens flares differently when used in video mode compared to taking photos...?
^^ I guess that's what he does ^^
I just bought this lens to use on my 6d, love it, love it, love it, far, far, far better then the 17-40!!!!
Your voice is therapeutic!!!!
Agree 100%. Christopher's voice is so nice to listen to! And his advice is always on point.
I bought one for a Used 1DX body I purchased. I like getting deep in the action when shooting, close up to my subjects etc.. and I would be shooting F/4 and up all the time so this lends fits my need perfectly. And you get IS to boot :)
As I await Canon to release a modern 16-35 f/2.8, I got this lens for my real estate and automotive photography needs. The current f/2.8 has horrible distortion, chromatic aberration, and lens hood design (usually not something people care about, but I use hoods constantly). I made the right decision with this lens as it's a stellar performer for my needs, with its only true shortcoming being that it's one stop slower. Because of this, it's not ideal for low light, but I seldom find myself in need of fast apertures with ultra wide angle shots anyway. So perhaps not a perfect wedding lens, but easily Canon's best ultra wide.
Chris, I have recently gotten into photography very heavily, and your reviews are top notch. Thank you so much for doing what you do. It is ever so helpful for guys like us! I would love to see you do some instructional type videos, and maybe some on location professional videos. Cheers, and thanks again!
I get much less flaring with my 16-35 f4 I am no sure why it became a problem in your test 🙂
Every time i watch your videos i spend money :]
:))
Every time I watch his videos I wish I had money to spend
Every time you want to spend money, you watch his videos :-D
ahahahaha 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
nice review as usual. You have never disappointed your audience with your honest in depth review.
On a note, I thought you sold your 70D and kept your 60D for your APSC Camera. Did you buy a new one? if you did, why didn't you buy 80D instead?
He may have recorded the video before he sold his camera.
For this particular video I borrowed my mother in law's 70D :-)
My fav lens ever, fun & only second to my sigma art 40mm
The Tamron 16-30mm f/2.8 VC is sharp and has a great price. However it doesn't accept filters. Polarized and ND filter are essential for landscape photography and the 15-30mm focal range is ideal for landscape photography. Tamron should put a filte ring in a future version. A filter ring even at 100mm.
Hi,
This lens is already in the market for such a long time, it has proven to be a an excellent lens, also there are so many reviews on the tube and on the net of this lens. There is no need to repeat findings already done by others. You should spend your precious time on reviewing currently made lenses and quickly as well.
Hope you take this as suggestion not a criticism.
+tean tan I tend to include videos of both new and old lenses, because it's not just when lenses come out new that people are interested in seeing a review.
The sun spike examples I’ve seen from the canon lens are super nice.
Another concise, yet complete, review; nice job!
Thank you for the review! I've heard good reviews of this lens because of the IS. I can live with the f/4 max aperture because I only plan to shoot landscapes and creative still life with it.
I have been looking for a 10mm upwards zoom for the 7DII, so I can keep using the Cokin P filters, but none of the 3 main choices had you singing their praises due to chromatic aberrations, soft corners etc. As I want it for landscape photography, so in the main using apertures of f8-f11,I think I will go with this one for the 5DIII. Then either deal with the vignetting caused by using undersized filters or use bracketed exposures and luminosity masks. Having the 14 basic filters in Cokin P size, I refuse to start again in Z size or buy Lee filters as I don't think the returns justify it. By the time you have bought the 1,2,3,5&10 stop ND, 1,2,3 ND grads, 1,2&3 reverse grads, 2&3 hard grads and polariser you could have bought yourself a decent house with the money. I accept I with have to buy the correct size polarising filter to help with the lens flare but rather that and have sharp images with practically zero CA than compromise elsewhere. Thank you again, I'm really glad you have this channel and I don't know if you realise how much your opinion is valued in the Canon community.
Thank you Christ!, I always watch carefully again and again your review videos before I buy any lens. Hope you have more review about Canon "L" lens like Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L, Canon 35mm f/1.4L too :)
Oh, yay! I've been keeping my eye on that lens! I'm glad you got your hands on it for a review.
+Smaakjeks K HEY I KNOW YOU!!! T & C LIVE ON THURSDAYS :OOO
Matthew White
Haha, yes, I haunt several photography channels :D
fantastic work chris! many thanks!
i am using Canon 16-35mm f2.8 II L , it is amazing in flaring
Can you do the mk2 2.8 version of this lens please
0:18 “its about 650 lbs..” me: holy f*ck ooooh British pounds nvm
Chris I'd be interested (and probably you as well) to see how this holds up on an R5 next to the new 14-35 f4 . You the best!
Do you have a video on the 16-35 2.8 version mark I ?
Same question..
Thank you for this review my friend!
Very good comparison video, thanks for this.
Did you have a chance to compare the real Tamrom's 15mm? Everybody says in fact it looks like 16.
Oh is here, thanks!!
I’d disagree with your assessment about the 17-55 being better than this for APS-C sensors. Especially the newer M50 for example which I use which has a Digic 8 processor. 1: L series glass is L series glass. It’s for pros, that’s why it costs so much and why that red ring is so sought after.
2; The 17-55 is due a MAJOR update as it’s like 10 years old compared to this bad boy only being 4. This lens will also be resellable for 95 percent of its worth and you’ll be able to use it on FF when you upgrade. If you don’t know if you’re serious about photography and video making, sure go with the cheaper older 17-55. But if you’re serious, this is the wide angle you want. Especially with the new speedbooster.
Hey Crist, a big fan here, I've been following you for some years now, will you consider doing a review on the Tamron SP 15-30 2.8 vc (version one) lens? Thank you in advance!
I already have :-)
@@christopherfrost which one would you pick? The Canon 16-35 f/4 or the Tamron 15-30 f/2.8?
Does it work with Canon 80D? Crop sensor
youtube needs a nikon version of you ! great reviews
Did you ever review the 2.8 versions?
great review and precised as usual. thump up 👍
love that zorki 4 film rangefinder at the end of your review :) I have one myself with the same Jupiter 8.
Hey Christopher, in light of RF now, would you still recommend this over the RF 15-35 2.8 for my EOS RP? Especially if I get the EF-RF adapter for free? f/4 is only one stop slower than f/2.8, and this lens only costs nearly 1/3 of the RF 15-35... Your opinion is much appreciated!
It will be a hybrid lens for me, for landscapes and 70% video work/vlogging.
Hello nice review! I'm having some doubts i have Canon 70D and i'm not sure about this lens or sigma 18-35 f1.8, in apsc sigma has better sharpness and overall image quality but my main concern is that i will probably move to FF in 2 or 3 years so i think canon 16-35 f4L would be a smarter choice but i'm concerned with image quality on apsc sensor, do you think it's a very good quality lens?
I have the Canon for my landscape photography and as my standard lens! I'm really pleased with it!! Although I consider getting a secondary light camera for little adventures or a day in the city, where I don't want such a heavy piece of kit...
+Der Xer ... The bottom line for you and other Canon owners [and I'm a Pentax DSLR-centric, semi-'retired', non-fanboy "old school" 'Nikon' pro, BTW -- not "semi-pro", whatever that's supposed to mean]: Just keep a search on at a certain sometimes questionable auction site for barely used Canon M3 bundles... which some people are giving up for a song --->
Short sighted people fail to grasp the M3 *system* due to Canon's weak initial start with mirrorless (the original EOS M with half-baked initial firmware) and their own unrealistic expectations for the M3 to be some kind of DSLR substitute (as per the breathless hype for Sony alpha and its "world's fastest" autofocus).
Unlike the usual aggressive blowhards in RUclips comments and elsewhere you've seen, I actually *own* two M3 'bundles' now -- to get all the bits I'll need at the very lowest net cost -- AND Sony full frame and crop... AND high end Pentax for DSLR. Because truly contemporary*, relevant* reviews are hard to come by [hint, hint, hint, Chris], few have so far more than barely noticed that it's Canon's ultra compact EF-M and EF-S lenses that the EOS M *system* is really all about. So many distractions are being thrown up, all around the M3 itself... still!
I do own many very fine prime lenses in my dotage (too many at present, for sure, but temporarily), yet only one native to Sony -- the full frame 28mm f.2.0 FE -- ...and it is going to be moving on soon. Sony's lens offerings are a mish-mash of the very old, the middling, and the very new and super price-y, lacking a coherent overall logic: too large... noticeably costly for their class, typically... yet too uncompetitive in performance for the asking price... too bland in 'rendering' qualities, etc., etc. Canon's EF-M lenses, especially, are in a league by themselves (with a couple of "kit" lens exceptions), as far as all around system suitability for gaining a bit of featherweight, typical-DSLR-lens'-thrashing IQ goes. Yet the effectively "illiterate" with respect to this specific matter, so-called reviewers included, retain -- and certainly do express openly -- numerous thoroughly wrong-headed opinions... which are believed, it seems, by quite a few unambitiously naive wheel spinners who like to show up with third hand "opinions" in photo forums and "comments" threads...
All these systems have their rough edges, frustrating elements, and gaps. Do your homework without unreasonable bias -- that is what I'd advise anyone wise enough to recognize the ring of truth. You should compare your 16-35mm f.4.0, 22+ ounce 'L' glass, Der Xer, on some well considered Canon bodies (including full frame) in Brian C.'s test chart comparator [the-digital-picture.com] to the 7.6 ounce (!) EF-M 11-22mm/4.0-5.6 on the M3. These rather close distance, flat test chart results are hardly the be-all and end-all for evaluations... but your jaw will drop, nevertheless. It's about a deep, dark 'secret', folks... And these *stabilized* lenses are NOT actually "slow", as they're almost universally characterized to be -- not if shooting at optimum apertures for best IQ means anything to you.
Can we just dial down the internet driven, thin D.O.F., bokeh fetishism for once?
Then take a look at dustinabbott.net for the American Southwest (Arizona?) landscape picture gallery associated with Dustin's sensible and honest, blog site M3 review [BTW, he's a pastor, Chris, if you didn't already know]: EF-M 22mm f.2.0 and 11-22mm f.4.0-5.6 employed. Those photos are just about all you're really going to need to see & understand... in order to start getting what I've suggested here: that is, if you have much by way of some useful, pertinent conception about how this sort of gear works, and you also understand your own true needs* as a photographer... as opposed to one's endlessly getting wound up with internet driven 'desires', as we all do from time to time. That's all I'm going to say about this...
...EXCEPT, CHRIS ---> Would it be possible, somehow, to pull off reviews of the EF-M 11-22mm, 22mm, new 28mm macro (with ring light on board!), and 9.1 ounce 55-200mm on a 24.3mp M3 body?! ...Thanks for tuning in, everybody... and thank you, Chris, for your unusually thoughtful, civilized reviews.
At my place ---> EF-S 10-18mm & 55-250mm (outstanding on-point reviews there, Chris)... EF-M 11-22mm... Rokinon 12mm/2.0... 22mm/2.0... EF 28mm/2.8 IS USM & 40mm/2.8 STM... Rokinon 50mm f.1.2... [All bought barely "used" at FAR below "expectation market value": for the present, just like 'putting money in the bank']... + 70mm/2.4 HD DA Pentax "Limited" 'pancake'... 12+ ounce 100mm DA Pentax WR 1:1 macro (a virtual "Limited" lens, in fact)... just to name a couple other lenses of mine which are perfect for my 'new' ~450 shutter activation, "used" M3/EVF + Canon EF/EF-S to EF-M adapter camera base. Everyone keeps saying the EOS M3 system is lacking lenses: ...Well, >>ahem!
Ah, WHAT are you actually telling me? I did not understand a word...
O.K., Der Xer, I may have assumed too much about your interests in pursuing the best image quality in the second camera you have been considering, because of your owning the nice full frame Canon lens featured here. So let's keep it simple. The auction site I was referring to is eBay, whose interests I dislike promoting too much for very good cause. Buyer beware; and try to 'know' your seller -- a couple of well-considered emails up front can save you a lot of grief later.
As for the simple camera, you might then consider one of the last two generation Sony RX-100's. Or the latest generation of the Canon all-in-ones with the so-called "larger" ["1 inch"sensor] -- the GX-8, is it? These have had slow auto-focus issues in the past, so do your homework there before buying. Neither is really anything I'm personally interested in for reasons I think I explained thoroughly in my main post. I hope this helps a little bit. Good luck.
+Frederick J. I'm considering to buy a second hand Fuji x100t. it's the one that fits me best! I'm gonna take a look at a local camera store which sells second hand gear... if they don't have sth with an ok price, I will look for one on Amazon or Ebay
As I already have the 17-40mm F4L, do you think it would be worth trading it in for this lens? Would there be a significant improvement?
There will be quite a significant improvement really - if it were me, I certainly would consider trading
hey, thx for the review!
can u review this lens on high res camera like the r5? thx alot
Thanks. I enjoyed your review.
When reviewing the corners of an image could you please review all four corners as the number of lenses I have bought that are decentered leads me to believe that this is a serious quality control issue with many brands. Thanks.
Hi Christopher, have you seen the filter kit for the Tamron? But it does add about another £150+ to the price.
I recently purchased the Canon RP. I own only 1 lens. The RF 35mm 1.8. I would like to purchase one more lens..a general purpose zoom lens . My prioroities are landscape and astro. I don't think I can afford a 2.8 lens unless it is a Tamron and it seems they are large and bulky ?? So I am looking at user EF 16-35 F4 versus 24-105 F$. What would you recommend? This is almost the "if I could own only one lens" I guess. Thanks for any advice you might have.
Interesting. But based on other reviews. It's shown that canon has much better lens flaring control than tamron
i want information about New Mitakon Zhongyi Speedmaster 85mm F/1.2 Camera Lens, can u pls help me
I have two cameras, Sony a7 II and a Canon R7. My focus is fineart landscape. Could you recommend a lens that I can use in both? thanks
ohh thought was going to be the upcoming 16-35 mk iii. looking forward to see that. Thanks :) !
Thanks for the review! everything I need😉
Like Your Review! BTW, I have a question. Now I have two selection of lenses. one is the Canon 16-35mm F4L IS USM, one is the Tokina 11-16mm F2.8. Right now I'm using Canon 70D. Which would you suggest for me to buy?
They are completely different lenses. I don't see the point of getting the 16-35. They the 11-16, and a Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 OS HSM
Hi Christopher, what if your recomendation for ultra wide lens with IS, for my Canon EOS R with adapter? I would shoot landscape and also use the lens for video. So video and photo. Is the a better lens like this Canon one? Thank you for your help
Hi Chris,
I would like to replace my very old 28-105mm silver lens with a wide angle lens. I'm currently using a Canon 650d with an APSC sensor, but I intend to buy a full frame camera someday. That's why I'm hesitating to buy a Sigma 18-35mm lens, which is designed for APSC (and usuable only at 35mm on Full Frame)...Would the Canon 16-35mm f/4 or the Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8 be a better option, even if I decide to switch to full frame within 5 - 10 years ?
Would be nice to know at what mm the barrel distortion is gone,
Christopher, i'm a big fan thank you for everything ! Please could you test the new Tamron 17-35 f2,8-4 ;-)
Hopefully I will :-)
Very confused by the Canon f4 IS L when it comes to flaring. Some reviews state how good it is (Matthew Gore and Darren Miles for example) and others like yourself state that it has problems. Keep doing reviews,i always your presentation.
I found flaring to be a real issue with this lens - I was surprised by it
Thanks for your reply,i think i have decided on Tamron 15-30mm
Steve Moore how do you like the lens so far? Is it that heavy. I mean I carry my 70-200 f4 all day so I might be use to it. The lack of filter options is making me want to to get this lens instead
Hallo Mr. Chris,thank you for the fantastic scientific review, but kindly, would you made a review for the canon 16-35 f 2.8 L Ii
That's would be nice from you
Thank you in advance
The 'ii' model or the 'iii' model? Well anyway, they're both on my hit list really.
I would love to see some of these tested on a Sony body!!! PLEASE!!!!
Hello Christopher could you please consider doing a review of Tokina 16-28 as I've heard that it's a beautiful yet affordable wide angle lens...
Chris, do you have a review planned for the Sigma 50-100mm f1.8? I'm really excited to see your conclusions about this lens. Cheers!
Yes, when I have a 24mp camera to test it on. Hopefully I can get some funding on Patreon
Fantastic! I hope you can get some funding as well. I'll try to donate when I can round up some money. Best of luck!
Thank you so much for your review.
1) Is the review of the canon 14mm already up? I can't find it.
2) During the lens flare text. Was the lens with or without cap?
3) I use optics compensation in after effects to correct barrel distortion. Any better tip for ae or final cut? (Maybe a plugin with lens profile like we have for lightroom. I don`t know.)
1) A good question about the 14mm. I shot a review, but the results of the tests were really bad. The copy I was trying seemed to be seriously decentered so I ended up abandoning the review. 2) It was without the hood. 3) Don't know really
Christopher Frost Photography thank you so much for your attention. I know it is disappointing to waste footage. Your reviews are the best in quality and duration. Maybe you could try again in the future and also compare to the 16mm. Take your time to do it.
The lens is bad with flaring and might be the justification that it comes with the hood.
Thanks
I got one of these canon lenses 16/3MM EF 4L lens
and Canon EF 16-35mm F2.8L III USM ?
I am very curios about Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L III... Christopher Frost, please bring this review to us!
I'm going to take a look at it at the same time I look at the new 24-105 f/4
I have an APS-C i must grab an 16-35 IS USM F4 ou an 17-55 EFS?
Are you going to review the new 18-135 with power zoom? Thanks
i think tamron 15-30 2.8 is much better than this lens. do you agree?
+emir No
Not a hope
would you recommend this to a sony a7r2 ?
hey mate, love your reviews!any chance of getting a video for the sigma 150-600mm sport? thinking of getting it and would love one of your reviews on it! thanks :)
Hmm, it's not on the cards really but I'll keep an eye out for one from the hire companies :-)
Very nice review, Chris. I'm just wondering, my sigma 18-35 1.8 is my best workhorse and is really sharp. How's this compares with this 16-35 in terms of sharpness at f4? Thanks.
Hmm, I think the Sigma might just be a touch sharper - they're probably similar. Take a look at my review of the Sigma lens for more info
Can you have a video for the other 16-36mm lenses. PLEASE!!!
Thanks just have it . very nice lens
Hi
How do you think about the 17-40 vs 16-35 , $300 US difference in my country but is that worth it in a dslr like 6D?
Personally I would say the price difference is worth it...just.
It’s worth it. Newer design and with IS. Also it starts at 16mm.
Chris where is the F2.8 model review?
I haven't reviewed it
Christopher Frost Photography nooo man...why?? 😂😂 I'm in the process of buying it right now.
Estilo Antunes yeah I was going to buy one but there was no review good enough haha not sure why he hasn't reviewed it!
i like your reviews :)
Chris, what lens do YOU film with?
+Matthew Bishop Most the time a Canon 24-105 f/4 IS USM 'L' :-)
Hey would you recommend a 60d over say a d5500? they are going really cheap right now and im tempted to get one. I would be shooting landscapes and buildings
+Raeygo The D5500 is a much newer camera, right? It's probably better. It depends really on whether you want Canon or Nikon.
Little interest in first party options these days. They are far more expensive for similar optical quality as the latest third parties.
Just picked this up yesterday haven’t opened it yet still doesn’t seem real
How does it perform with 5dsR?
I have a canon 6d Mark i what lense to buy for street photography but also in low light conditions ? No money problem** PLZ answer ME!
Βασιλης Καραγιοβανακης maybe canon 50mm f/1.8
thanks for this video, i would prefer the test on the wall and the door as usual but i have this lens now and i'm happy with it even on apsc
Hi Chris, i would like to see a review like this one with the new canon 16-35mm f/2.8 III, i know is more expensive but how much good it is in relation to this f/4 version?, thanks, i like very much your videos
I'm not reviewing that lens any time soon but I hear it's even sharper than this f/4 version
Thanks Christopher Frost Photography keep it up with the good work
Was it £650 at the time? Currently £1000 new in the UK, £650-700 second hand...
Gosh, it's gone up in price
Went for second hand Tamron 17-35mm in the end. Much better value and great image quality. Just wish it had vc!
If you own a 24-70mm, do you think it's worth getting this lens? I ask because it's only 8mm wider...
It's 8mm wider but on the wide angle end that's a huge difference
Damn, I was totally expecting you to say "fuck no" - in other words, of course.
what do you think about 16-35 f2.8 version ii vs 16-35 f4L? any suggestion.?
Haven't tried it TBH
I was hoping someone could help, I currently own a canon 77d and was looking to upgrade. I would love to upgrade to a full frame canon but don’t know where to look. Would a canon 5d mkiii be an upgrade? Thanks
Sure
Please review the tokina 16-28 f/2.8 :)
Is there a video for the 2.8 one?
I don't think I ever got round to that one
Lol I just bought a 17-35 f2.8 no chance I’m spending over 1000 on the 16-35 f2.8 when i can get my 17-35 for 375 😂😂
The Fishing Photographer which brand is this lens?
i might be trading this for the 50 1.2L tomorrow. should i do it?!
That's up to you, and the kind of photography you want to do :-) personally, I probably would
@@christopherfrost i pulled the trigger about an hour ago. im very excited. i think i might grab the new tokina 11-16 2.8 i to replace the now missing wide angle capabilities. Cheers and I absolutely love your channel.
thanks for youre great videos, i have a question
i have canon 6D and i need a wide angle, whats youre suggestion between canon 16-35 f/4 and sigma 18-35 f/1.8 ?? help me plz
Ardalan DB the sigma 18-35 f/1.8 is only for crop censor cameras.
Love your channel! I go to Christopher Frost for all my lens reviews. Always good info mate 👍
Someone is selling this near me for $300. Shall I buy it? For 70D.
I think you probably have the wrong lens - either that, or it's broken, because no-one would sell it for only $300
Did you buy another 70D? I thought you sold your "first" for your wedding? ;)
I borrowed my mother-in-laws for this review :-)
my eyes are bleeding, thats god damm sharp
On APS-C why would anyone buy this instead of the Sigma 18-35 F1.8 ART?
A very good point
The Sigma Art lens back focuses at certain focal lengths and apertures. So it's unreliable.
Well, mine doesn't. Maybe I got lucky in my copy, or maybe this is a problem of the past that Sigma fixed on firmware updates :P
Because this works for full frame? Pfft..
+《AiM》 "On a APS-C..." hmmm, if I am not mistaken that is the beginning of my statement.