Super fast comparison between two ultra wide lenses.

Super fast comparison between two ultra wide lenses.


Canon 16-35mm f4

Tokina 16-28mm f2.8


  • Hi Dave, yes the canon looks a smidge sharper, but particularly if doing video you are not going to pick it, and the Tokina is half the price, no contest for video, Tokina every time. For photos, maybe not such a clear winner.

  • Thanks Dave, was considering the new Canon but this has made up my mind for the Tokina. Cheers!

  • Regarding the distortion. Does LR. have the lens correction enabled? Because I would assume the Canon profile is not yet available.

  • @MeMe no I didn’t have is enabled and you are right there is no profile for that lens yet, I also had all lens correction turned off on my 5d3.

  • The canon seems to pick up less reflection in the glass of fire place. Is that a light change? Or coating on lens?

  • Hi Dave,
    Glad you were able to review this by chance. Can you tell me if the Tokina focus ring turns the same way as the Canon?
    I have the Tamron 24-70 F/2.8 Lens and focus is the opposite way to Canon’s, which is damn confusing!

  • Dave,

    Wouldn’t the Canon in camera lens correction give canon the edge on barrel?

    The way I see it:
    Pros for Tokina: Cost, 1 stop wider aperture, better warranty.
    Pros for Canon: image quality (with lens correction), build quality, Image Stabilization, weight, Less CA, standard filter use, slightly longer zoom.

    I read stellar reviews on the Canon and the MTS charts are through the roof. I also see that ebay and craigslist are flooded with Canon 16-35mm F2.8, Canon 17-40mm F4, so there is no doubt this lens is a huge improvement on the older Canon UWA zoom.

    No doubt the Tokina is an awesome lens and gives you huge bang for the buck over the Canon.

  • Hi Dave

    Thanks for the quick review.
    Just one thing not mentioned was that the Canon has IS. Not that it makes a big difference on the wide side for photos, but it may come in handy for video glide cam users?