Adapting 16-35 f/4 EF to EOS R body--vignette or distortion at 16mm?

[bigjames]

Hello!

I do quite a lot of real estate photography. I recently switched over from the Sony A7 series to the Canon R series. I unthinkingly bought the 15-30 4.5-6.3 RF and instantly regretted it. For my purposes it's almost unusable from 15-17mm. The vignette and distortion are aided by profile corrections in LR, but the distortion is still super noticeable when shooting the kind of work that I do. 

I'm thinking of buying an older 16-35 f/4 EF and adapting it to my new R body with the standard first party adapter. I'm curious though, with the adapter will I get the full 16mm out of the lens? Will there be distortion or vignetting? I'd love to hear other's experiences with this combo. Thanks!

[Tronhard]

Hi and welcome.

I get that you find the performance of the RF 15-30 IS USM to be not to your liking, but it is the cheapest of the ultra-wide RF lenses.   I would strongly suggest considering the much better RF 14-35L f/4 unit.  I have one and it does a brilliant job as long as you let the software do its lens corrections.

Pretty much all lens makers are now using algorithms to perform computational photography corrections to their lenses.  This has been around for a long while for cell phones but is relatively new to dedicated cameras. It allows lens makers to create lenses with performance that would require very large, heavy and expensive lenses to achieve the same results by purely optical means.   If you shoot JPG, those corrections are done in-camera and you see them through your viewfinder.  For post processing of RAW, the corrections are usually done upon import.

Before you go and buy a lens, I recommend trying one out in a camera store or renting one for a few days.  From a business point of view it is a much better solution.

[johnrmoyer]

I hope some of this might be helpful.

I have the EF16-35mm f/4L IS USM lens and use it on my EOS R5 with the Canon adapter. For this photo, in Canon DPP software, I enabled distortion correction and set the peripheral illumination correction to 25 on a scale of 0 to 100. I sometimes enable the distortion correction, but not always. I also do not always enable the peripheral illumination correction. I did use the Canon DPP digital lens optimizer at level 80 to correct small aperture diffraction blur. The only other edits were white balance, gamma curve to increase dynamic range, and unsharp mask. I do not do a lot of images with straight lines, but it seems to me the distortion and peripheral illumination for this lens are not bad.  I read this review before purchasing the lens refurbished from Canon: https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-16-35mm-f-4-L-IS-USM-Lens.aspx  

I also have the 17-40mm, but it has older focus motor design and no image stabilization. It is available for even less money sometimes and also seems acceptable to me without correction.

The price refurbished on sale a Xmas time seemed attractive to me.

https://www.rsok.com/~jrm/2024Mar31_birds_and_cats/2024mar20_holly_IMG_9338c.html 

Ilex vomitoria (also called Yaupon, Yaupon Holly, Cassina) was blooming in Norman, Oklahoma, United States on March 20, 2024 ; Canon EOS R5 ; F Number 16.0 ; ISO 100 ; 1/25 second ; 16 mm ; focus distance about 1.25 meter ; handheld

[Tronhard]

The EF 17-40L may be an older lens but it is a bit of a classic.  I have had one for some time an shot a few interiors with it.   The following images are examples, taken with the venerable Canon EOS D30 (2000 vintage) but photographed about 20 years later!

All shots were hand-held, in available light, something I would be surprised if you were doing.  As a matter of interest, the EF 17-40L f/4 lens was the optic of choice of the well-known real-estate photographer Scott Hargis, in his book on real estate photography "The Essential Guide to Lighting Interiors".  Now, time has moved on, but if you don't want the RF lens, which I still think you should try, then this will certainly be cheaply available and as my colleague John says, requires little manipulation once the camera is levelled.

D30, 17-40L@17mm, f/5.6, 1/8sec, ISO-400   D30, EF 17-40L@40mm, f/8, 1/8sec, ISO-200D30, EF 17-40L@22mm, f/4, 1/10sec, ISO-400

[shadowsports]

Greetings,

I cannot offer much as I owned the EF 16-35 f2.8 with my 6D2 and currently have a RF 15-35 f2.8 with my R5 C.  

No issues here, but I do use the lens corrections in DPP and DxO PhotoLab.  There's a slight, very slight peripheral illumination at 15, but a few clicks and its gone.  I don't use this lens for wide close ups (rooms) like you. Instead I shoot mostly landscape and architecture at distance.  

I never noticed PI with my EF 16-35.  The guy I sold it to still texts me from time to time, and tells me how much he loves it.  That lens was razor sharp.