Canon Zoom Lens EF 20-35mm 1: 3.5-4.5 Ultrasonic Review

According provided by Canon Zoom Lens EF 20-35mm 1: 3.5-4.5 Ultrasonic lens many thanks to Obyzyuk Yuri.

Canon Zoom Lens EF 20-35mm 1: 3.5-4.5 Ultrasonic

Canon Zoom Lens EF 20-35mm 1: 3.5-4.5 Ultrasonic Review

The Canon Zoom Lens EF 20-35mm 1: 3.5-4.5 Ultrasonic (also called Canon EF 20-35mm f / 3.5-4.5 USM) is a cute little wide-angle lens for Canon full-frame cameras. The lens is quite old, it has been produced since 1993, most likely it is not produced anymore, and it is extremely rare to find it new on sale.

20mm focal length is very wide when used on full-frame cameras. For example, to get the same angle of view with a Canon APS-C camera, you would use a lens with a focal length of approximately 12mm.

Canon Zoom Lens EF 20-35mm 1: 3.5-4.5 Ultrasonic

Canon Zoom Lens EF 20-35mm 1: 3.5-4.5 Ultrasonic

The Canon EF 20-35mm f / 3.5-4.5 USM is lightweight and weighs just 340 grams. In the hands of the lens does not create the impression of a solid construction. The focus ring is very narrow, plastic, with a slight backlash. Rotating such a focus ring is not very convenient. The zoom ring is wider, rubberized, located closer to the front lens of the lens and it is quite pleasant to rotate it.

In the lens, first of all, I want to highlight internal focus and internal zoom. When changing the focal length, as with focusing, the lens does not change its size. When changing the focal length, only the rear lens moves. By the way, the surface near the rear lens is covered with velvet, similar to the one used for the walls of the bayonet shaft of the camera.

Behind the front lens is a 'cinematic' rectangular diaphragm to help the lens fight against sun glare. In fact, the lens does not tolerate backlight poorly, creating a lot of glare and flare. But I got a lens marked by years of use, so I will not find fault with the image quality of this copy.

Canon Zoom Lens EF 20-35mm 1: 3.5-4.5 Ultrasonic

Canon Zoom Lens EF 20-35mm 1: 3.5-4.5 Ultrasonic

Auto focus is very fast. The minimum focusing distance is 34 cm, you can shoot with a maximum magnification of 1: 7.7. The lens has a window with focus distance marks in meters and feet. There are also 4 tags for working in the infrared spectrum (for 20, 24, 28 and 35 mm). The focus ring rotates 120 degrees, when it reaches the extreme positions it does not rest, but continues to slide without affecting the focus.

The body has a 'AF / MF' focus mode switch. In autofocus mode, the focus ring remains fixed.

Canon Zoom Lens EF 20-35mm 1: 3.5-4.5 Ultrasonic

Canon Zoom Lens EF 20-35mm 1: 3.5-4.5 Ultrasonic

When working with the lens, I did not find any problems with focusing, it grabs the objects in the frame quite accurately, and working with it is a pleasure. It is also nice that the maximum relative aperture at the long end is slightly larger than some other similar lenses (F / 4.5 versus F / 5.6).

Generally, the Canon EF 20-35mm f / 3.5-4.5 USM is one of two wide-angle lenses from Canon that do not belong to the 'L' series and use variable maximum aperture... The second such lens is the Canon EF 22-55mm f / 4-5.6 USM, which is also discontinued. It turns out that Canon does not produce available wide-angle zoom lenses for full-format cameras at all?

Canon Zoom Lens EF 20-35mm 1: 3.5-4.5 Ultrasonic

Canon Zoom Lens EF 20-35mm 1: 3.5-4.5 Ultrasonic

The lens aperture consists of only 5 petals (as, for example, Canon Lens EF 50mm 1: 1.8 II) Closes to F22 @ 20mm and F / 29 @ 35mm. From bright and hard light sources in the frame, you can get 10 ray stars (see an example).

The lens uses large filters with a diameter of 77mm (a kind of standard). Wide-angle lenses are often used for landscape photography, architecture photography, where you have to use special light filters, I think that the 'one-stop professional solution' with 77 mm light filters is a very pleasant thing.

Also, the lens can use a bayonet hood, but the Canon EF 20-35mm f / 3.5-4.5 USM came to me naked.

Canon Zoom Lens EF 20-35mm 1: 3.5-4.5 Ultrasonic and Sigma Zoom 15-30mm D 1: 3.5-4.5 DG EX Aspherical IF

Canon Zoom Lens EF 20-35mm 1: 3.5-4.5 Ultrasonic and Sigma Zoom 15-30mm D 1: 3.5-4.5 DG EX Aspherical IF

If you do not take into account the drop in sharpness at the edges of the frame, the lens is very good at open apertures. If you close the diaphragm, then the edges come back to normal. The lens is very sharp at closed apertures. It's a shame, but in backlight the Canon EF 20-35mm f / 3.5-4.5 USM loses much contrast and catches a lot of glare. Of course, there is distortion, but with such a lens for some scenes, the bigger problem is the 'elongation' of the corners of the image, which can ruin the whole picture.

Here link to the archive with the originals and files JPEG - 424 MB, 40 photos in .CR2 format (RAW) and JPEG. from cameras Canon EOS 5DCanon EOS 450D. On Canon cameras with APS-C sensor EGF the lens will be 32-56 mm, and on cameras with an APS-H sensor - 26-45.5 mm.

When shooting indoors, the flash was used Nikon Speedlight SB-900working in automatic mode without TTL and without modeling backlight. By the way, the above mode is not very convenient when using zoom lenses with a variable maximum aperture, since the number F on the flash (for calculating power) is set for only one value. This inconvenience can be circumvented by using not the maximum allowable relative aperture, but slightly covered, for example, to F / 4.5, as in this case. Thus, F / 4.5 can be constant over the entire range of focal lengths and you do not have to adjust anything on the flash.

Canon Zoom Lens EF 20-35mm 1: 3.5-4.5 Ultrasonic

Canon Zoom Lens EF 20-35mm 1: 3.5-4.5 Ultrasonic on Canon 350D Camera

The range of zoom lenses:

  1. Canon EF 8-15 mm 1:4 L Fisheye USM
  2. Canon EF 11-24 mm 1:4 L USM
  3. Canon RF 15-35 mm F2.8 L IS USM
  4. Canon EF 16-35 mm 1:2.8 L USM
  5. Canon EF 16-35 mm 1:2.8 L II USM
  6. Canon EF 16-35 mm 1:2.8 L III USM
  7. Canon EF 16-35 mm 1:4 L IS USM
  8. Canon EF 17-35 mm 1:2.8 L USM
  9. Canon EF 17-40 mm 1:4 L USM
  10. Canon EF 20-35 mm 1:2.8 L
  11. Canon EF 20-35 mm 1: 3.5-4.5 USM
  12. Canon EF 22-55 mm 1: 4-5.6 USM

Line of fixed lenses:

  1. Canon EF 14 mm 1:2.8 L USM
  2. Canon EF 14 mm 1:2.8 L II USM
  3. Canon EF 15 mm 1:2.8 Fisheye
  4. Canon EF 20 mm 1: 2.8 USM

Lens prices in popular stores can look at this link.

Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.


I think that Canon Zoom Lens EF 20-35mm 1: 3.5-4.5 Ultrasonic is generally a good and inexpensive 'shirik', of course, not as' fancy 'as modern' L'-ki, but quite usable.

Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram

Add a comment:



Comments: 19, on the topic: Canon Zoom Lens EF 20-35mm 1: 3.5-4.5 Ultrasonic review

  • = Kotofalk =

    An actual look, I joke joke an inexpensive screen on the Canon 1D Mark II.

  • Dmitry K

    I don’t know how there was no shirikov lens, but I like the nickel more and more))) the colors are especially

  • Jury

    Arkady, thanks. The lens is normal, HA is only strong and poisonous red, even at f / 9, which is not a buzz. You can remove them in the lightroom, but artifacts are still visible.

  • mrHuM

    Pretty decent quality of photos, if you take into account the cost of this lens in the secondary market, and crop is not bad as a staffer:]

  • Dmitriy

    And I have a Sigma EX 17-35 / 2.8-4 HSM crop as the main lens. It would be interesting to send you for a review, but ... I'm in the Russian Federation, you yourself understand how it is now ...

  • anonym

    Yes, there are no shiriks available for the kenon. The most affordable is the world of 20mm for 1600 UAH. And zenitar fish, the price is the same, but already fish. Further bearings and samyanga. One manual. Autofocus, and even with variable focus, already climbs for 3-4 thousand per beu. And since such a booze, it is already better to save up for L, these are my thoughts. Thanks for the review, I didn't know such a lens, it's interesting to learn something new.

    • Victor

      a 17-40 l

  • Amatich

    Thanks Arkady.

  • Dmitriy

    The angle is wide. But the quality of the picture - there is no point even to criticize, it is not. All the problems that a lens can have are brought together.

    • Dmitry K

      as for me, so only the backlight keeps filth. Sharpness on resize to 2400 to 1600 suited me. Chrome all crushed successfully in the lightroom. There, the picture is brought to mind in 3 clicks

  • Alexey

    24-70 2,8 Canon EF 24-70mm f / 2.8L USM he and shirik he is a portrait :) and this pampering!

  • Pastor

    Interesting shirik. There is no particular point in taking on the crop. The price of a used one for Avito is 200 dollars, and for 300-350 you can take a new shirik 10-18IS, which is much wider, and much sharper, and with a stub. But for ff, the choice of shiriks is quite small. Either take cropped lenses like tokina 116 or sigma 10-20 and look at which focal point there is no vignetting, or take elki / sigma 12-24. And the cheapest Elka is even used at least 2,5 times more expensive than this lens, but still quite soapy (I'm talking about 17-40 4L). It turns out that something decent for canon from shiriks is either sigma 12-24, or already 16-35 2.8. Recently came out 16-35 4 with a stub, it seems to be even sharper than 2,8, but still they are all far from Nikon 14-24 2,8 :)

    • Edgar b.

      I disagree with you. I was 17-40, I want to say that it is more than sharp (believe me, there is something to compare with). Another thing is that it is not a reportage, but a LANDSCAPE lens. From here the maximum aperture is f4.0, from here the optimal range is from f5.6 to 8.0 (there is no point above, diffraction makes itself felt), from here is the price (note, this is one of the 3 cheapest "L"). And here you climb it with the top reportage glass from Nikon to compare. Fu fu, would you still fuck (sorry for the expression) compare with your finger

      • Dmitry K

        14-24 2.8 from nikon no report glass. Reporting 17-35 2.8

      • Pastor

        17-40 is unsharp on the open one, but the open one is not 2.8, but only 4. The corners become more or less sharp only around 8. For an elki for a lot of money, it is somehow strange. The same 70-200 4L sharp with an open one. Even a cheap 40 2.8 with an open cut. Not at all elka 10-18IS on the crop is sharper than 17-40. In my opinion, this is strange for an elki. Nevertheless, I do not argue that the glass is good for landscapes and there is no point in buying a 16-35 2.8 - still clamp it to 8.
        I do not climb anywhere, I expressed my opinion.
        I don’t compare horseradish with a finger, I compare the widths from the canon to Nikon’s 14-24 and note that, unfortunately, the canon has not yet given birth to a really wide zoom-width with good sharpness. And regardless of the price, the canon does not have an absolutely cool width per ff, which is the case with Nikon. That is why some pros taking canon pictures for wide angles take Nikon 14-24 and use it through an adapter or even buy a separate carcass for this glass.

      • Pastor

        And also, please pay attention to the colon and bracket at the end of the sentence about Nikon 14-24 2.8. This combination of punctuation marks means a smiley face, that is, it shows a slightly comic coloring of this part of my comment.

  • Sergei

    At me he very much limped, on 400d. Well, very much, maybe the copy was not successful?

  • Aleksey68

    once tried to shoot with it. both on the crop and on the full frame. there is no sharpness on any FR. even at 8.0 everything is worse than at any other width. it’s even strange how such glass could have been produced. (the focus itself was accurate, but there was no resolution)

  • Sergei

    Alas, the link to the archive with the originals no longer leads anywhere.

Add a comment

Copyright © Blog author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2023

Russian-version of this article

Version en español de este artículo