Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 14 Apr 2012 (Saturday) 15:22
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Why are UWA primes so expensive?

 
Tony_Stark
Shellhead
Avatar
4,287 posts
Likes: 349
Joined May 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Apr 14, 2012 15:22 |  #1

I have been eyeing some UWA setups, and apart from the plethora of UWA zooms available, the UWA primes seem to be super expensive compared to the zooms. Why is that? Look at the 14L and the newly announced Zeiss 15/2.8. Both are over $2000 with the Zeiss being $3000. Just curious.


Nikon D810 | 24-70/2.8G | 58/1.4G
EOS M | 22 f/2 STM

Website (external link) | flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Scatterbrained
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,506 posts
Gallery: 263 photos
Best ofs: 12
Likes: 4529
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Yomitan, Okinawa, Japan
     
Apr 14, 2012 15:25 |  #2

likely the amount of work it takes to take such a wide area of view and cover a full frame sensor with it while minimizing distortion. Look at how cheap uncorrected UWA primes are, i.e. fisheye lenses. Just my guess anyway.


VanillaImaging.com (external link)"Vacuous images for the Vapid consumer"
500px (external link)
flickr (external link)
1x (external link)
instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tony_Stark
THREAD ­ STARTER
Shellhead
Avatar
4,287 posts
Likes: 349
Joined May 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Apr 14, 2012 15:51 |  #3

Scatterbrained wrote in post #14265704 (external link)
likely the amount of work it takes to take such a wide area of view and cover a full frame sensor with it while minimizing distortion. Look at how cheap uncorrected UWA primes are, i.e. fisheye lenses. Just my guess anyway.

Fair enough. I would love a Zeiss 15mm but damn for $3K I cant stomach that!


Nikon D810 | 24-70/2.8G | 58/1.4G
EOS M | 22 f/2 STM

Website (external link) | flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Echo ­ Johnson
Senior Member
Avatar
433 posts
Joined Aug 2011
Location: UK
     
Apr 14, 2012 15:55 |  #4

Both Sigma and Tamron made FF 14mm f/2.8 lenses in the $400-600 range. Samyang's got their reportedly super-sharp 14mm f/2.8 for $400, albeit without autofocus.
Anything Zeiss will be expensive. As to why the Canon is as expensive as it is.. who knows?


Canon 5D3 | 17-40 | 50/1.4 | 135/2
...and other stuff.
Flickr (external link) | EchoJ.deviantART (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scatterbrained
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,506 posts
Gallery: 263 photos
Best ofs: 12
Likes: 4529
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Yomitan, Okinawa, Japan
     
Apr 14, 2012 16:11 |  #5

Tony_Stark wrote in post #14265797 (external link)
Fair enough. I would love a Zeiss 15mm but damn for $3K I cant stomach that!

yeah, I got pretty excited about that lens till I saw the price. :mad:


VanillaImaging.com (external link)"Vacuous images for the Vapid consumer"
500px (external link)
flickr (external link)
1x (external link)
instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
S.Horton
worship my useful and insightful comments
Avatar
18,051 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 117
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Royersford, PA
     
Apr 14, 2012 16:15 |  #6

Look at the Sammy. In UWA, you can manually focus. People swear by this lens, but be aware of the mustache distortion.

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=909272


Sam - TF Says Ishmael
http://midnightblue.sm​ugmug.com (external link) 
Want your title changed?Dream On! (external link)

:cool:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tony_Stark
THREAD ­ STARTER
Shellhead
Avatar
4,287 posts
Likes: 349
Joined May 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Apr 14, 2012 16:21 |  #7

The price on that lens if very tempting, but the fact that you can't mount filters on to it is a deal breaker. I think eventually I will have to settle with a UWA zoom for my needs :/


Nikon D810 | 24-70/2.8G | 58/1.4G
EOS M | 22 f/2 STM

Website (external link) | flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
S.Horton
worship my useful and insightful comments
Avatar
18,051 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 117
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Royersford, PA
     
Apr 14, 2012 17:04 |  #8

Ok.


Sam - TF Says Ishmael
http://midnightblue.sm​ugmug.com (external link) 
Want your title changed?Dream On! (external link)

:cool:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Todd ­ Lambert
I don't like titles
Avatar
12,643 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 132
Joined May 2009
Location: On The Roads Across America
     
Apr 14, 2012 17:08 |  #9

I'm going to try and swing the Zeiss 15 at some point, but will have to wait after the 1DX. Hopefully the price will come down some by then.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
S.Horton
worship my useful and insightful comments
Avatar
18,051 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 117
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Royersford, PA
     
Apr 14, 2012 17:46 |  #10

Yes, a naked background from that lens would look fantastic.


Sam - TF Says Ishmael
http://midnightblue.sm​ugmug.com (external link) 
Want your title changed?Dream On! (external link)

:cool:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bpark42
Senior Member
307 posts
Joined Jul 2009
     
Apr 14, 2012 19:47 |  #11

Complex designs with lots of exotic/expensive glass to correct distortions and aberrations.

Keep in mind you are also talking about full frame lenses. Most of the cheaper ultrawide zooms are for APS-C. Similar full frame zooms such as the Canon 16-35 and Nikon 14-24 are quite expensive.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scatterbrained
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,506 posts
Gallery: 263 photos
Best ofs: 12
Likes: 4529
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Yomitan, Okinawa, Japan
     
Apr 14, 2012 19:58 |  #12

bpark42 wrote in post #14266606 (external link)
Complex designs with lots of exotic/expensive glass to correct distortions and aberrations.

Keep in mind you are also talking about full frame lenses. Most of the cheaper ultrawide zooms are for APS-C. Similar full frame zooms such as the Canon 16-35 and Nikon 14-24 are quite expensive.

yes, but he's asking about primes. The 14L is considerably more than the 16-35, and the Zeiss 15 is 3k. :eek::eek: I personally would love to get the Zeiss 15, but then I'd want to be able to use my filters one it, which would require buying a new filter set up as the plates I'm using now are too small for a lens that big. Then you're into buying huge plates as well as a new holder, on top of the 3k lens. Oh man. Money, money, money. I think someone wrote a song about it. . . . .:D


VanillaImaging.com (external link)"Vacuous images for the Vapid consumer"
500px (external link)
flickr (external link)
1x (external link)
instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bpark42
Senior Member
307 posts
Joined Jul 2009
     
Apr 14, 2012 20:12 |  #13

Scatterbrained wrote in post #14266644 (external link)
yes, but he's asking about primes.

I'm aware of that, but he commented on the prices relative to zooms.

Tony_Stark wrote in post #14265691 (external link)
the UWA primes seem to be super expensive compared to the zooms.

Compare the 14L to a high performing zoom like the Nikon 14-24. They are in the same price class.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,066 views & 0 likes for this thread
Why are UWA primes so expensive?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is MarcusBullen
844 guests, 197 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.