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 02 Jan 2014 (Thursday) 13:06
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Which wide angle?

 
MWxPhoto
Member
51 posts
Joined Oct 2013
     
Jan 02, 2014 13:06 |  #1

Hi.

So I have a 24-105mm and a 70-200mm, and I shoot landscape often, for fun.
I feel that my 24-105mm (which I will upgrade to a 24-70mm eventually) should cover most of my needs, especially at the wider end, but I think I could benefit a lot from having a wide angle lens, but I'm not sure which to get. It would be a lens that I bust out when I cannot use my normal standard zoom to cover the view.
I was originally looking at the zoom ones (16-35mm and 17-40mm) but felt that the primes (24mm, 14mm) were sharper, based on reviews. Not to mention that I am covered from the ranges 24mm and up, and that I would only use this when my normal lens cannot cover the view. Also, I found out about the tilt shift 17mm, which looked even more amazing.

My thoughts:
EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM is awesome but it seems like a prime lens might be sharper?
EF 17-40mm f/4L USM is great, but I think if I get a zoom I'd get the 16-35mm.
EF 14mm f/2.8L II USM is as wide as it gets without being a fisheye. Maybe almost too wide. Seems like a great lens though.
EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM is a very sharp lens throughout the image, and very fast. Being at 24mm, I could also use it for some full body portraits at low light, or astro photography. My concern is this won't really help me in obtaining a wider angle, but I'm sure it'll give me a sharper image at 24mm.
TS-E 17mm f/4L is a top contender for sharpness throughout the image, and it has little distortion and it is a tilt shift. Enough said? Downside is that it isn't as fast, is not weather-resistant at all, and doesn't have auto focus. The usage would be pretty limited to architectural or specific landscape conditions.

Sharpness throughout the image is important to me.

Almost deadline to buy a lens to be eligible for Canon's mail in rebate... what do you guys think?

Also, I shoot 5DM3.


Kata MiniBee UL111 Short Review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
PH68
Senior Member
599 posts
Joined Jun 2013
Location: England
     
Jan 02, 2014 14:53 |  #2

If, as you said, 24+ covers your needs, then maybe invest in a fast 24mm prime.

On FF I wouldn't go wider than about 24mm.


Fuji XE1 ~ XF18 ~ XF27 ~ XF60 ~ XC50-230

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tapeman
Sliced Bread
Avatar
3,720 posts
Likes: 120
Joined Jan 2004
Location: Twin Cities
     
Jan 02, 2014 15:02 |  #3

The TS-E 17 is a lens I am considering as well.
IMO using a tripod and fooling around with the shift and/or tilt may be fun, but how often am I going to do that as opposed to just grabbing my 16-35 and firing away?


Canon G1X II, 1D MKIV, 5DSR, 5DIV, 5D MKII, 16-35/2.8L II, 24-70/2.8L II, 70-200/2.8L IS II, IS, 100-400/4.5-5.6 L IS II, 500/4 L IS II, 24-105/4 IS, 50/2.5 macro, 1.4x MKII, 1.4X MKIII, 2X MKIII,580EX II, 550EXs(2), ST-E2.
Gitzo 1228, 1275, 1558, Lensbaby 3G. Epson 3880, Bags that match my shoes.:)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BrickR
Cream of the Crop
5,935 posts
Likes: 114
Joined Mar 2011
Location: Dallas TX
     
Jan 02, 2014 15:07 |  #4

If sharpness is the most important thing, the 17 TSE should be your first choice and not much to think about after that ;)


My junk
The grass isn't greener on the other side, it's green where you water it.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nick3434
Goldmember
Avatar
1,568 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Likes: 204
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Trespassing in South Florida
     
Jan 02, 2014 15:10 |  #5

24ii is like gods gift to people that like to shoot on the wider side. Stopped down a little it is insane for landscapes, and 1.4 - 2.0 makes for (in my opinion) the coolest environmental portraits. Distortion is almost non existant which is crazy for a wide lens, and portraits don't have that weird distorted look you may expect. I bought this on a hunch never having used it and have been blown away. 1.4 that wide is just awesome.

If you look on my flikr, anything recent and wide is with that, mostly landscapes and shots of my kids so a lot of wide open and stopped down. Also have used it at f16-22 to get a slower ss and the picture quality is still nice. If I could only own one lens, this would be it. I am sure the 35 is better at portraits, but this is a jack of many trades and does them all great, not just well.

Anyway, I would that or TS, 14 is really intriguing but the 24 is the only walk around of those. I am sure the 16-35 is good, but like I said, a wide prime that fast is like a whole other lens in that focal length.


Everything is relative.
Gear: 6D, Unholy Trinity:twisted: (24Lii, sigma 50A, 135L), and for the other ends of the spectrum, sigmaEX 14mm2.8 and sigmaEX 100-300F4.
Fuji X-e2, Rokinon 8 2.8 Fisheye II, Fuji 14 2.8, Fuji 18-55, Fuji 23 1.4
FlikR (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MWxPhoto
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
51 posts
Joined Oct 2013
     
Jan 02, 2014 15:11 |  #6

Oh yes, I should add that I am using 5DM3.

And 24mm does look awesome. I think it would strengthen my 24mm photos greatly. I was just worried about it overlapping with my 24-105mm, but it sounds like it would actually strengthen my 24mm photos by a lot. Great shots, Nick3434.

And the downside about TS-E 17mm is that it isn't as fast and doesn't have auto focus. The usage would be pretty limited to landscape or architectural. I'm pretty interested in having it, but like Tapeman said, it's hard to tell how often I'd use it. Not to mention I can't really use filters on this lens, and it isn't weather-resistant, so this wouldn't be good in certain landscape conditions.

Will edit original post to reflect these.


Kata MiniBee UL111 Short Review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PH68
Senior Member
599 posts
Joined Jun 2013
Location: England
     
Jan 02, 2014 15:19 |  #7

On your 24-105 what do you mostly shoot at?
If it's mostly 24mm then the 24mm prime is a no-brainer.


Fuji XE1 ~ XF18 ~ XF27 ~ XF60 ~ XC50-230

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cerett
Senior Member
804 posts
Likes: 151
Joined Jun 2013
Location: Santa Ana, California
     
Jan 02, 2014 15:31 as a reply to  @ PH68's post |  #8

Tapeman wrote in post #16572297 (external link)
The TS-E 17 is a lens I am considering as well.
IMO using a tripod and fooling around with the shift and/or tilt may be fun, but how often am I going to do that as opposed to just grabbing my 16-35 and firing away?

BrickR wrote in post #16572305 (external link)
If sharpness is the most important thing, the 17 TSE should be your first choice and not much to think about after that ;)

The 17 TS-E is an extraordinary lens. Tack sharp. However, it has a protruding front element that precludes using filters unless you invest in a special adaptor. Even then, there are limitations. Although I own on, I purchased it after I already had a number of prime and zoom lenses to cover landscapes and wanted something unique. From what you said so far, it would not be my first choice.


Marty
5D M3, 14/2.8 II, 24/1.4 II, 16-35/2.8, 24-70/2.8, 70-200/2.8 II, 300/2.8, 200-400/4, 500/4 II, 24/3.5 TS-E, 17/4 TS-E, Zeiss 21/2.8; H5D-50C, HCD 28/4, HC 35/3.5, HC 50/3.5II, HCD 35-90/4.5-5.6, HC 150/3.2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
That's my line!
Avatar
9,056 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 1970
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
     
Jan 02, 2014 15:32 |  #9

I've just come across this lens and in looking around online, I really like what I've seen.

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=515581


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jimewall
Goldmember
1,871 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Jan 02, 2014 15:56 |  #10

hes gone wrote in post #16572350 (external link)
=he's gone;16572350]I've just come across this lens and in looking around online, I really like what I've seen.

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=515581

Older and discontinued, so you would need to find one on the used marked.

To the OP -

It also depends on how wide you really want/need. You implied 14mm might be too wide. From your list that puts you at the 17mm, 24mm, or the 16-35L (since you said the 17-40L is probably too slow for you). You didn't seem to like the lack of AF on the TS-E. Now down to two!

The 24II is a bit sharper than the zoom when both are wide open, stopdown the 24L to f/2.8 and it is a lot sharper than the 24-35L. The zoom is well a zoom, so arguably has more versatility.

I'd rather have a zoom first - but that's me.

I shoot more at 35mm, so I went there rather than the 24L. That was after the zoom (17-40L). I went 17-40L because UWA is not my current main shooting style and I got a great deal. Otherwise it would have been the 16-35L - as it may eventually be anyway.

Keep in mind there is also the Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8, and the Sigma 15mm f/2.8 EX DG Diagonal Fisheye. Both are supposed to as good or better than the Canon equivalents in sharpness.

I think all the lenses you listed and the ones I mentioned will be sharp enough for most people, with the zooms being behind the primes (except for versatility).


Thanks for Reading & Good Luck - Jim
GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nick3434
Goldmember
Avatar
1,568 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Likes: 204
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Trespassing in South Florida
     
Jan 02, 2014 16:04 |  #11

Thanks about the photos!

All I can say is that the 24ii is like a different lens completely from any zoom at 24 and probably any prime of different quality. I am not one of those shoot wide open and obliterate background. I try to (and sometimes get lucky and do:lol:) think of a composition. But unlike longer lengths, the 24 wide open has a discernible background that melts and for me eye it is pure photo awesomeness. That and I like landscapes and architecture, and the 24 is just wide enough and plenty sharp. You already know the AF speed, build and weather sealing is part of the package as well.

Now it does vignette like a mother. Which I love for portraits anyway so I am way cool with it, but that is the one negative to consider.

Also, I am not one of those always recommend what I have because I think a 17ts or 14 would be super sweet to have in my bag as well, but I always pump up the 24 because I do not know why more people do not have it. I understand the money, but I mean people that have a nice L collection anyway. If you research it, it is arguably one of canons best lenses and for me real life shooting is better than my high expectations based on reviews. I don't think the FL is for many though and hence the lack of popularity. There are better wider lenses for landscape and longer options better for portrait, but the 24 is like a compromise that doesn't compromise on anything and most important to me it has a special "look and feel" to the pics as I am not a technical photographer:lol: I will take not sharp and feel over tack sharp and no feel all day. 24 can be either or both.


Everything is relative.
Gear: 6D, Unholy Trinity:twisted: (24Lii, sigma 50A, 135L), and for the other ends of the spectrum, sigmaEX 14mm2.8 and sigmaEX 100-300F4.
Fuji X-e2, Rokinon 8 2.8 Fisheye II, Fuji 14 2.8, Fuji 18-55, Fuji 23 1.4
FlikR (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
napawino
Member
Avatar
108 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Dec 2013
Location: Seattle
     
Jan 02, 2014 21:25 |  #12

Reading this is making me consider the same lenses as the OP. I have the kit 24-105L and 70-200 2.8 IS II.

The tilt shift lens is just too weird for me. Wouldn't have a clue how to properly use it.

For me its between the 24 and the 16-35. But I'm leaning towards the speed of the 24.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jwm9289
Senior Member
Avatar
653 posts
Joined Dec 2011
Location: North Florida
     
Jan 02, 2014 21:31 |  #13

MWxPhoto wrote in post #16572022 (external link)
Hi.

So I have a 24-105mm and a 70-200mm, and I shoot landscape often, for fun.
I feel that my 24-105mm (which I will upgrade to a 24-70mm eventually) should cover most of my needs, especially at the wider end, but I think I could benefit a lot from having a wide angle lens, but I'm not sure which to get. It would be a lens that I bust out when I cannot use my normal standard zoom to cover the view.
I was originally looking at the zoom ones (16-35mm and 17-40mm) but felt that the primes (24mm, 14mm) were sharper, based on reviews. Not to mention that I am covered from the ranges 24mm and up, and that I would only use this when my normal lens cannot cover the view. Also, I found out about the tilt shift 17mm, which looked even more amazing.

My thoughts:
EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM is awesome but it seems like a prime lens might be sharper?
EF 17-40mm f/4L USM is great, but I think if I get a zoom I'd get the 16-35mm.
EF 14mm f/2.8L II USM is as wide as it gets without being a fisheye. Maybe almost too wide. Seems like a great lens though.
EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM is a very sharp lens throughout the image, and very fast. Being at 24mm, I could also use it for some full body portraits at low light, or astro photography. My concern is this won't really help me in obtaining a wider angle, but I'm sure it'll give me a sharper image at 24mm.
TS-E 17mm f/4L is a top contender for sharpness throughout the image, and it has little distortion and it is a tilt shift. Enough said? Downside is that it isn't as fast, is not weather-resistant at all, and doesn't have auto focus. The usage would be pretty limited to architectural or specific landscape conditions.

Sharpness throughout the image is important to me.

Almost deadline to buy a lens to be eligible for Canon's mail in rebate... what do you guys think?

Also, I shoot 5DM3.

Go with a 16-35 II and forget about it!


Canon 6D | 16-35L II | 24-70L II | 70-200L II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
robonrome
Goldmember
Avatar
2,746 posts
Likes: 1
Joined May 2008
Location: Australia
     
Jan 02, 2014 21:39 |  #14

for landscapes the 16-35 II offers little if anything in sharpness over the much cheaper 17-40... i sold the 16-35 II and went back to the 17-40 for that reason and another you should consider ...77mm filter thread which is shared by your 24-105.


rob - check my galleries at http://hardlightimages​.zenfolio.com/ (external link)
Zenfolio coupon discount when signing up - 93R-NCK-DUT
_______________
Canon 5D Mkiii; Sony RX100; Lumix G5; 17-40L; 24L TS-E F3.5 Mk2; 24-105L IS; 40 F2.8; 135L; 70-200L F2.8 IS MkII; Ext II 1.4x; 580 exII; 270 ex... other filtery stuff:)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kuma1212
Senior Member
364 posts
Joined Jun 2007
Location: Chicago
     
Jan 02, 2014 21:50 |  #15

Since you are going to eventually get the 24-70II, I might consider the 14mm L, just to get wider.
The 24L is a touch sharper than the 24-70, but not by a lot. I like the 16-35 II as well (it was sharper wide open than my 24-70 version I), but ever since I got the 24-70 II, I rarely use the 16-35.


5DII. 50L. 24-70LII. 16-35LII. 70-200is2.8II. 100L 135L.

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

1,759 views & 0 likes for this thread
Which wide angle?
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 Alfissimo
850 guests, 403 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.