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 07 Feb 2015 (Saturday) 21:28
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon EF11-24mm@$3000! Am I missing something

 
GeoKras1989
Goldmember
Avatar
4,038 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 261
Joined Jun 2014
     
Feb 08, 2015 13:13 |  #31
bannedPermanent ban

frankchn wrote in post #17421919 (external link)
Anyway, for most people, the 16-35mm f/4L IS is a much better value, but you really want the widest of the UWAs, then you have to pay good money for it.

I'm cheap. The 17-40 works just fine for me. When it isn't wide enough, I have the Rok 14 and the Σ15 FE.


WARNING: I often dispense advice in fields I know little about!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
panicatnabisco
Senior Member
Avatar
971 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Likes: 318
Joined Apr 2012
Location: san francisco, CA
Post edited over 5 years ago by panicatnabisco.
     
Feb 08, 2015 13:37 |  #32

umphotography wrote in post #17421654 (external link)
I was really looking forward to this lens and was hoping it was going to come in at F/2.8 and priced to compete with Nikons flagship 14-24. I for one, am very disappointed with this announcement. and 3K is just stupid for f/4 glass with no IS....lame move in my opinion But im sure the canon fan club will drink this Kool-ade as fast as Canon can pour it

You'll need all the kool aid you can get if you want to carry around a 11-14mm f/2.8


Canon 1DXmkIII |1DX | 6Dii | 6D | 16-35/2.8II | 24-70/2.8II | 35/1.4ii | 50/1.8 | 70-200/2.8 IS II | 85/1.4 IS | 100/2.8 IS macro | 200mm f/2 | 400/2.8 IS II | 2xIII
Leica M8.2 | Noctilux 50 f/1 | Elmarit 90/2.8
afimages.net (external link) | Facebook (external link) | instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
umphotography
grabbing their Johnson
Avatar
11,206 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 3038
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Gig Harbor, Washington
     
Feb 08, 2015 18:33 |  #33

panicatnabisco wrote in post #17421979 (external link)
You'll need all the kool aid you can get if you want to carry around a 11-14mm f/2.8


Please-- I see tons of Nikon shooters, many of them females, that have no problem carrying around a 14-24 F/2.8. That is a non issue. The only WA Canon makes now ifs 5 yr old technology. They have abandoned it for WA use.


Mike
www.umphotography.com (external link)
GEAR LIST
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,238 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 2788
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
Post edited over 5 years ago by DreDaze.
     
Feb 08, 2015 18:39 |  #34

umphotography wrote in post #17422512 (external link)
Please-- I see tons of Nikon shooters, many of them females, that have no problem carrying around a 14-24 F/2.8. That is a non issue. The only WA Canon makes now ifs 5 yr old technology. They have abandoned it for WA use.

the 14-24mm already weighs less than the 11-24mm at f4...making it f2.8 would make it quite a bit heavier


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,260 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6329
Joined Sep 2007
     
Feb 08, 2015 18:40 |  #35

CheshireCat wrote in post #17421811 (external link)
Let us know if your Rokinon resolves 50 MP.

the rokinon probably can, however, this lens is CLEARLY in another class. Probably super flat plane, and little curvatures issues, very little variation, ect.

Nothing does 11mm, nothing. I think this lens is priced a tad high, 2500 seems more correct, however it's not way out of price tbh. Quite unique, and probably the greatest ultrawide angle lens ever produced, that's gotta count for something. I do imagine owning it one day.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,260 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6329
Joined Sep 2007
     
Feb 08, 2015 18:48 |  #36

frankchn wrote in post #17421916 (external link)
Interesting, I've not seen that before. FWIW, it seems that Bryan Carnathan has the opposite results: http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=0 (external link) (Samyang 14mm vs Canon 16-35 f/4L IS at f/4)

sorry, I dont agree with all test charts, that assumes that there is no field curvature. My particular copy has quite a bit of curvature, so on a test chart, it would score horribly, however, I've used both the 16-35 and rok 14, and I can assure you that the rok 14 can match the resolution. it's very very sharp.

the difference between sharpness is a wash IMO, but how wide a lens can get is a whole different matter. 14 just seems to produce a lot more dramatic shots, so I kept it instead of the 16-35, which I had budgeted for. Both are fantastic lenses, and my highest recommendation for the 16-35 if that fits your style.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
virsago_mk2
Senior Member
Avatar
600 posts
Likes: 20
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Perth (Australia) & Semarang (Indonesia)
     
Feb 08, 2015 18:49 |  #37

To all whom **** about this lens, let us know if you can find another Full Frame 11mm lens on the market.

If you feel that this lens is not for you, then quit **** & get something else.


Gear: Here | Portfolio: Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
panicatnabisco
Senior Member
Avatar
971 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Likes: 318
Joined Apr 2012
Location: san francisco, CA
Post edited over 5 years ago by panicatnabisco. (2 edits in all)
     
Feb 08, 2015 18:57 |  #38

umphotography wrote in post #17422512 (external link)
Please-- I see tons of Nikon shooters, many of them females, that have no problem carrying around a 14-24 F/2.8. That is a non issue. The only WA Canon makes now ifs 5 yr old technology. They have abandoned it for WA use.

lol if you think a theoretical 11-24mm f/2.8 is anywhere near the size of a 14-24mm f/2.8, you had too much of that koolaid


Canon 1DXmkIII |1DX | 6Dii | 6D | 16-35/2.8II | 24-70/2.8II | 35/1.4ii | 50/1.8 | 70-200/2.8 IS II | 85/1.4 IS | 100/2.8 IS macro | 200mm f/2 | 400/2.8 IS II | 2xIII
Leica M8.2 | Noctilux 50 f/1 | Elmarit 90/2.8
afimages.net (external link) | Facebook (external link) | instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
frankchn
Senior Member
460 posts
Likes: 158
Joined Jun 2009
     
Feb 08, 2015 18:57 |  #39

Charlie wrote in post #17422548 (external link)
sorry, I dont agree with all test charts, that assumes that there is no field curvature. My particular copy has quite a bit of curvature, so on a test chart, it would score horribly, however, I've used both the 16-35 and rok 14, and I can assure you that the rok 14 can match the resolution. it's very very sharp.

the difference between sharpness is a wash IMO, but how wide a lens can get is a whole different matter. 14 just seems to produce a lot more dramatic shots, so I kept it instead of the 16-35, which I had budgeted for. Both are fantastic lenses, and my highest recommendation for the 16-35 if that fits your style.

True, but I assume the photozone.de tests that GeoKras1989 posted are also from a test-chart and they show that the Rokinon/Samyang is clearly better than the 16-35 IS in the corners. So there is probably some pretty severe sample variation for the Samyang 14mm, which is not unexpected.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ejenner
Goldmember
Avatar
3,839 posts
Gallery: 92 photos
Likes: 971
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Denver, CO
     
Feb 08, 2015 22:14 |  #40

Not sure what to make of the test chart results. All I know is that my 16-35 f4 is darn good (put not 'perfect') in the corners, but very similar to the TS-E17mm unshifted.

Also clearly the Rok is not really competing with the 11-24. While 14mm is significantly wide than 16mm, 11mm is in a different league. The more I think about it though, the more the weight is more of a deal for me than the price even. The TS-E is heavy enough, but with 2 TC's I have 17mm, 24mm and 35mm and that makes it worth carrying. TS-E + 11-24 + stuff over 35mm might just be the straw that breaks the camel's (or mine) back. Problem is that the 11-24 would be adding a lens rather than replacing one.


Edward Jenner
5DIV, M6, GX1 II, Sig15mm FE, 16-35 F4,TS-E 17, TS-E 24, M11-22, M18-150 ,24-105, T45 1.8VC, 70-200 f4 IS, 70-200 2.8 vII, Sig 85 1.4, 100L, 135L, 400DOII.
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/48305795@N03/ (external link)
https://www.facebook.c​om/edward.jenner.372/p​hotos (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
woos
Goldmember
Avatar
2,224 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Dec 2008
Location: a giant bucket
     
Feb 08, 2015 22:19 |  #41

Actually the price seems reasonable. It has a MASSIVE ground aspherical lens in it. Also it probably has insane assembly and QC requirements.

I think it'll drop to ~2500 eventually anyway. 11 is *insanely* wide. It's a good bit wider than 12mm which is so wide that previously only Sigma had attempted it for DSLR lenses. If getting something decent and that wide was easy, why was only Sigma doing it? And 11 isn't just a tiny bit wider than 12mm, it's quite a bit wider.

As someone else said the overpriced lens is the Canon 14mm 2.8 , I don't get why that costs so much, it should be like 1k. Many have done 14mm. Sigma have done 12mm and the price is fair. Canon has now done 11 and it looks to be a good bit sharper than the Sigma.

No one complains about the price of the 17mm tilt shift. This is like that lens on crack but without the tilt/shift. I mean look at the construction. The front element is aspherical! And it's friggin massive! Not only that, the two (also huge) elements behind it are also aspherical. And it's not molded it's ground.


amanathia.zenfolio.com

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charles ­ Brown
Member
153 posts
Likes: 37
Joined Oct 2007
     
Apr 18, 2016 12:28 |  #42

I've had this lens for a year, ever since it first came out, but I've only used it once. After a while, I forgot I had it, due to my being so used to carrying the 16-35 and 14 rectilinear. There are only so many lenses one can carry in a bag on a plane, and with the 11-24 being so large, I found myself going with what I knew, instead of what was new.

To get out of that habit, I just removed the 16-35/2.8Lii and 14/2.8Lii from my bag today, as it takes the space of both of those lenses to fit the 11-24/4L. I'm going to work the next two jobs with the 11-24 as the only WA option, in order to stop treating it as a "specialty" lens, and make more use of it's unprecedented range in UWA.

When I used it that one time before, I actually bought it as an emergency solution to my having forgotten to bring my 14 to a job where that angle was needed. I was on the opposite side of the continent, so going back home to get it wasn't an option, and there was no time to ship. I just so happened to be in a town large enough to have an independent camera store, who just so happened to have the lens in stock, due to Canon's effort to distribute at least some stock evenly around the country. Neither B&H nor Adorama had any stock, as the lens was selling like hot cakes once announced. But this little store had one. They had just received it a day before I landed. I paid full retail price, and had the tool I needed to get the job done. After I flew back home, I put it away and went back to the lenses I was used to.

In doing the shot planning for an upcoming gig, I determined that a 14mm wouldn't be wide enough , and was like... oh yeah, I've got that 11-24. So rather than bring it to use for just that one shot, I'm going to try using it for all shots under 24mm. We shall see how it goes...




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SeattleSpeedster
Goldmember
Avatar
3,236 posts
Gallery: 581 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 7137
Joined Nov 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
     
May 03, 2016 11:50 |  #43

Rented it a few times then bought. Sold a few days later. Love the 11mm but the rendering is flat to me.

Review: https://mikereidphotog​raphy.wordpress.com …-11-24mm-another-opinion/ (external link)


Fuji GFX50s and A7R II | Zeiss 85mm f1.4 Otus and 28mm f1.4 Otus | Fuji GF23mm and 32-64mm | Canon 200mm f1.8 | Zeiss 100-300mm | Zeiss and Canon 16-35mm f4 | Zeiss 135mm f2 | Voigtlander 10mm f5.6 | Zeiss and Sony 50mm f1.4 | DJI Mavic Pro 2 and Inspire 2 X5S drones | https://mikereidphotog​raphy.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cwphoto
Go ahead, make my day
Avatar
2,158 posts
Gallery: 30 photos
Likes: 74
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Kellyville, Baulkham Hills, Cumberland, NSW, Australia
     
May 04, 2016 21:36 |  #44

Last time I looked there wasn't much competition at 11mm...


EOS-1D X Mark II| EOS 5D Mark IV | EOS 80D | EOS-1V HS
L: 14/2.8 II | 17/4 | 24/1.4 II | 24/3.5 II | 35/1.4 II | 50/1.2 | 85/1.2 II | 100/2.8 Macro IS | 135/2 | 180/3.5 Macro | 200/2.8 II | 300/2.8 IS II | 400/2.8 IS II | 500/4 IS II | 600/4 IS II | 8-15/4 Fisheye | 11-24/4 | 16-35/2.8 III | 24-70/2.8 II | 70-200/2.8 IS II | 100-400/4.5-5.6 IS II | 200-400/4 IS 1.4x
Sundry: 600EX II-RT | 1.4x III | 2x III | 12 II | 25 II | OC-E4

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

11,784 views & 7 likes for this thread
Canon EF11-24mm@$3000! Am I missing something
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 potnboy
831 guests, 227 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.