Ultra Wide Angle choices for Full Frame ?

Current owner of a 24-70 would like to move into the Ultra Wide Angle arena. Though I love the pics I've seen with the Canon 14mm MKII the price has me looking into alternatives. There is a Mark I 14mm available locally for $900. Is the difference that noticeable ? Love the pics I've seen with the Zeiss 21mm 2.8. Price for that is about
$ 1850. The Zeiss 18mm 3.5 looks interesting but I don't see too many images from that lens. What other alternatives in this range should I be considering ? Landscapes of course but I'll be doing some people shooting too.

You've got a few options... Are you looking for zoom or prime? Manual or AF?

For zooming, you've got a few options...

EF 17-40 f/4L
EF 16-35 f/2.8L
Sigma 12-24 EX DG
Tokina 16-28 f/2.8
Nikon 14-24 (using Nikon-EF adapter, Manual Focus only)

Depending on your budget, the Sigma is a great route to go. However, if you're confident in your manual focusing abilities, the Nikon 14-24 is raved as the best UWA lens on the market.

Primes you've got a bunch of options as well

EF 14 MkII and MkI
EF 15mm Fisheye
TS-E 17 f/4
Samyang 14mm (Manual Focus Only)
Sigma 14mm (This lens is discontinued, can only pick up used - kinda rare to get)
Zeiss 18 and 21mm

I think the question should be what kind of shooting are you doing and do you plan on purchasing any filters or accessories. I have the 17-40 because the filter size is the same as on my 24-70 and 70-200. This allows me to use my polarizers and ND filters on all of my lenses (the primes are smaller and just require a step down ring).

TheAnt wrote in post #12169314
You've got a few options... Are you looking for zoom or prime? Manual or AF?

For zooming, you've got a few options...

EF 17-40 f/4L
EF 16-35 f/2.8L
Sigma 12-24 EX DG
Tokina 16-28 f/2.8
Nikon 14-24 (using Nikon-EF adapter, Manual Focus only)

Depending on your budget, the Sigma is a great route to go. However, if you're confident in your manual focusing abilities, the Nikon 14-24 is raved as the best UWA lens on the market.

Primes you've got a bunch of options as well

EF 14 MkII and MkI
EF 15mm Fisheye
TS-E 17 f/4
Samyang 14mm (Manual Focus Only)
Sigma 14mm (This lens is discontinued, can only pick up used - kinda rare to get)
Zeiss 18 and 21mm

****

I like my 24-70 L zoom but am looking for a prime pixel peeper buster this time around

The Zeiss 21 2.8 looks snappy indeed but I've only found a handful of pics taken with the Zeiss 18 3.5. It's cheaper. What's the deal with that ?

The Samyang 14mm for less than $400 looks like a fabulous deal.

kbColorado wrote in post #12171095
The Samyang 14mm for less than $400 looks like a fabulous deal.

Well, the 70-200 2.8 remains at the top of my wishlist. At $379 ... delivered ... I can satisfy my UWA jones with the Samyang/Rokinon 14mm lens without depleting the 70-200 savings account too much. Looking forward to playing with it.

kbColorado wrote in post #12176128
Well, the 70-200 2.8 remains at the top of my wishlist. At $379 ... delivered ... I can satisfy my UWA jones with the Samyang/Rokinon 14mm lens without depleting the 70-200 savings account too much. Looking forward to playing with it.

The Rokinon 14 is awesome. I posted a review a while back. Make sure to budget 25 dollar for the program PTLens. It'll handle the 14's distortions well. Has a profile built in...I think the new CS5 does as well though.


There are several(not many) desirable FF lenses wider than 24.

ZE 21
Olympus 21/2 & 3.5
Nikon 14-24

^^^ Greats.
There are a few versions of Nikon 20s that are good.
Tamron/Tokina made a 17 that's 'okay'
17-40 is alright as is the 16-35
Samyang 14 is great, but has heavy distortion. Only bad if you don't have time or program to correct it.
There's the Voigtlander 20. It's okay as well.
The ZE 18 you talked about is really good from f/8 to f/11. It vignettes all the time, has slight distortion and higher than average CA.

The gist of this is that there aren't many options for full frame Canon users who want a highquality lens wider than 24.

If you're okay with manual focus (I suspect your are since you're considering the Zeiss 21), take a look at the Olympus OM 18/3.5...great little lens, low distortion, and excellent IQ. They sell in the neighborhood of $800 (if you can find one). There's also a Leica 19mm if I recall, but I'm not too familiar with that particular lens. I do shoot with the Oly 18/3.5 on my 5D2, however.

I'd go with the 17-40L.

I have the 17-40L and for most of my landscape work, I have been using the 24-70 and 70-200. I think the 24-70mm is good enough for most wide angle shots, if you going to go wider as might as well get a TS-E as the distortion on the UW are pretty bad unless it's a nature shot. If I knew any better, I would of just got the 100-400mm or in your case the 70-300 for the longer end because there's alot of beautiful landscape done in the higher zooms.

I have the Zeiss *.8/*1 - I've seen nothing like it. The 17-40L works fine too - it's great when stopped down to f/8 and the hyperfocal distance is about 4ft.... so manual focusing is never an issue.

On a tight budget, you could look for a Vivitar Series 1 from the early 1980's. (Nikon or OM mount.) If memory serves, it was a rebadged Cosina... I still use mine when I'm in the mood for some interesting internal artefacts - it's manual focus, manual stop down and has strange wave-distortion... but it's a very usable lens.

Get the 16-35L II and don't look back.

Samyang 14mm if you are looking for a prime. A steal, imo.

PS: I do not own one.

The Zeiss 21 is excellent. It's absolutely fantastic AND it can take filters. The Nikon 14-24 is 90% as good as the Zeiss and it is very flexible but filters are an expensive addition to the lens. Stick to those lenses and you won't go wrong. The canon offerings don't stack up. I've read good stuff about the Samyang 14, so if you need an UWA prime that's a good quality inexpensive option. canon rules the telephoto roost but their wide stuff (excluding the 24mm ts-e) isn't that great.

I own that Samyang 14/2.8 since April 2010.
It is the first lens I would call really "digital optimized". A lens with such distortion could (nearly) not be used on analog film cameras if your objects have sea level or straight building features in it