What is best landscape lens

Have shot many landscape photos with 24-105 mm and 17-40 mm on 5D2 and now looking at buying a better lens! What would you recommend?

17 or 24 TS-E

Zeiss 21

Zeiss 15

Todd Lambert wrote in post #15532575
17 or 24 TS-E

Zeiss 21

Zeiss 15

Thanks Todd...good list .

I agree with Todd, both 17mm and 24mm TS-E lenses are great for landscape photography. Also, the 16-35mm mkII is another decent choice if you're looking to upgrade from your 17-40mm. Another choice to throw out there is the 14mm from Canon.

-Nick

nburwell wrote in post #15532657
I agree with Todd, both 17mm and 24mm TS-E lenses are great for landscape photography. Also, the 16-35mm mkII is another decent choice if you're looking to upgrade from your 17-40mm. Another choice to throw out there is the 14mm from Canon.

-Nick

Thanks Nick, will try a few by renting.

nburwell wrote in post #15532657
I agree with Todd, both 17mm and 24mm TS-E lenses are great for landscape photography. Also, the 16-35mm mkII is another decent choice if you're looking to upgrade from your 17-40mm. Another choice to throw out there is the 14mm from Canon.

-Nick

I never found the 16-35 offered anything over the 17-40 for landscape work. And, although the Canon 14mm is great, Ive found the Samyang/Bower/Rokinon 14mm is just as good for around $300...as long as you're OK with running it through PT Lens to correct the terrible moustache distortion.

All that said, my advice is similar to everyone elses:

17 TS-e
24 TS-e
Zeiss 21
Samyang 14

However, I wouldnt limit your landscape shooting to just wide angle. Maybe consider a telephoto with a good range of FL and is sharp across the frame. I've got my eye on the 70-300L for this purpose.

MNUplander wrote in post #15532715
I never found the 16-35 offered anything over the 17-40 for landscape work. And, although the Canon 14mm is great, Ive found the Samyang/Bower/Rokinon 14mm is just as good for around $300...as long as you're OK with running it through PT Lens to correct the terrible moustache distortion.

All that said, my advice is similar to everyone elses:

17 TS-e
24 TS-e
Zeiss 21
Samyang 14

However, I wouldnt limit your landscape shooting to just wide angle. Maybe consider a telephoto with a good range of FL and is sharp across the frame. I've got my eye on the 70-300L for this purpose.

Yes I also shoot with the 70-200 mm F2.8 series II and a few with the 100-400 ?

The good ones cost much, let me read on the Samyang 14. Edit, after reading a few reviews, not too keen on this one.

Here is the photo archive for the Samyang 14. It's not in the class of the other lenses (you need to remove distortion with software), but many people have gotten some fantastic results with it.

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

mafoo wrote in post #15532778
Here is the photo archive for the Samyang 14. It's not in the class of the other lenses (you need to remove distortion with software), but many people have gotten some fantastic results with it.

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

Thanks, good photos on the link and at F2.8

How are the 17-40 and 24-105 coming up short for you? A lot of people really like those two lenses.

Personally I prefer the 24-70/2.8 to the 24-105. It's sharper, has less optical vignetting (especially at 24mm) and is better corrected, resulting in less barrel/pincushion distortions.

But when I think "landscapes", I usually think wider.

The Canon 16-35/2.8 II is the premium alternative to the 17-40. Of course, the 16-35 is bigger and heavier... uses an 82mm filter and most likely will require more expensive "slim" filters as well. Though both lenses have some optical vignetting at their widest angle of view and largest apertures, the 16-35mm has slightly less than the 17-40. It's a mixed bag for sharpness... depending upon where in the image area you compare the two and at what focal lengths and apertures... but the 16-35 might have a slight overall edge. Of course, the 16-35/2.8 II costs a whole lot more. I suppose only you can say if it's worth the difference in price, for the incremental improvements it offers over the 17-40.

Haven't used it personally, but the Tokina AT-X 16-24mm f2.8 appears to be an interesting alternative to the 16-35 or 17-40. It's said to rival the image quality of the 16-35. Since it doesn't have USM, it might not give the focus performance of the Canon. But wide angle lenses don't need to move their elements very much to achieve focus and their inherent depth of field tends to cover any minor focus errors, so there might be little difference in AF performance, in the field. Tokina does use a different method turning AF on and off (slide the focus ring forward or backward). And Toki's zoom rings operate backwards from Canon's (ie., the same as Nikon's). I use a different Toki zoom and really don't notice these differences in the field, though I worried I might when I shopped, before I bought the lens.

The Canon Tilt-Shift TS-E 17mm and 24mm (and 45mm, 90mm) are interesting lenses.... and not cheap. If you have a lot of buildings in your shots, it might make more sense to consider these for the perspective correction they offer with the shift movement. But their tilt feature also can be used to expand or control depth of field in nature-scapes, seascapes.

Personally I like to use primes and that includes a Canon 20/2.8 that I like a lot. Of course, it doesn't have the versatility of a zoom.

I have considered adding a 14mm to my kit. The Canon 14/2.8L II is really pricey. It's certainly a nice lens and radically wide.

For occasional use I might instead go with the Rokinon 14mm (also Samyang/Bower/Vivitar/​ProOptic.... same lens under different brand names), even though this is a manual focus and manual aperture only lens. That would be fine for the type of shooting I would be doing with this lens.

There was a 17/3.5 Tokina AT-X offered in Canon mount for a while.... It's been discontinued for a while and only available used, but hard to find and I really don't know how it compares in image quality and other factors.

Zeiss prime lenses are simply legendary. They offer the ZE series for Canon, which includes 35/2, 35/1.4, 28/2, 25/2, 21/2.8, 18/2.8 and now 15/2.8. These are all very sharp, extremely well corrected and top quality in every respect, but manual focus only (aperture is controlled normally). They are also quite pricey.

There are a lot of vintage, manual focus lenses that might be adpated for use on Canon, too. Some of them were excellent in their day... but many of the wider ones tend to hold value quite well because they are still sought after (Nikon and Pentax can still be used on their respective manufacturers cameras, at least to some extent). Modern lenses will tend to be better corrected though, thanks to computer design, closer tolerance manufacturing and improved coatings that have been developed since those vintages lenses were made.

Something else to consider... Do you use filters? ND, ND grads and C-Pols? The Canon 14/2.8L II, 17mm TS-E, Rokinon 14/2.8, and Tokina 16-24mm all have convex, protruding front elements that don't allow typical filters to be used. You might be able to rig a means of holding a rectangular filter in front of the lens.... And some (all?) of them might allow rear mounting gel filters.

There are lots of ways to do landscape, though... Have you checked out Gigapan.com? Also take a look at George Lepp's Gigipan work. For some of his images, he's used telephotos (70-200 zoom in one case I recall), taken up to 200 or more individual shots with the Gigipan head and controller, then stitched them together into a single, massive image. There are examples from other photographers at the Gigapan site. The sheer amount of detail that can be captured in an image with this process is far beyond what any single snap can accomplish!

I am happy with my images from the 24-105 and 17-40 as well as from 70-200 mm seriesII
I am checking to see what else would improve my shots and the Canon tilt lenses and Zeiss are the next steps, whe will I move will be based on bargains I find and experience after renting them from Borrow lens (they have pickup and dropoff in Las Vegas)
Thanks for the explanation, it helps.

The 16-35 offers nothing over the 17-40 when it comes to landscaping. Both offer the same underwhelming "sharpness" when stopped down to F8. None of them are truly sharp across the frame.

My vote goes to the 17 and 24mm tilt shifts, the Zeiss 21 and the Samyang 14.

Canon will probably release their counterpart to Nikons 14-24mm soon, and that one will hopefully be as sharp as Nikon's. In other words: it will blow the 17-40 + 16-35 out of the water.

Osiriz wrote in post #15532998
The 16-35 offers nothing over the 17-40 when it comes to landscaping. Both offer the same underwhelming "sharpness" when stopped down to F8. None of them are truly sharp across the frame.

My vote goes to the 17 and 24mm tilt shifts, the Zeiss 21 and the Samyang 14.

Canon will probably release their counterpart to Nikons 14-24mm soon, and that one will hopefully be as sharp as Nikon's. In other words: it will blow the 17-40 + 16-35 out of the water.

I am also looking foward to the 14-24, thks for confirming the short list.
Yes the reason I did not go with the 16-35 and got the 17-40
1. I can use my 77 mm filters
2. Smaller easy for travel photography, which is normally my shots, I even bring only one lens hood with 24-105
3. normally shotabove F 8 even F22 for starshape nightlights
4. The F2.8 would have been usedul inside dark cathedrals, so I use F4 and push the iso.

For travel I have the 16-35 II on a 5D2, this set up works great especially for landscapes, I aslo do a lot of Urbex photography so this set up works well 90% of the time, if I need something longer for the other 10% of the time ive got a 5D3 with a 70-300L attached, this comes in very usefull in mountain/hilly area's especially for birds found in those area's. I would have bought the Zeiss 21 if I was purley shooting landscapes,the Zeiss is one amazing lens, but for me I needed a more mobile set up, especially with the walking/climbing I do, just my thoughts on the subject

24mm TSEII - a real gem!