Canon 24L II or Zeiss 21mm ZE for landscapes

Another which lens to get question. My next lens purchase will be either the Canon 24L II or Zeiss 21mm ZE. It will primarily be used for landscapes, quite a bit at night. Which one should I get and why? I am leaning towards the Zeiss, from everything I heard it is the premier landscape lens, what do you all think?

Love my Zeiss 21mm ZE for landscapes....don't shoot much at night though and I've never shot the 24L II. For landscape work, many will swear by the 17 TS-E and 24 TS-E II.

-Tim

I'm a landscape shooter and I've owned the ZE21, 24L II and 24 TS-e...here are my thoughts on it, YMMV.

The ZE21 is a phenomenal lens for landscapes. The 21mm FOV is about perfect for me - I never feel like I need wider, it is extremely sharp, great contrast, and built like a tank. I truly have a soft spot for this lens and if you go this route, you won't be disappointed. The experience of using it and out of camera IQ are both fantastic.

The 24 TS-e II frequently makes me feel like I need to stich images to get the FOV I want which is some added work in the field and in post processing. However, the tilt/shift movements are almost indinspensible once you've tried them and the IQ is very good. Shifted panos, true/straight vertical lines and tilting for critical near-to-far focus offer nearly infinite possibilites.

The 24L is the ultimate nightscape/starscape lens. It is sharper than the ZE21 at f2.8 and has less vignetting, plus you have the option of opening up to 1.4 to really pull in light and/or shorten your exposure times. Of course, I mentioned 24mm is a little tight for me and the 24L lacks the ability of doing shifted panos like the TS-e or having an acceptable native FOV like the ZE21, so this is a drawback for me. But, the 24L has the additional benefit of being very useful in day-to-day non-landscape shooting whereas the other two are more often just dedicated landscape lenses. I've found 24mm on FF @ f1.4 is more useful than you might think for family, museum and just day-to-day shots - plus it approximates a 35mm FOV on a crop camera so it could do double duty for you. Maybe you'd find you wouldnt need the Sig 35 any longer and the funds could be used elsewhere.

So, even though I absolutely love the ZE21, I've sold it for the 24 TS-e and plan to add another 24L II in the near future. Although the ZE21 does what it does VERY well and I probably like it better than the other two on an emotional level, the other two lenses do something functional that the ZE21 simply cannot (speed or movements). I'd love to have all 3, but as long as I am budget limited, I would prefer the two with more functional benefits. If I were you, I would also be deciding between these two and weigh the costs and benefits of each for your own uses.

MNUplander wrote in post #15623488
I'm a landscape shooter and I've owned the ZE21, 24L II and 24 TS-e...here are my thoughts on it, YMMV.

The ZE21 is a phenomenal lens for landscapes. The 21mm FOV is about perfect for me - I never feel like I need wider, it is extremely sharp, great contrast, and built like a tank. I truly have a soft spot for this lens and if you go this route, you won't be disappointed. The experience of using it and out of camera IQ are both fantastic.

The 24 TS-e II frequently makes me feel like I need to stich images to get the FOV I want which is some added work in the field and in post processing. However, the tilt/shift movements are almost indinspensible once you've tried them and the IQ is very good. Shifted panos, true/straight vertical lines and tilting for critical near-to-far focus offer nearly infinite possibilites.

The 24L is the ultimate nightscape/starscape lens. It is sharper than the ZE21 at f2.8 and has less vignetting, plus you have the option of opening up to 1.4 to really pull in light and/or shorten your exposure times. Of course, I mentioned 24mm is a little tight for me and the 24L lacks the ability of doing shifted panos like the TS-e or having an acceptable native FOV like the ZE21, so this is a drawback for me. But, the 24L has the additional benefit of being very useful in day-to-day non-landscape shooting whereas the other two are more often just dedicated landscape lenses. I've found 24mm on FF @ f1.4 is more useful than you might think for family, museum and just day-to-day shots - plus it approximates a 35mm FOV on a crop camera so it could do double duty for you. Maybe you'd find you wouldnt need the Sig 35 any longer and the funds could be used elsewhere.

So, even though I absolutely love the ZE21, I've sold it for the 24 TS-e and plan to add another 24L II in the near future. Although the ZE21 does what it does VERY well and I probably like it better than the other two on an emotional level, the other two lenses do something functional that the ZE21 simply cannot (speed or movements). I'd love to have all 3, but as long as I am budget limited, I would prefer the two with more functional benefits. If I were you, I would also be deciding between these two and weigh the costs and benefits of each for your own uses.

Awesome post, perfectly delineated run-down of these 3 amazing lenses! I sweat the Zeiss 21: of all the Zeiss lenses I see samples from, I feel that it produces the best "Zeiss micro contrast" look. I really, really want it, but I hold the same mindset as MNUplander, that the 24 f/1.4 ends up being the much more versatile lens, and as such has cemented it's spot in my lineup.

Someday, when I have loose change lying around, I will own the Zeiss 21

jkokbaker wrote in post #15623146
Another which lens to get question. My next lens purchase will be either the Canon 24L II or Zeiss 21mm ZE. It will primarily be used for landscapes, quite a bit at night. Which one should I get and why? I am leaning towards the Zeiss, from everything I heard it is the premier landscape lens, what do you all think?

1. 24 T&S II
2. Zeiss 21mm or 24-70 2.8 II
3. 24 1.4 II

For landscape usage the 24-70 II basically delivers about the same edge to edge sharpness and actually has less PF on branches against bright sky.

I originally got the 24 1.4 II because the 24-70 I and 24-105 and so on didn't quite cut it at 24mm for landscapes IMO but I just sold the 24 1.4 II and got a 24-70 II and I can't say I miss the 24 1.4 II, the zoomability gives you more flexibility too!

I actually use a 70-200/300L as much as for landscapes as a standard zoom or wide prime so don't forget about long end too.

The samyang 14mm is a relatively inexpensive way to add something insanely wide, sharp edge to edge on FF.

I love both lenses and I couldn't go without either one bcoz' they both have special characteristics.

I went with the 24tse because of the movements.

24-70mkII is apparently as good as the 24L at 2.8 so if your not shooting wide open get the zoom?

Maybe wait for the Rokinon 24mm TSE, out in middle of April, only $999 which is considerably less than all the other options

I have the Zeiss 21 2.8 and am about to trade it, It takes really nice pictures when you get it focused the problem is I have a hard time focusing it so I'm looking in to replacement lens like the 16-35 2.8, the 24 1.4, 24 2.8 IS, and maybe the 14 2.8 I had a 27-70 before and hated it and had a 17-40 it was a nice lens but I wanted something faster. Lens decisions are so hard LOL.

Another thing the Zeiss is stellar (no pun intended) at for night shooting is focus. Many autofocus lenses are a little sloppy at the infinity end. I have had to do a lot of hunting for good infinity focus when shooting manual focus at night. With the Zeiss 21, I turn the ring to infinity and it is dead on. I have not shot the 24L but I love the ZE and it is my go to lens for wide night shooting.