14L or 17L

I love a wide angle perspective and have been considering the 14L for a while now. But, after looking through the 17L TS photo gallery, I'm second guessing myself. Is there any reason to go with the 14L over the 17L TS aside from aperture when it comes to landscapes? Also, Im worried that maybe the 17 wont be wide enough, but they're so close in focal length that maybe I wont have to worry about it. I'm looking for something to that will give me a wider option than my 24L for landscapes. Can someone provide some insight or their thoughts and experiences for me?

Before you spend 10x the price consider this:
http://extremeinstabil​ity.com/lens14mm.html
Made me think twice. It is not without its faults but with Lightroom it's minimal.

Samyang is one amazing lens for the money... But the color rendition in my experience is a little "off" and sometimes never appears to get right in some situations. Just takes some more careful editing. And the lack of AF, but its only $300 vs. nearly $2,000!

I really want the 14L II bad... Its just so hard to spend that much for it when the Samyang performs so well for so much less.

99.9% of the time, I am in the: "You get what you pay for." And a firm believer in the "If it was truly as good it would cost more." group. (Samyang should cost $1500 compared to $2000) I also have gone the lower cost route on lenses, and ended up selling them at a loss to buy the more expensive one I originally wanted. And vowed never to make that mistake again. (100mm USM vs 100L) The Samyang 14mm may be the vastly cheaper exception. After I get my 50L

See also: http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/l​enses/samyang14.html

kevinstinks wrote in post #16550020
I love a wide angle perspective and have been considering the 14L for a while now. But, after looking through the 17L TS photo gallery, I'm second guessing myself. Is there any reason to go with the 14L over the 17L TS aside from aperture when it comes to landscapes? Also, Im worried that maybe the 17 wont be wide enough, but they're so close in focal length that maybe I wont have to worry about it. I'm looking for something to that will give me a wider option than my 24L for landscapes. Can someone provide some insight or their thoughts and experiences for me?

Heya,

I find 3~5mm difference big enough to matter. If you want wide, get the widest you can get. Make it very, very differently from your 24mm. 10mm difference is huge.

Very best,

MalVeauX wrote in post #16550096
Heya,

I find 3~5mm difference big enough to matter. If you want wide, get the widest you can get. Make it very, very differently from your 24mm. 10mm difference is huge.

Very best,

Thats kinda what I'm thinking. Also, I feel using the 14L handheld will be utilized more often than using the 17L on a tripod. I guess if I really think about it, you cant compare their uses. Two very different lenses.

In regards to price, I'm not worried about the price. I just want to make sure I make the right decision the first time around. Plus, Im a sucker for red rings

Invertalon wrote in post #16550054
Samyang is one amazing lens for the money... But the color rendition in my experience is a little "off" and sometimes never appears to get right in some situations. Just takes some more careful editing. And the lack of AF, but its only $300 vs. nearly $2,000!

I really want the 14L II bad... Its just so hard to spend that much for it when the Samyang performs so well for so much less.

InfiniteDivide wrote in post #16550076
99.9% of the time, I am in the: "You get what you pay for." And a firm believer in the "If it was truly as good it would cost more." group. (Samyang should cost $1500 compared to $2000) I also have gone the lower cost route on lenses, and ended up selling them at a loss to buy the more expensive one I originally wanted. And vowed never to make that mistake again. (100mm USM vs 100L) The Samyang 14mm may be the vastly cheaper exception. After I get my 50L

Definitely great stuff in those review of the Samyang. But, I have used a 14L a couple times and I'm afraid I cant ignore how much I liked it Buy once, cry once. Then repeat when you find something else you NEED.

The Samyang 14 is a nice piece of glass for the price. It definitely could cost more for what it delivers and people would pay. Not me tho.
I've owned the 14L for over 4 years and absolutely love it for the IQ, build and the AF. Mostly everybody that uses an UWA always state that they don't need AF. Fortunately, I use the lens for more work requiring AF than landscapes where it's not as necessary.

For the OP, using a 14 and correcting lines in post may be almost like a shifted 17, depending what it is you're shooting. The 16-35 is the most versatile wide angle but... man, the 14 is so fresh.

17ts IMHO

kevinstinks wrote in post #16550020
Also, Im worried that maybe the 17 wont be wide enough, but they're so close in focal length that maybe I wont have to worry about it.

They're not close. 17/14 = 1.2 i.e 20%. It's roughly the difference between 35mm and 28mm on full frame, which most people regard as different lenses for different purposes.

If, and only if, you correct an image for keystoning in software you will lose some angle of view, which will tend to even up the comparison between these two lenses, since the 17mm has a shift capability and the 14mm does not.

I'm doubtful as to whether landscape can benefit much from a 14mm II. I consider this lens to be an architecture and cityscape lens.
The tilt shift ability of the 17mm TS is much more useful for landscape as you will be able to keep the foreground and background equally sharp without needing to go up to soft f22.

I would go with the Samyang 14 + 17TSE. I've thought about the Samyang, but have stuck with the 17 and then the fisheye for ultrawide (I do use it for 'landscapes').

It you need ultra-ultra wide with AF for non-tripod uses, then maybe the 14L.

The TS-E17 is just so darn freaking amazing.

InfiniteDivide wrote in post #16550028
Before you spend 10x the price consider this:
http://extremeinstabil​ity.com/lens14mm.html
Made me think twice. It is not without its faults but with Lightroom it's minimal.

with this review available, not sure why anyone would bother with the 14L.... buy once cry once..... haha, cry twice more like it.