Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L

^Did you shift the lens on the second one?

jdizzle wrote in post #12937836
^Did you shift the lens on the second one?

I shifted for both, especially the second one to pull the full height of the bridge. No tilt though.

David Arbogast wrote in post #12937853
I shifted for both, especially the second one to pull the full height of the bridge. No tilt though.

Nice! Sometimes you may never have to use the tilt function.

I'm curious you guys. Between the 17 and the 24, if you could only pick one which would it be? Or is it really that beneficial to have both?

The intent would be both interior and exterior architecture of course

agphotography wrote in post #12940357
I'm curious you guys. Between the 17 and the 24, if you could only pick one which would it be? Or is it really that beneficial to have both?

The intent would be both interior and exterior architecture of course

If you have to pick one then you need the 17mm to better capture smaller interior environments. But I like the flexibilty of being able to use GNDs and a CPL on the 24mm.

I'm just thinking of shifting towards a new shooting style and I really would like to keep my Zeiss 21, but I feel that the 35 and 85 (though I love them) are slightly expendable. I would be able to get either the 17 TS-E or the 24 TS-E if I sold them both and I'm trying to figure out which would be more useful to me.

I should note that at present I don't own or use any filters on my lenses.

17 tse + 1.4x

That actually works?? I'm not much of a long lens shooter so I've never invested in any TCs. I just assumed they were only for Super-Teles.

I wonder though, I've heard a few mixed feelings about these lenses when Tilted. Are the concerns un-founded? I've never used a TS lens on 35mm but I do have a background in Large Format (4x5) photography so I'm accustomed to the ideas behind the lens movements.

I actually wanted to ask the same question, that agphotography just did. I want to buy "the ultimate" landscape lens, and am thinking to either go with 17 or 24 TS-E. The thing is, the 24 has better IQ, and can take filters (I want to use polarizer, GND, ND), but I am afraid it may be not wide enough. On the other hand with panning and stitching it may give wider results. However, despite all this logic, the pictures from the 17 TS-E thread impress me more... So could anyone who used both of these lenses express his opinion on which lens to choose if only one can be picked?

agphotography wrote in post #12941295
That actually works?? I'm not much of a long lens shooter so I've never invested in any TCs. I just assumed they were only for Super-Teles.

I wonder though, I've heard a few mixed feelings about these lenses when Tilted. Are the concerns un-founded? I've never used a TS lens on 35mm but I do have a background in Large Format (4x5) photography so I'm accustomed to the ideas behind the lens movements.

Unfounded.

You generally only need very little tilt with either of them anyway, because they are WA and UWA lenses. The biggest concern is with extreme shift, really, but even there these lenses are outright amazing.

The 17 mm is the best true UWA lens I have ever come across, full stop. It just doesn't get better. Sharp from corner to corner, it truly is an amazing lens.

I wil eventually get a TS-E 24L II, but I don't miss my old TS-E 24L at all, as I used it mostly on my APS-C bodies when I still had those, and I have the TS-E 45 and 90 as well anyway . Ok, I also own a 24L II, so I am cheating a little here, but only a little .

That 17, however: wow wow wow is all I can say . Every single time.

HTH, kind regards, Wim

dextrocube wrote in post #12941897
I actually wanted to ask the same question, that agphotography just did. I want to buy "the ultimate" landscape lens, and am thinking to either go with 17 or 24 TS-E. The thing is, the 24 has better IQ, and can take filters (I want to use polarizer, GND, ND), but I am afraid it may be not wide enough. On the other hand with panning and stitching it may give wider results. However, despite all this logic, the pictures from the 17 TS-E thread impress me more... So could anyone who used both of these lenses express his opinion on which lens to choose if only one can be picked?

If only one can be picked, and you like to shoot WA, landscapes or architecture, the TS-E 17 without a doubt, for me at least . Add an extender, and it doubles as a 24, with IQ equal to or better than the old TS-E 24L, be it an F/5.6 only.

The TS-E 24L II is supposed to be slightly better than the TS-E 17, but you have to value them for what they are. One is a WA, the other an UWA, and Canon really outdid themselves with the TS-E 17. Do note that vignetting with this lens is outstandingly low, unless you shift to the extreme. Even then it generally isn't noticeable, unless you look hard for it.

The TS-E 17 is an extremely sharp lens, which also renders beautifully. Images often have a 3D look to them when taken with this lens (despite it being an UWA lens!). The images you see here in this thread are quite representative of what one can achieve with this lens from an IQ POV. Other than that the photographers here are excellent too, and combine that with good tools like the TS-E 17, and you get awesome, astonishing results. This lens never ceases to amaze me, and it does so over and over again.

HTH, kind regards, Wim

^^Any Zeiss Wim?

+1 to everything wim said

Hi Julian,

jdizzle wrote in post #12947201
^^Any Zeiss Wim?

Yes, 1 (CZ 50 1.4, adapted), which I don't particularly like, and refuse to sell because I don't want to saddle anybody else with something I cannot be happy with myself.

Of the current series, I also tested the 50 F/1.4, 50 F/2, 28 F/2, 21 F/2.8, 18 F/3.5 (several copies of some). To me, the 21 is the best of that lot, but it vignettes quite heavily - actually all Zeiss lenses seem to, relatively speaking anyway - and I really just don't like that. Furthermore, IMO, the TS-E 17 beats them all .

Let me clearly state that that is my opinion, BTW, which I will not discuss any further here, other than that I generally just don't like the way these lenses render.

Kind regards, Wim

agphotography wrote in post #12941295
That actually works?? I'm not much of a long lens shooter so I've never invested in any TCs. I just assumed they were only for Super-Teles.

I wonder though, I've heard a few mixed feelings about these lenses when Tilted. Are the concerns un-founded? I've never used a TS lens on 35mm but I do have a background in Large Format (4x5) photography so I'm accustomed to the ideas behind the lens movements.

Interesting question. As an old 4x5 user I have to say that I have found the tilt a bit tricky to use on the TS-E 17. Obviously, the problem is the incredible DOF which makes it really hard to SEE the effect in viewfinder or on the LCD screen. (I haven't tried it tethered but that would work I should think.)

For all that, I have used the tilt successfully enough using Schiemflug's rule, and estimating the intersection points between film plane, lens plane etc. But have wondered if just stopping down would not be just as effective!

Mind you I have seen work from others that indicate a clever use of tilt, so I guess I just need to practice more!

I'm with Wim and others on the quality of the lens....first rate!!