Getting started with the TS-E (24mm Mk1 vs Mk2)

I'm thinking of venturing into TS-E territory for the first time ever. I clearly appreciate what shift can do for me and my converging verticals as well as panos, but tilt, well I guess I will just play with it.

The question is, since I'm just starting out, is the old 24 TS-E a wiser decision since I can obtain one at much less compared to the new Mk2? Or is it so soft that it isn't even worth owning at that price? I'm shooting on the 5DMk2.

I've been shooting commercial work with the old version for almost 4 years and never had a client complain about softness. I'll be the first to admit that it isn't tack sharp but it isn't what I would call soft. It suffers a bit from CA too but nobody has complained about that either. It would depend on how much of a sharpness junkie you are, if you can't stand the thought that there is something better than by all means get version 2. For me the economy says I'll be sticking with version 1 for now.

http://golfshots.shutt​rr.com …-back-into-golf-in-spain/

check out these samples from a the tse 24mm stitched for pano. to me they are not soft. (they are really downsized and compressed for web)

I owned version I for a long time, and the lens was soft, suffered from prominent barrel distortion, and had considerable cyan/red chromatic aberrations. The distortion and the CA were easy to correct, but the softness was pretty bad.

Here's an example of the TS-E 24 version 1. Colors and contrast are nice, it does its job as a tilt-shift, but even at f/8 (this picture) it's just not that sharp, especially in the periphery.

For that reason, I think it may not be worth the price for some people. I loved this lens, loved using it, but for the $900 I paid for it I expected better performance.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif'

I think it depends on the luck of the draw. Like all lenses, there is the chance that one lens will disappoint while another will impress. If you trade or buy from an individual, you hope to be lucky. If you buy from a retailer, you can send it back if you aren't happy.

I took a chance and traded for one and I think I lucked out

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

I have not used the new 24 (I have had one on order for 10 weeks though) just the new 17 and old 24 in the wide ones. The old 24 has lots of CA but both are a little soft in extreme shifted corners. The origional 24 is worse way sooner in the corners than the 17. On a 5D mk II I would go for the new lens. I liked it better on the origional 5D. The old lens is not a horrid lens (as one would feel reading the web) but I think the high resolution a 21 mp system does bring out its weakness.

I've not used the old version, but the markII is incredibly sharp.

Cool, thanks for all the feedback and the photo samples. Hmm....maybe I might pass on the Mk1 - value is not about absolute lowest price, it's what you get for the price. I would be buying 2ndhand so no chance of returns.

The independent rotation of the tilt and shift is another plus on the mark II.

I've got a MkI version at work and used it for an extensive project last winter. On the 40D it was plenty sharp enough when focused with live view. I'm a serious pixel peeper too. I'm certainly not saying that its the sharpest lens around, but it did the job fine. One of these days I'm going to try it on the 5D2.

For the cost difference, I don't see where you could go wrong with the MkI.

Are you sure 24mm is the focal length you want? Maybe a good choice on a crop body but 24 is quite wide on full frame. I recently added a 45mm TS-E to the 24mm TS-E Mk1 I already had. Despite not being an L the 45 is just as sharp or sharper and the tilt function is a lot more useful. Just a thought.

windpig wrote in post #9918802
The independent rotation of the tilt and shift is another plus on the mark II.

Having tilt and shift in the same plane can be useful and the Mk 1 can be modified to this configuration in a few minutes if you have the right screwdriver.

Mike Bell wrote in post #9920332
Are you sure 24mm is the focal length you want? Maybe a good choice on a crop body but 24 is quite wide on full frame. I recently added a 45mm TS-E to the 24mm TS-E Mk1 I already had. Despite not being an L the 45 is just as sharp or sharper and the tilt function is a lot more useful. Just a thought.

The 45 is my favorite TS-E on full frame and it is definitely sharper and way less CA than the origional 24. It was my first TS lens and it forced me to buy other ones (really it just kept telling me how it wanted its siblings to join it, what a nag). I still use it the most by a fair bit but I like the normal FOV. The 90 is versatile as well doing almost macro work at 1:3 and great for portraits.

You can see the problem with these TS-E's, they all are very useful.

hmm....

new 24TS Mk2 - $2199.

This one..$1K.

I think it may have my interest again. The 24 is the FOV I want, actually I was mulling the 17TS. I plan to shoot landscapes, cityscapes, architecture, so it would be good to go as wide as I can - as it is I already use and abuse the 17-40 a lot.

i think you should get the 24mm https://photography-on-the.net …&highlight=cano​n+24mm+tse