Canon 16-35 II vs Distagon 21mm

Home · Register · Search · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

Pre-order new Rokinon 16mm f/2.0 ED AS UMC lens

Pre-order new Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 DC HSM lens

Bower 35mm f/1.4 price dropped to $379

FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell
1 2 end

Archive 2012 · Canon 16-35 II vs Distagon 21mm

user222
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · Canon 16-35 II vs Distagon 21mm

I have a nice, sharp Canon 16-35 II. However, I have a jones for the Zeiss Distagon 21mm.

I would have to sell my 16-35 II to help pay for it though and I'm not sure I want to do that.

Interested to hear from others who may have done the same thing?

You sold your 16-35 II and never looked back?
You miss the zoom?
You have both?

One thing that concerns me is that the Zeiss isn't weather sealed, but the Canon is.

Jan 05, 2012 at 12:22 AM

Gunzorro
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #2 · Canon 16-35 II vs Distagon 21mm

I own both. The Zeiss is very nice, but I wouldn't sell my 16-35L II. In fact, I would get rid of the Zeiss before I considered selling the 16-35. The 16-35 is one of my most used lenses. I seldom use the 21/2.8.

Jan 05, 2012 at 12:34 AM

Richard Nye
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #3 · Canon 16-35 II vs Distagon 21mm

I own a 16-36 II, but have never owned the Zeiss. I would suspect the Zeiss blows away the Canon in IQ, but you loose the zoom and AF. I was going to buy the Zeiss 21, but bought the Canon TS-E 24 II instead and I'm glad I did. Amazing lens! The IQ is incredible and you have the T/S feature.

Jan 05, 2012 at 12:46 AM

tsdevine
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #4 · Canon 16-35 II vs Distagon 21mm

I'm the opposite, have both.....use the Zeiss whenever I can. Rumor has it Zeiss may come out with a 15mm or 16mm prime....if that happens I imagine I'd be selling the 16-35 II and going that route.

It is nice to have the flexibility of a zoom. But if I can have 16/21/35 covered with Zeiss primes, I'd probably be happy.

-Tim

Jan 05, 2012 at 12:49 AM

scalesusa
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #5 · Canon 16-35 II vs Distagon 21mm

You will see a variety of opinions, and they are all correct, at least for the person posting.

You need to determine if manual focus and one focal length is what you want. At 21mm, the Zeiss has better IQ. At 16mm 24mm, and 35mm, not so good.

Jan 05, 2012 at 01:26 AM

Lars Johnsson
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #6 · Canon 16-35 II vs Distagon 21mm

I also own both those lenses. And I use the Zeiss 21 a lot more. The I.Q. of the Zeiss is outstanding, but it can't replace the zoom.

Jan 05, 2012 at 03:54 AM

helimat
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #7 · Canon 16-35 II vs Distagon 21mm

The Zeiss blows the zoom out of the water at 21mm. But not as good at 16 or 35mm...

Jan 05, 2012 at 04:13 AM

Zeph
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #8 · Canon 16-35 II vs Distagon 21mm

Own both / use the 21mm much more. The edges are shaper, period!
For landscape work, it's one of the best!

Jan 05, 2012 at 05:39 AM

bobbytan
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #9 · Canon 16-35 II vs Distagon 21mm

Aside from the flexibility of the zoom, any AF lens is heaps better than a MF lens especially if, like me, you like to shoot on the fly and seldom use a tripod. I had the Nikon 14-24G and LOVE the IQ but MF got the better of me, so I sold it and bought a 17-40L and 24L II and never looked back. FWIW, I am using my 17-40L a lot more than my 24L II because of the zoom range. Zoom + AF will give you tons of keepers.

Jan 05, 2012 at 06:14 AM

kevindar
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · Canon 16-35 II vs Distagon 21mm

Gunzorro wrote:
I own both. The Zeiss is very nice, but I wouldn't sell my 16-35L II. In fact, I would get rid of the Zeiss before I considered selling the 16-35. The 16-35 is one of my most used lenses. I seldom use the 21/2.8.
I am with gunzorro, though I dont own the zeiss. That much said, one is not inherently better than the other. it really all depends on your needs. the canon is quite good at 21mm f11, if that where you will be shooting landscapes. it really comes down to you and what you value most.

Jan 05, 2012 at 07:14 AM

user222
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #11 · Canon 16-35 II vs Distagon 21mm

Thanks for the feedback.

I'm going to keep the 16-35, and try to add the Zeiss at some point...and this whole process got me looking at the 24mm TS-E II, another great lens!

Jan 05, 2012 at 04:34 PM

bpark42
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #12 · Canon 16-35 II vs Distagon 21mm

If you want higher performance but also still want the flexibility a zoom gives you, why not the Nikon 14-24? It's not quite as good as the Zeiss overall, but it is darn close and in some ways better (no complex distortion, no cyan corners).

Jan 05, 2012 at 05:47 PM

Gunzorro
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #13 · Canon 16-35 II vs Distagon 21mm

user222 -- Yes, the 24TS-E II is what further complicates my relationship with the 21/2.8. They are very close to the same image size and magnification, and the IQ is at least as good (if not better) in the 24 (certainly less distortion). Add to that the ability to shift to produce wider panoramic composites, and the 24 can actually act like a 14mm for narrow panos, or blocked into a grid it rivals UWA medium format quality. So, between my 16-35 and the 24TS, the 21/2.8 is often the odd-man-out. That is why I consider it not vital in my useage. Don't misunderstand, the 21 is a wonderful lens, but it is limited depending on your approach.

Jan 05, 2012 at 06:01 PM

splathrop
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #14 · Canon 16-35 II vs Distagon 21mm

One thing to remember about manual focus is that at 21mm there are times, quite a few times, when you can say "so what?"

Jan 05, 2012 at 09:41 PM

user222
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #15 · Canon 16-35 II vs Distagon 21mm

I recently picked up my first manual focus lens (zeiss MP 50/2). In fact, that's what spurred my interest in the 21mm. Had to laugh because...one of the 50 MP reviewers on FM said "Once I bought the 50 MP...I purchased the Distagon 21mm within a week." That's kind of the position I found myself in...hah...

After my first day out with the 50 MP, I was impressed by all the focus hits! Much more than my former 50L with AF (still like that lens though too, just different).

I'm still in the honeymoon phase...but I am manual focus convert for sure.

Jan 05, 2012 at 11:10 PM

Pixel Perfect
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #16 · Canon 16-35 II vs Distagon 21mm

user222 wrote:
I have a nice, sharp Canon 16-35 II. However, I have a jones for the Zeiss Distagon 21mm.

I would have to sell my 16-35 II to help pay for it though and I'm not sure I want to do that.

Interested to hear from others who may have done the same thing?

You sold your 16-35 II and never looked back?
You miss the zoom?
You have both?

One thing that concerns me is that the Zeiss isn't weather sealed, but the Canon is.

What about the canon TS-E 24 mk II. Not as sexy, but damn good lens and would push the Zeiss on IQ.

Jan 05, 2012 at 11:22 PM

user222
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #17 · Canon 16-35 II vs Distagon 21mm

Pixel Perfect wrote: What about the canon TS-E 24 mk II. Not as sexy, but damn good lens and would push the Zeiss on IQ.

Yes! I've been oooing and awwing pictures from this lens on the TS-E 24 mk II flickr group.

Jan 05, 2012 at 11:29 PM

robert61
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #18 · Canon 16-35 II vs Distagon 21mm

helimat wrote:
The Zeiss blows the zoom out of the water at 21mm. But not as good at 16 or 35mm...

Exactly. Different tools. If you can get along with a fixed 21 and manual focus, grab the Zeiss. Otherwise, the Canon 16-35 mkII is your tool of choice. For me, I prefer the flexibility of a zoom and auto focus. But your shooting needs may be different.

Both are great lenses when used accordingly.

Jan 05, 2012 at 11:31 PM

Mike Tuomey
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #19 · Canon 16-35 II vs Distagon 21mm

I'd rather have the TS-E 24 II alongside the zoom than the ZE 21. More flexibility, especially for producing big prints (stitched panos via simple shifts, for example) and for some of the architecture and cityscapes I shoot. But if you're anticipating a lot of handheld use, then the nod goes to the zeiss.

Jan 06, 2012 at 12:27 AM

SteveP
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #20 · Canon 16-35 II vs Distagon 21mm

I had the 16-35 II, but sold it for the Zeiss 21mm and am very happy. Also have the 24mm T/S II, and very happy with that. If I get another zoom to go with these primes, it will be the 17-40mm because of lighter weight, smaller filter, lower cost, and comparable quality at my shooting apertures.

Jan 06, 2012 at 03:13 AM

1 2 end
FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 end