Upload & Sell: On
| p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Canon EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM or TS-E 17mm f/4L, |
RS Photo wrote:
I just ordered a Canon 5D3 and now I'm torn between the Canon 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye ($1,319) or the TS-E 17mm f/4L ($2,249). I've never owned a Tilt/Shift lend before and from what I read I can't wait to try one. Maybe I should rent for the weekend first. Thoughts?
Those are really different lenses, and both are relative outliers in terms of what most folks will use. And we don't even know what sort of subjects you intend to shoot!
I'd say you are perhaps getting way ahead of yourself. The primary criteria for lens selection are functional and primarily related to your specific type of shooting and preferences. Without some clear notions of what those might be, making a wild guess at which of these unusual lenses to get based on some forum feedback to an extraordinarily general question is not a promising approach.
If you are new to this stuff, a great place to start - presuming you might be interested in either landscape or architecture or similar - is with the fine EF 17-40mm f/4L. This will give you experience with the focal range you are considering (roughly, though not as wide as the fisheye, but that is a long story) and provide you with an experience basis for making decisions about more expensive lenses. In fact, there is a very good chance that you might just find that the 17-40 is the right lens for you.
The fisheye is a very specialized lens, and for the vast majority of shooters it would not likely be a core lens in their setup. The fisheye effect is striking, but it is also a "style" in and of itself. You can, sort of, use it for regular ultra-wide work, but then you get into "de-fishing" issues in post. Is there a reason you want to go there?
TS lenses are also fine lenses... if they suit your subject and your shooting style. What you gain, primarily, are the ability to tilt the plane of optimal focus and to "correct" perspective distortions. The former can be useful for certain types of landscape photography - when the subject itself is roughly in a tilted plane - and the latter for architecture photography. However, these are rather "fussy" lenses to operate - you are going to have to focus manually, and the process is a bit complex once you add the tilted focus plane to the equation. In addition, you must give up the flexibility and adaptability of zooms. Is there a reason you want/need to do this?