Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
  

Archive 2015 · Does anyone that has the Canon 11-24L not like it?

  
 
Peter Figen
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Does anyone that has the Canon 11-24L not like it?


Because the resolution is much higher. The higher res shows the limitations with a far greater degree of contrast between the center and corner than, say, a 5D3 would. What looks just a tad soft in a 5D3 corner is really pretty bad on a 5DS. Now, whether that matters is dependent on print size and viewing distance, but you need to know that it exists to make an informed decision about what tool to use.


Oct 27, 2015 at 12:44 PM
RobDickinson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Does anyone that has the Canon 11-24L not like it?


objectively a print of the same size would look no worse than a 5d3 vs 5ds.

But subjectively you may notice soft corners more when the centre is sharper

Sadly i didnt have enough time with the lens(+5ds) and what tiem I did have was rushed and poor weather



Oct 27, 2015 at 03:06 PM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Does anyone that has the Canon 11-24L not like it?


The question here becomes, I think, several questions, and they are ultimately questions that the OP or any other buyer needs to answer within his or her own context.

Do you want/need 11-15mm in a zoom lens? (And, how much do you want/need 11-15mm in a zoom lens?) If you need it and you shoot Canon, this lens provides that for you, and it does a fine job of providing coverage of that focal length range in a zoom lens.

Are you sort of wondering what it might be like to shoot at 11-15mm? If so, you might consider renting a lens or possibly buying with the plan of selling at a small loss (and some time and aggravation) if you don't end up needing it as much as you imagine. (If you are well off financially, I suppose you might regard the cost of such a lens as a small expense and worth it to experiment. If you are less well off and considering its value as a photographic tool in your work, your perspective might be a bit more conservative.)

Are you OK with the downsides of using such a lens? For most folks it is going to be a tripod lens, and not likely a walking around lens. It is not at all easy to use filters with it. It is a big and bulky thing. Again, if you need it, you are going to put up with those issues. If you don't need it, they might lessen the appeal of the lens.

Might you actually be fine with 16mm in your zoom? That is quite wide! If so, consider the 16-35mm f/4L IS as a lower cost, smaller size, IS-equipped, and somewhat more adaptable lens that also provides very wide coverage in a small package the produces top notch image quality.

YMMV,

Dan

Edited on Oct 27, 2015 at 06:16 PM · View previous versions



Oct 27, 2015 at 05:52 PM
RobDickinson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Does anyone that has the Canon 11-24L not like it?


Also - can you stitch? 2 frames stitched at 16mm with 25-30% overlap can cover a similar view


Oct 27, 2015 at 06:09 PM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Does anyone that has the Canon 11-24L not like it?


RobDickinson wrote:
Also - can you stitch? 2 frames stitched at 16mm with 25-30% overlap can cover a similar view


That is a great option for folks working from the tripod with many subject, especially if they only need wider than 16mm on a few occasions. (That's more or less where I come from. I have a 16-35mm lens because sometimes I need it — but I'd bet that I use it for no more than 5% of my photography. There might be a rare occasion when 16mm isn't enough, and in those situations I'll rely on stitching.)

And, for someone trying to decide whether 11mm would be that useful to them or not, stitching a few images that cover such a focal range can be a good way to get a sense of what you can do with 11mm and how likely they are to use it much.

Dan



Oct 27, 2015 at 06:15 PM
Rajan Parrikar
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Does anyone that has the Canon 11-24L not like it?


The 11-24mm makes possible images with more than simply a wider fov. The possibilities with such an ultra-wide angle of exaggerating elements within a composition cannot be gotten by stitching.


Oct 27, 2015 at 06:23 PM
ben egbert
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Does anyone that has the Canon 11-24L not like it?


I just returned from a trip to Kolab Canyon where I hiked Taylor Creek and photographed Double Arch Alcove. 11mm is not wide enough, maybe 11mm shifted might have worked. I also photographed a popular place about 3 miles up the Kolab road that had defied any lens I have used, and 11 is still not wide enough, But it did a fine job turned vertically and making a 3 image stitch. You can also do this with a 17, but the scene gets cramped in the vertical direction.

I posted these at the critique forum and will post them at Landscape as soon as I get them good enough.

As to Peter's comments, yes, the CA is not as good as I would like nor is the corner sharpness. I shoot at f13 and use live view focus. I can never get such sharp images with a manual focus lens. When the 5DS-R is downsized, these issues become very hard to find.

I have the 17TSE and I seldm use it now. The 11 mm provides about the same field of view as a shifted 17 so I can keep a level camera and crop. This works most times but as in my recent trip it did not. However, a 17 TSE would not have worked either.






Oct 27, 2015 at 06:58 PM
Peter Figen
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Does anyone that has the Canon 11-24L not like it?


Just to be clear, I'm not saying I don't like the lens, but just be aware of what it is and what it isn't. And yes, on smaller prints, it will no doubt be fine, the same way the soft corners on the old Nikkors were as well. I've just cranked out several 36 x 52 inch prints for the client from the job I shot two weeks ago (24-70 not 11-24) and they are spectacular. He may well want larger prints as well. And the last big shoot for Honeywell at the beginning of the summer had them making two 5' x 10 ' prints, so for me, I just never know how big something is going to go and these are the circumstances where you actually can see the difference. Now whether the client would notice them or not is another thing.


Oct 27, 2015 at 07:39 PM
Herb
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Does anyone that has the Canon 11-24L not like it?


gdanmitchell wrote:
The question here becomes, I think, several questions, and they are ultimately questions that the OP or any other buyer needs to answer within his or her own context.

Do you want/need 11-15mm in a zoom lens? (And, how much do you want/need 11-15mm in a zoom lens?) If you need it and you shoot Canon, this lens provides that for you, and it does a fine job of providing coverage of that focal length range in a zoom lens.

Are you sort of wondering what it might be like to shoot at 11-15mm? If so, you might consider renting a
...Show more
I have the 16-35 f2.8.....was looking for wider...i also have the 8-15 but i don t like the way the less than 15 looks...hence looking for wider.

when people have said that it needs to be used correctly what does that mean?



Oct 27, 2015 at 08:21 PM
snapsy
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Does anyone that has the Canon 11-24L not like it?


It's just too expensive for a lens that doesn't have sharp edges.


Oct 27, 2015 at 08:26 PM
Peter Figen
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Does anyone that has the Canon 11-24L not like it?


There are so many different ways to use and lens, and many of them don't involve critical detail in the extreme corners, so while it might seem expensive, it's also very unique and very complicated to design and build, so 3K isn't really all that much. Cheap compared to Leica and Rodenstock.

The difficulties of shooting effectively with an ultra wide down to 16mm are compounded when going down to 11-14mm. The corners get VERY stretched. Out of level is magnified and sometimes hard to figure where your issue is. It's a very specialized tool that takes some time to learn, but when you get that great shot that only this lens can make, it is worth it.



Oct 27, 2015 at 08:36 PM
RobDickinson
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Does anyone that has the Canon 11-24L not like it?


I usually shoot wide ( stitched and 14/16mm) and I found you need to re-evaluate at 11mm!


Oct 27, 2015 at 08:49 PM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Does anyone that has the Canon 11-24L not like it?


snapsy wrote:
It's just too expensive for a lens that doesn't have sharp edges.


Quite often when shooting at ultra-wide focal lengths, there is obvious enough "distortion" in the far corners that, in my view, some degradation of sharpness, etc. in the far corners is perhaps not as noticeable a problem as it would be on images with longer focal lengths.

Some also overlook the fact that the ultra wide angles make it likely that you'll include some very close elements in photographs of more distant subjects, creating some DOF issues.

Dan



Oct 27, 2015 at 09:02 PM
billsamuels
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Does anyone that has the Canon 11-24L not like it?


I must say though that the Bower/Samyang/Rokinon 14mm F/2.8 is a really nice and sharp prime lens that at for around $300, is an easy sell. It's sharp all around and if you don't love it, it's worth the risk.


Oct 27, 2015 at 11:38 PM
brian500au
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · Does anyone that has the Canon 11-24L not like it?


I have just returned from Sydney and the amount of tourists I seen walking around with this lens astounds me. I even seen a wedding tog using the lens. It is a big lens and is very distinguishable just by the size.


Oct 31, 2015 at 04:45 AM
Sneakyracer
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · Does anyone that has the Canon 11-24L not like it?


ben egbert wrote:
I just returned from a trip to Kolab Canyon where I hiked Taylor Creek and photographed Double Arch Alcove. 11mm is not wide enough, maybe 11mm shifted might have worked. I also photographed a popular place about 3 miles up the Kolab road that had defied any lens I have used, and 11 is still not wide enough, But it did a fine job turned vertically and making a 3 image stitch. You can also do this with a 17, but the scene gets cramped in the vertical direction.

I posted these at the critique forum and will post them
...Show more







Maybe This Would have Helped :)




Oct 31, 2015 at 07:13 PM
Peter Figen
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · Does anyone that has the Canon 11-24L not like it?


I've asked Stefan on multiple occasions for high res samples from that getup, and he's never supplied them. Given how much the resolution falls off on an unshifted 35mm frame, I can imagine it's only gonna get worse when shifting.


Oct 31, 2015 at 08:58 PM
ben egbert
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · Does anyone that has the Canon 11-24L not like it?


Sneakyracer wrote:


My problem was height, The 11mm got it in vertical mode, the 17TSE may have if shifted in vertical, but the problem was the lower half was all clutter and I would have needed a square crop. I ended up making a 4x5 crop that left me with about a 22mp image. Not bad, but not well received at the Landscape forum. I did not need a stitch and it would not have worked.

I think my problem is I want the entire mountain, cliff or whatever, and other people settle for minimalist shots.





Oct 31, 2015 at 09:20 PM
rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · Does anyone that has the Canon 11-24L not like it?


Peter Figen wrote:
I've asked Stefan on multiple occasions for high res samples from that getup, and he's never supplied them. Given how much the resolution falls off on an unshifted 35mm frame, I can imagine it's only gonna get worse when shifting.


He posted max shift numbers for the 11-24 here. That said, it's max shift/image circle and not necessarily max acceptable sharpness. I believe his argument in the past was that often there is just sky in the edges/corners that doesn't need critical sharpness... Of course that won't always be the case. Anyway, at 11mm the shift is only around 3-4mm.

Will be interesting to see how the announced Voigtlander 10/5.6 for Sony FE and Leica M will compare to the 11-24 @ 11mm... Past experience with Voigtlander UWAs has been a fair amount of CA and not quite the micro contrast punch of Zeiss, but still decent for the money. Of course this lens will be impossible to use on Canon EF...



Nov 02, 2015 at 12:49 PM
orangecuse
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · Does anyone that has the Canon 11-24L not like it?


GREAT Lens --- what not to like = SIZE/Weight


Nov 03, 2015 at 02:25 PM
1      
2
       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.