 |
|
|
avuroski
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Nov 3, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 250
|
|
Review Date: Oct 5, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,715.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Smallest, lightest ultra-wide for full fame dslr - very sharp, virtually zero distortion, an engineering marvel
|
|
Cons:
|
no filters, front element easy to scratch
|
|
|
This is a specialized lens. If you like ultrawides, there's really no other lens like it. People who complain about the flaws of this lens don't understand lens design - there has never been an ultrawide lens with this much coverage so sharp with so little distortion EVER made, period. Not Leica, not scheider, no one. If you've never used an ultrawide, I would definitely rent one before buying - they're quite difficult to use well. The field of view is astounding - on my full frame 5Dmk3, the detail is remarkable. No flair so far, and very, very little distortion. All ultrawides have significant falloff, that's unavoidable. It's easily corrected in lightroom, etc, with lens profiles.
For reference, the other ultrawide I use is the Schneider 47mm XL for 4x5 on a Linhof Master Technika with a $350 center filter. It obviously has better resolution overall, but it's amazing how close this lens comes in such a small, light package. While it takes me about 5 minutes to take a single shot with my 4x5, this can go with me everywhere. It's my new favorite lens. Great for interior shots. Very expensive, unfortunately, but there's nothing better. The nikon 14-24 is a monster comparatively speaking.
|
|
 Oct 5, 2012
|
|
retrofocus
Online
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 19, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 2405
|
|
Review Date: Aug 19, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,760.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp at f/2.8, no distortions at the frame borders and corners, superb contrast and color. One of the best Canon lenses in my opinion.
|
|
Cons:
|
Price. Try to find a good deal for a used one.
|
|
|
Excellent lens for ultra-wide angle photography on full frame sensors. I bought it for interior shots in buildings and for creative shots. I realized that sometimes my 17-40/4 is not wide enough to photography rooms and architecture. The 3 mm wider of the 14/2.8 II make a huge difference, and the lens is an amazing piece of glass. Sharp and in-focus photos even at f/2.8 with nearly no distortions. Didn't see a lot of CA with this lens either so far - the bit of CA can be easily removed in post-processing software. Flares and glares are no issue even outdoors with this lens!
Protruding front lens element needs to be handled with care, but the lens cap works well to protect it. Filter is not necessary since the lens is coated in a way that colors don't fade and appear natural in the photo.
|
|
|
Aug 19, 2012
|
|
twistedlim
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Oct 20, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3046
|
|
Review Date: May 15, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp across the board. By 4.0 everything is usable. Focus is fast and accurate. Very portable. Very little distortion. Lines are nice and straight. Really and engineering marvel.
|
|
Cons:
|
None within the designed use of this lens, only the price but anything else approaching this focal length has far, far more distortion. You get what you pay for.
|
|
|
Opening up a whole new area of photography for me.
|
|
|
May 15, 2012
|
|
ohsnaphappy
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 29, 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 389
|
|
Review Date: Jun 29, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
|
I'm not sure where to post my question, but I was wondering if anyone had experience using this lens for wedding photography? Particularly for wedding receptions? The general consensus is that it's too wide for wedding work. What are your thoughts?
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2011
|
|
gerrit p
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 10, 2003
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Apr 22, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
The most beautiful wideangle Canon has ever produced.
little distortion and very sharp.
|
|
Cons:
|
CA, but that can be solved in Photoshop or Lightroom 3
|
|
|
I had to wait one month for the delivery of the 17mm TSE.
Tried the 14mm in the store.
Wondered whether this lens would be a good choice instead of the 17mm.
Decided to take the 14mm lens.
Do not regret my choice.
This lens has autofocus, which is really an advantage.
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2011
|
|
Victor Go
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 13, 2007
Location: Singapore
Posts: 47
|
|
Review Date: Jan 9, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $2,074.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Solid build, very well controlled distortion, weather sealed, and razor sharp.
|
|
Cons:
|
No filter to protect front elements, but I guess it can be serviced by canon if scratched!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 9, 2011
|
|
Delpartal
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 3, 2010
Location: Spain
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Oct 8, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Tamaño, peso, calidad optica, colores, muy poca distorsión.
|
|
Cons:
|
Precio.
|
|
Es muy curioso, porque con la 1D Mk IV, me gusta mucho más este objetivo que con la 5D MkII, ya se que el angular se acorta pasa a ser un 18,2mm pero sigue siendo una focal muy interesante y desaparecen los pequeños problemas (nada importante) que presenta con el FF.
Ejemplo con la Canon 1D Mk IV (APS-H):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/arojo/5064353196/
Ejemplo con la 5D (FF):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/arojo/2722252305/in/set-72157606484142998/
Saludos a todos.
|
|
|
Oct 8, 2010
|
|
breitwand
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 21, 2010
Location: Austria
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 21, 2010
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $2,120.00
|
|
Pros:
|
looks nice, contrast ok
|
|
Cons:
|
focus aberration at infinity, color aberration increasing at corners, generally too soft, disappointing
|
|
|
Maybe there are are some bad copies of the lens.
Then I definitely got one.
Definite blue-yellow color aberration in corners.
OK for amateur purposes, impossible to use professionally.
Cannot compare to Leitz.
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2010
|
|
berni123
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 25, 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 20, 2010
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: $2,200.00
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp, wide and excellent for architecture and landscape. Tilt and shift similar to what was only possible with Sinar / Cambo etc. EXCELLENT !!
|
|
Cons:
|
Price, but worth every cent. You must be carefull with lens
|
|
|
Because of TS-E 17mm, TS-E 24mm and EF 14mm, I bought the Canon (before was a Nikon fan) and start shooting architecture in "leica" format. Before I was using Cambo and Hasselblad. If you shot architecture or landscape that's for you and you would not regret!! My Hass. is waiting for "normal" priced full format digital Back. Hope it will come in 2-4 years.
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2010
|
|
mike reid
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Nov 26, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1890
|
|
Review Date: Jul 4, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,300.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp, great colors, little distortion, built like a tank
|
|
Cons:
|
The lens coating helps but its no polarizer
|
|
|
A stellar performer for architecture and that wwwiiiiddddeee perspective which brings out the creativity. Very solid build quality. I often end up going for my 17-40 instead though when I need glare taken off water ie streams.
|
|
|
Jul 4, 2010
|
|
LeoJan
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 26, 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 25, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Wide, Color and sharpness in the middle. Good at F2.8
|
|
Cons:
|
Not very sharp at the edges on FF.
|
|
|
This is not an easy lens, it force you to be creative. Go close to your subject, then it is also very nice that the lens is good at F2.8. The color is really amazing. It is a very nice lens to own, but rather expensive because the use is limited. A Canon 35 F1.4L is more value for money for me.
|
|
|
May 25, 2010
|
|
benny86
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 15, 2010
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 14, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,700.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Very Sharp, Super Wide, Very High Quality, Great for making Videos.
|
|
Cons:
|
Cost, No Filter so need to be extra careful.
|
|
|
Bought this back in January and never looked back. This is my most used lens. I personally love shooting in wide angle with my 5d II. It is a very expensive lens but its worth every penny. You will however, be very careful when using this lens because this lens doesn't allow any filter.
|
|
|
Apr 14, 2010
|
|
mervifwdc
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 18, 2005
Location: Ireland
Posts: 2095
|
|
Review Date: Apr 5, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Super WA for extreme situations, brilliant for small rooms where you need to show loads of stuff, great colors, very sharp.
|
|
Cons:
|
cost I guess is the only one, and possibly that shots this wide are very specialised - I dont use it that much.
|
|
|
Awesome lens for when you need something this wide.
|
|
|
Apr 5, 2010
|
|
berni123
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 25, 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Dec 25, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $2,133.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp, wide and excellent for architecture and landscape
|
|
Cons:
|
Price, but worth every cent !!!
|
|
|
Because of these lens and TS-E 17mm I bought the Canon (before was a Nikon fan) and start shooting architecture in "leica" format. Before I was using Cambo and Hasselblad. If you shot architecture or landscape that's for you and you would not regret!!!
|
|
|
Dec 25, 2009
|
|
dmanky
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 24, 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 229
|
|
Review Date: Nov 23, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $2,200.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, WIDE, Excellent Image Quality, Artistic
|
|
Cons:
|
Price, No Filter Set-up
|
|
|
Just picked up this lens over the weekend. AMAZING AMAZING AMAZING on a full frame 5D Mark II. As mentioned the view is breathtaking and a little dizzying. You can get some very unique perspectives with this lens. Will take more time to get to know exactly how it bends/warps at the edges, but it's no fish-eye. Took a variety of images from f 2.8 to 22 and they were sharp all around. No vignetting noted - some CA when wide open and contrasty subjects.
Pricey but well worth it - a superb lens and it is going to add a lot of variety and creative to my kit.
|
|
|
Nov 23, 2009
|
|
terminator
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 28, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 272
|
|
Review Date: Jun 22, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp from center to border, superb build quality, super wide, distortion is well controlled, light weight, a joy to use
|
|
Cons:
|
expensive, cannot use filter
|
|
|
I already own a 16-35L II and had never thought about this lens till the day an once-upon-a-life-time deal showed up accidentally. This lens is an incredible piece of glasses! At 14mm, it blows away my 16-35L in terms of angle of view, distortion control, and sharpness. Build quality is top of the line. And it is surprisingly small and light. I have never been a fan of super wide angle lens, but this lens changes my mind. It is so much fun to use it!
The resale price is crazy, fortunately I get it much cheaper. Thus, my only complain is that it cannot accept any filter, so I have to be very cautious of using it.
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
39
|
157519
|
Oct 5, 2012
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
92% of reviewers
|
$2,011.00
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.97
|
7.41
|
9.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
