As Canon users we have gone from relative famine to feast. We now have choices around the all important 21 -24 mm range. I have the 24 mk 11 and it is a fabulous lens. The 17 TS-E is almost better for landscape but you can't go wrong with either. I am delaying a trip hoping that the new 24 TS-E will arrive because I feel it will be more suitable than the 17. If it does not arrive then the 17 with extender will do the job. The 24 will take filters more readily although I have a solution for graduated filters with the 17.
The big reason for the 24 is that with the extender I will have a 35 TS-E which really pleases me. I agree that Canon will probably redo the 45 and I will be on their waiting list. We live in very exciting times.
Since I already own a 1DIII, instead of 17 TSE with 1.4 on FF, I can use the 1DIII for an effective 22mm. I anticipate being able to use a lot of shift if needed. This combination could replace my 5d with 24 TSE.
Or use a 7D for 27mm FOV with a 17 TSE.
Buying a 7D is a lower investment than buying a 24 TSE II. Instead of changing lenses, change bodies!
A good line-up would be 5DII, 1DIII, and 7D with 17 TSE, plus 1.4. Of course if you don’t want / need a these bodies for other photography, buying extra bodies instead of lenses doesn’t make sense either.
I’ve been working with only two bodies and rent or borrow a spare when I have one in for service; however, it’s not the best system. I intend to purchase at least one more body in the near future. Since each body is in for cleaning at least once per year, I really should have at least three bodies. I’ve never owned a 1.6 crop body, maybe the 7D is a viable option.
Mike: I think others will say you're better off with a 5DII and maybe a 7D and skip the 1DIII because the higher pixel density from the first two bodies will allow more cropping options. With the 5DII you can crop the 17 to an effective 22mm and still have more pixel resolution than what you get from the 1DIII.
But I know what you mean. I also already have the Mark III (it's all I use). Personally I'd rather add a 5DII to get the full coverage of the 17, use the TC when necessary and skip the 7D.
But if you're picky, I think the results from the TS-E 24 mkII might be worth it, at least on a higher pixel density body like the 5DII. If you're just going to stick with the Mark III (like I am for now), then the 17 w/1.4x is a reasonable alternative.
I'm not that picky, the 24 TSE V 1 has been fine until now (I have a 17 TSE CPS loan this week)...
I have the 1DIII and 5D, figuring on getting 5DII (or 1DsIII) before long. May add 7D as third body. Demote 5D (after adding 5DII) with cheap lens to "knocking around in the car at all times" body.
When I service one of my bodies now, I borrow or rent an additional body so need to add the third soon.
For me and my customers, I'm happy enough with the current cameras, but have used 5DII and liked it. Actually I haven't felt the need to upgrade instantly since the 1DII and 5D arrived. I could consider an additional used 5D as a third body and be happy.
Hmmmm... A 17 TS-E, a 1.4x TC, a FF body, and a crop body. That would effectively give you 17mm, 24mm, 27mm, and 38mm equivalents. This lens is getting cheaper and cheaper by the minute.
