Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

2 3 … 6 7 end

Archive 2009 · Trying to avoid the 17/4

Yakim Peled
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Trying to avoid the 17/4

Dear FM'ers,

Lately I have been bitten hard by the TS bug. I recently bought two M645 Mamiya lenses (35/3.5 and 120/4 macro) and a Mirex TS adapter and am having great fun with them. Trouble is, I now want TS in a wider FL. As the 35/3.5 is the widest FL in the M645 Mamiya range that means just one thing: Canon. More specifically, the 17/4. I am focusing on that lens as I am in the APS realm now (40D) and will probably stay there (7D).

Stitching pictures for panorama pictures currently does not interest me. Shifting up or down will still be narrower than my 10-22. That means that the only benefit I'll get from it is when I tilt it, right?

I am not a die hard landscape shooter. On the contrary. I mostly shoot portraits and macro. In fact, the 10-22 is my least used lens. Therefore, paying so much money just for the tilt feature seems outrageous to me. It seems to me that the only true benefit I will get from it is if I go FF. Even on 1.3X it is narrower than my 10-22.

Any thoughts?

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Oct 18, 2009 at 09:15 AM

burningheart
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Trying to avoid the 17/4

Yakim. Resistance is futile. I recently went on holidays and took all my Tilt+Shifts (17.24.45.90 and Nikon 85PC MKI), just like you I was having great fun with them and found that I was grabbing them often. The most used ones for me were the 24 and 45. But I like landscape.

Since 35 is your widest, if you must buy consider the 24 over the 17. Since your 10-22 is used very little, I ask how would the 17 focal length fit in given you are not a landscape shooter. Yes It could be used for macro, but portrait not likely unless you are taking portraits of Salem Sue.

http://www.robert-chisholm.com/fred_miranda/IMG_7640_ts90_28.jpg

http://www.robert-chisholm.com/fred_miranda/IMG_7637_t217_11.jpg

Its not a great picture but portaits with the 17 would be extremely limited,

Seriously the 17 would do well in macro with an extension tube, but you would be limited in macro just shooing at normal MFD without one. The 24 may meet your needs or may not again it is wide angle, but not ultrawide like the 17.

It is a lot to invest if the lens has very limited use. Another thought take out your 10-22 and set it at 17 and see if you like the FOV, granted you wont get tilt or shift but the FOV will at least give you an idea if you really will have any use for a 17 TS.

Edited on Oct 18, 2009 at 10:20 AM · View previous versions

Oct 18, 2009 at 10:06 AM

Yakim Peled
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Trying to avoid the 17/4

I want the 17/4 for landscape/cityscape shooting. Today I use my 10-22 for it. However, generally speaking I am doing little of such photography. Thus, just like the 10-22 gets little use, so will the 17/4, and though I lust for it, I hesitate to spend so much money on a lens which will seldom be used.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Oct 18, 2009 at 10:19 AM

AGeoJO
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Trying to avoid the 17/4

Yakim Peled wrote:
I want the 17/4 for landscape/cityscape shooting. Today I use my 10-22 for it. However, generally speaking I am doing little of such photography. Thus, just like the 10-22 gets little use, so will the 17/4, and though I lust for it, I hesitate to spend so much money on a lens which will seldom be used.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

I am not saying that your logic is flawed, not even close. But what if you start out thinking differently. You get this lens since it will "push" you to shoot more landscape/cityscape, and you may like the results very much. So much that you end up enjoying this lens tremendously. Wouldn't that be worth the money? Plus, you will be shooting happily ever after...

Oct 18, 2009 at 10:30 AM

burningheart
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Trying to avoid the 17/4

Good point AG, what you said is so true. I found that when I first went into Alternate lens and now T+S. On my recent trip I took only 3 AF lens and only 1 was really used the rest of the time was manual focus alts and tilt shifts.

I see no 24T+S in your profile, is that in you future plans?

Oct 18, 2009 at 10:38 AM

Geofn
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Trying to avoid the 17/4

I debated between the 17 and the 24, and ended up going with the 17 since it can be used with the 1.4x to become a 24 (and the new 17 with a TC has better IQ than the old 24 Mk I, which I also own). I use the 17 on full frame for architecture and landscapes and it is awesome for both. Just bite the bullet and buy it!

Another thought: if you get one now and don't absolutely fall in love with it, you should be able to sell it for very close to what you paid given the relative scarcity of this lens.

Oct 18, 2009 at 10:42 AM

Photon
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Trying to avoid the 17/4

Yakim, what kinds of stuff are you shooting with your Mirex adapted Mamiya 35? If you want wider view with similar capabilities, would a 24 TS and 5D cost about the same as a 17 TS? Of course if you are moving toward a 7D, wish to avoid full frame, and don't shoot much landscape (let alone architecture), then any of the Canon TS lenses seem like overkill to me.

OK, Joshua has made a good argument for getting the 17/4 TS. Just to be contrary, I'll say "save your money - some day you'll fall for full frame, and the fabulous fit of TS lenses designed for it. Wait until you're ready to jump in with both feet."

Oct 18, 2009 at 10:44 AM

AGeoJO
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Trying to avoid the 17/4

burningheart wrote:
Good point AG, what you said is so true. I found that when I first went into Alternate lens and now T+S. On my recent trip I took only 3 AF lens and only 1 was really used the rest of the time was manual focus alts and tilt shifts.

I see no 24T+S in your profile, is that in you future plans?

That was my own experience in wildlife shooting. I didn't know I love it so much before I ventured into it. I had the classic 24 TS-E, I sold it and went with the 17mm, instead. Chances are, I won't get the new 24 TS-E. It is more "either or" for me and I felt the 17mm is more exciting to use and it is more exotic

Oct 18, 2009 at 10:50 AM

RobertLynn
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Trying to avoid the 17/4

Just give me your wallet and credit cards, and you won't be able to buy it. Done. I'll even buy you a beer.

Oct 18, 2009 at 11:06 AM

gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Trying to avoid the 17/4

With your description of how you shoot and what you do/don't shoot, it is hard for me to see value to your photography in getting a 17mm TS lens.

Dan

Oct 18, 2009 at 11:17 AM

Yakim Peled
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Trying to avoid the 17/4

AGeoJO wrote:
I am not saying that your logic is flawed, not even close. But what if you start out thinking differently. You get this lens since it will "push" you to shoot more landscape/cityscape, and you may like the results very much. So much that you end up enjoying this lens tremendously. Wouldn't that be worth the money? Plus, you will be shooting happily ever after...

That's exactly what my heart is saying. I'm trying to avoid listening to it.....

gdanmitchell wrote:
With your description of how you shoot and what you do/don't shoot, it is hard for me to see value to your photography in getting a 17mm TS lens.

Dan

And that is what my head is saying.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Oct 18, 2009 at 02:38 PM

Yakim Peled
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Trying to avoid the 17/4

Photon wrote:
Yakim, what kinds of stuff are you shooting with your Mirex adapted Mamiya 35?

A bit of portraits. A bit of architecture.

Photon wrote:
If you want wider view with similar capabilities, would a 24 TS and 5D cost about the same as a 17 TS?

But my 10-22 will still be wider....

Photon wrote:
Of course if you are moving toward a 7D, wish to avoid full frame, and don't shoot much landscape (let alone architecture), then any of the Canon TS lenses seem like overkill to me.

That's exactly what I was thinking. Thing is, my lust for it is totally irrational.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Oct 18, 2009 at 02:44 PM

dolina
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Trying to avoid the 17/4

The cons of getting the 17 are these. May distort some shots, has no filter threads, no hood and with a glass bulb like that will cause a lot of near collisions that may cost you $450.

Oct 18, 2009 at 03:03 PM

Peter Figen
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Trying to avoid the 17/4

And the advantages are that you may be able to make images you could never make previously. Sometimes we buy things because they feel right or we just want them. I had a gut feeling about this lens that it would be along the lines of both my drum scanners and Epson 98/9900 - items that I wasn't quite sure how they would pay off but ended up being some of the most profitable equipment I own.

Oct 18, 2009 at 03:10 PM

Yakim Peled
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Trying to avoid the 17/4

dolina wrote:
The cons of getting the 17 are these. May distort some shots, has no filter threads, no hood and with a glass bulb like that will cause a lot of near collisions that may cost you $450.

Yes. Build wise, the 24TS looks like a much better idea than the 17TS. That humongous and hoodless front elements is giving me nightmares.

Peter Figen wrote:
And the advantages are that you may be able to make images you could never make previously.

Exactly. That's the TS bug I was talking about.

Peter Figen wrote:
Sometimes we buy things because they feel right or we just want them.

Yes. Exactly so.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Oct 18, 2009 at 03:16 PM

dolina
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Trying to avoid the 17/4

So Yakim you better get that TS-E soon before Canon decides to jack up prices again.

Oct 18, 2009 at 03:18 PM

Antje
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Trying to avoid the 17/4

Yakim Peled wrote:
That's exactly what I was thinking. Thing is, my lust for it is totally irrational.

You're doomed, Yakim. Enjoy the struggle, but you will give in eventually.

The only comfort I allow myself is that it'll be in good hands!

Antje

Oct 18, 2009 at 03:23 PM

mMontag
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Trying to avoid the 17/4

The drama of the 17 - the "WOW' factor - best reveals itself with a full frame field of view.

A used 5d - Nikon 14-24 & G-adapter can be had for about the same price & allow the Mirex set-up to open up to FF FOV. The 14-24 does a great job of city lights & Architecture also.

Oct 18, 2009 at 04:01 PM

Yakim Peled
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Trying to avoid the 17/4

Antje wrote:
You're doomed, Yakim. Enjoy the struggle, but you will give in eventually.

The only comfort I allow myself is that it'll be in good hands!

Antje

I wish I could get the same encouragement from my wife. She thinks I have too many lenses right now.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Oct 19, 2009 at 04:48 AM

Yakim Peled
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Trying to avoid the 17/4

dolina wrote:
So Yakim you better get that TS-E soon before Canon decides to jack up prices again.

Don't say that! I'm trying to avoid it altogether......

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Oct 19, 2009 at 04:51 AM

1 2 3 … 6 7 end
FM Forums \| Canon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 … 6 7 end

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