Richard Nye wrote:
I\'ve never used the Nikor 14-24, but I would find it very difficult to believe it\'s \"better optically than the Canon TS-17\". That\'s one of Canon\'s best wide, prime lenses.
The center performance of the 14-24 is better in my experience.
But the Tse-17 is a completely different beast. For architecture and city shots it\'s unique. There is no alternative from any other brand in 35. The 17 has very little distortion fitting its architecture function. Finally the 17 has almost no CA. Even when fully shifted!
A shift mechanism really gives you a lot of flexibility in composing an image. Whenever I use my non shift lenses these days I feel limited. If there is one downside to the tse-17 it is that you have to be careful to use it in wet conditions. Once the shift mechanism got stuck after using it in rainy weather.
Nov 27, 2011 at 11:54 PM
Previous versions of ViscaB's message #10120807 « 16-35L, 14L, TS-17 or Nikkor 14-24 »
