khurram1
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 Re: Canon RF 14-35 f/4L IS USM Ongoing Review | |
aut0maticdan wrote:
This was an awesome post! I was really curious about FOV comparisons with the 15-35. TBH, I’m a little weirded out that focal lengths are no longer a measurement of focal length but rather an approximation on FOV resulting from correction. This is especially a little off putting on expensive L glass. In the end it is just about taking photos and having a good time. For many that is mostly about it lugging around lighter gear. This looks like a neat lens.
@khurram1@ - it is possible this lens does perform much tighter on a narrower range of like 16-28, so it may be just what you are after with ‘options’
In other comparisons, the 15-35 seems to destroy it in the 28-35 range, so if that is important for you…
I think that both Stan and Jesse's photos show that the 14-35 is clearly wider than 14mm, and what you see corrected in camera may indeed be close to what you get corrected out of the software. One of the questions is going to be how much effort you have to do in post processing to get it there.
I'd like to get the widest lens I can. the following shot is with the 16-35 F4L, and it was this trip that convinced me I needed to get wider than 16mm, because, I couldn't capture all that i wanted.
The second shot is with the 11-24 f4L, and is also at 16mm. While i love the 11-24L lens, the size of the lens is a pain. The bulbous lens design and the size of the SW150 ND Grad filters, it was almost impossible to clean the spray off the lens and filters. A smaller (regular flat lens surface and smaller filters would have been much easier to clean. I only had 5 to 8 minutes of the having the light, the sun where i wanted it, waiting for people to walk out of the frame, AND wipe away the spray on the lens and the filter. Bulbous lenses are a bxxch to clean, and the huge Lee filters are just as difficult to wipe.
I actually took more shots from the same location as the second shot and shot at 15 mm as well to get my kids in the shots, and could see how far off to the side I could have them, before distortion would be a factor having people in the shots. I loved being able to go wider - the extra mm helped to get those shots.
WIth the 11-24, I can see that with the Lee adaptor it will vignette between 13-14mm, so I know I have to zoom out to around 14mm to play it safe. I just want to make sure I can do the same with the 14-35L and 15-35L that have in camera corrections.
The other question is which has the better sunstars with the 14-35 and 15-35?? WIth the two shots i posted, for both the 16-35 F4L and the 11-24, i had to stop down to F16 - which softens things up with diffraction to get the sunstar i wanted. I find the 16-35L to be much better stopping down to F16 than the 11-24 does. Wondering if there is a similar difference between the 14-35 and 15-35?
Ideally, i'd like to get the widest lens as i can - but in the past I had the TSE 17, TSE 24, 16-35L, 11-24L, 24-70L, 85L, and 70-200L. Going forward, i don't want as many overlapping lens. Prefer to go with the EF 70-200 f2.8L III, RF 24-70L, RF 85L and one of 14-35L or 15-35L. Maybe sometime down the line, I may add a TSE back in the mix, but I'm trying to go with a more limited set of lens going forward.
|
