That will depend on a lot of things, Peter. If the distagon was a 24 mm, I would say no. For landscape, the difference in FL is greater than the numbers suggest. And you cannot \"step back a few steps\" to include 20% more clouds in your image, as one example.
So I am left with comparison with the zoom for IQ, and then it depends again. The distagon is exceptionally well corrected for CA, and while software tools can also do that to some extent, it does have an impact on sharpness. The 16-35 II gives more CA when stopped down to f/5.6 than wide open. And, as you may have noticed, I buy some lenses for \"eternity\", and the 16-35 II is not such a lens for me.
Further, the ZE lenses are compatible with focus confirmation in the viewfinder, without that I would not be able to focus manually, so I am not a hard-core alternative optics user. Only Canon or ZE for me
Oct 02, 2010 at 12:55 PM
Previous versions of alundeb's message #8903936 « Zeiss 21 f/2.8 ZE vs. 24L II, etc. »
