 |
|
|
Dragonfire
Online
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Jul 25, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 8871
|
|
Review Date: Apr 8, 2018
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,000.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Extremely fast focusing on the 1DsIII, outstanding image quality from edge to edge, complete lack of distortion.
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
I would use the 14L II to shoot a wedding without hesitation and I am eagerly awaiting Astrophotography season and a few trips into NYC.
Astrophotography - http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1552566
The 14L II is my new walkaround.
|
|
 Apr 8, 2018
|
|
peterstrong
Offline
[ X ]
Registered: Dec 21, 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Dec 21, 2016
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Angle of view; Fairly wide aperture
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
I think the lens is amazing and very fun to use. However, it can also be frustrating to compose with but that is no fault of the lens. You need to be aware that EVERYTHING gets in the frame at 14mm - your feet, the people around you and even the buildings behind you when you're shooting towards the sky! Therefore a 14mm lens can be a challenge to get a *clean* composition with. This is the only reason I would prefer to own a 14-24mm zoom.
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2016
|
|
mce_30
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 19, 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 15, 2014
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, astonishingly wide field of view, autofocus works well
|
|
Cons:
|
Large front element can't be protected with a filter - this is simply due to the design of the lens and can't be helped
|
|
Great lens! I've previously put in a review but I've since written an article about my experiences using this lens and wanted to provide a link for anyone interested. It's focused around urban / architecture photography with this lens. There are many example photos.
http://meandmy5d3.blogspot.com.au/2014/06/ultrawide-lenses-urban-exploration-at.html
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2014
|
|
rbussmann
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 11, 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 27, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, with great color rendition. Great built quality.
|
|
Cons:
|
Never like the design with a slide on lens cam and no chance to put filters on. Price.
|
|
|
This is really a great lens for architectural shots, unless you want to use a tilt-shift, although I use it mostly for landscapes. Fast and accurate AF, great color rendition. Superb built - have used one on expeditions for years without any problem, although I would like to see a design that would allow slim filters.
|
|
|
Mar 27, 2014
|
|
arthurb
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 24, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 121
|
|
Review Date: Nov 19, 2013
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 1
|
|
Pros:
|
Angle of view; Fairly wide aperture
|
|
Cons:
|
Fuzzy round the edges; Expensive
|
|
|
I was looking forward to getting this lens, a bit wider than my 17-40mm f4 and a bit faster. I was off to Disneyland Paris and the lens arrived a few hours before I left. The wide angle of view and lack of distortion were great. When I looked at the files though, the edges of the frames were out of focus and showed severe chromatic aberration. This was worse in the top right and lower left of the frame and whilst bad at large apertures was still apparent to an annoying degree at f11 / f16. I assumed that the lens was faulty and returned it to the retailer in Hong Kong who sent it to Canon for calibration. Canon's view was that the lens was perfect. Luckily I had returned it to the retailer within their 14 day no quibble money back period. If that is as good as it gets then I don't want it. My Sigma 15mm takes a similar angle of view and is pin sharp. Ok it is fisheye.
The 14mm is only the second Canon lens that has disappointed (the other being a 70-300 f4.5/5.6 lll). I have about 8 other Canons and they are very good. It was a huge amount of money to fork out for such a poor piece of kit. The only lens I have that cost more is the 70-200 f2.8 ll and that is a brilliant bit of glassware....
|
|
|
Nov 19, 2013
|
|
mce_30
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 19, 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 21, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Fantastic image quality across the frame. The massive angle of view captured with this lens makes it a very creative and fun tool to use.
|
|
Cons:
|
The bulging front element is somewhat exposed and therefore the lens does not accept a front filter. There's probably no other way to build this kind of lens though.
|
|
My only caveat to this review is that I have only rented the lens, I do not yet own it. I have rented it twice, for a sum total of around five days of solid shooting. I do plan to get this lens but I am first holding out to see if Canon will develop a 14-24mm zoom, as this would be far more versatile. I love urban / street / architecture photography and this lens has certainly delivered me some powerful compositions.
I think the lens is amazing and very fun to use. However, it can also be frustrating to compose with but that is no fault of the lens. You need to be aware that EVERYTHING gets in the frame at 14mm - your feet, the people around you and even the buildings behind you when you're shooting towards the sky! Therefore a 14mm lens can be a challenge to get a *clean* composition with. This is the only reason I would prefer to own a 14-24mm zoom.
Both copies of this lens that I have rented have performed flawlessly and I would highly recommend this lens to anyone who, like myself, is addicted to ultrawide angle photography! A collection of my photos taken with this lens on a 5D Mk III camera body can be found here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/michael_elford/sets/72157635748911705/
|
|
|
Sep 21, 2013
|
|
avuroski
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 3, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 537
|
|
Review Date: Oct 5, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,715.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Smallest, lightest ultra-wide for full fame dslr - very sharp, virtually zero distortion, an engineering marvel
|
|
Cons:
|
no filters, front element easy to scratch
|
|
|
This is a specialized lens. If you like ultrawides, there's really no other lens like it. People who complain about the flaws of this lens don't understand lens design - there has never been an ultrawide lens with this much coverage so sharp with so little distortion EVER made, period. Not Leica, not scheider, no one. If you've never used an ultrawide, I would definitely rent one before buying - they're quite difficult to use well. The field of view is astounding - on my full frame 5Dmk3, the detail is remarkable. No flair so far, and very, very little distortion. All ultrawides have significant falloff, that's unavoidable. It's easily corrected in lightroom, etc, with lens profiles.
For reference, the other ultrawide I use is the Schneider 47mm XL for 4x5 on a Linhof Master Technika with a $350 center filter. It obviously has better resolution overall, but it's amazing how close this lens comes in such a small, light package. While it takes me about 5 minutes to take a single shot with my 4x5, this can go with me everywhere. It's my new favorite lens. Great for interior shots. Very expensive, unfortunately, but there's nothing better. The nikon 14-24 is a monster comparatively speaking.
|
|
|
Oct 5, 2012
|
|
retrofocus
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 19, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 10154
|
|
Review Date: Aug 19, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,760.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp at f/2.8, no distortions at the frame borders and corners, superb contrast and color. One of the best Canon lenses in my opinion.
|
|
Cons:
|
Price. Try to find a good deal for a used one.
|
|
|
Excellent lens for ultra-wide angle photography on full frame sensors. I bought it for interior shots in buildings and for creative shots. I realized that sometimes my 17-40/4 is not wide enough to photography rooms and architecture. The 3 mm wider of the 14/2.8 II make a huge difference, and the lens is an amazing piece of glass. Sharp and in-focus photos even at f/2.8 with nearly no distortions. Didn't see a lot of CA with this lens either so far - the bit of CA can be easily removed in post-processing software. Flares and glares are no issue even outdoors with this lens!
Protruding front lens element needs to be handled with care, but the lens cap works well to protect it. Filter is not necessary since the lens is coated in a way that colors don't fade and appear natural in the photo.
|
|
|
Aug 19, 2012
|
|
twistedlim
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 20, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3175
|
|
Review Date: May 15, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp across the board. By 4.0 everything is usable. Focus is fast and accurate. Very portable. Very little distortion. Lines are nice and straight. Really and engineering marvel.
|
|
Cons:
|
None within the designed use of this lens, only the price but anything else approaching this focal length has far, far more distortion. You get what you pay for.
|
|
|
Opening up a whole new area of photography for me.
|
|
|
May 15, 2012
|
|
ohsnaphappy
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Jun 29, 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 1649
|
|
Review Date: Jun 29, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
|
I'm not sure where to post my question, but I was wondering if anyone had experience using this lens for wedding photography? Particularly for wedding receptions? The general consensus is that it's too wide for wedding work. What are your thoughts?
|
|
|
Jun 29, 2011
|
|
gerrit p
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 10, 2003
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Apr 21, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
The most beautiful wideangle Canon has ever produced.
little distortion and very sharp.
|
|
Cons:
|
CA, but that can be solved in Photoshop or Lightroom 3
|
|
|
I had to wait one month for the delivery of the 17mm TSE.
Tried the 14mm in the store.
Wondered whether this lens would be a good choice instead of the 17mm.
Decided to take the 14mm lens.
Do not regret my choice.
This lens has autofocus, which is really an advantage.
|
|
|
Apr 21, 2011
|
|
Victor Go
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 13, 2007
Location: Singapore
Posts: 47
|
|
Review Date: Jan 8, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $2,074.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Solid build, very well controlled distortion, weather sealed, and razor sharp.
|
|
Cons:
|
No filter to protect front elements, but I guess it can be serviced by canon if scratched!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 8, 2011
|
|
Delpartal
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 3, 2010
Location: Spain
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Oct 8, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Tamaño, peso, calidad optica, colores, muy poca distorsión.
|
|
Cons:
|
Precio.
|
|
Es muy curioso, porque con la 1D Mk IV, me gusta mucho más este objetivo que con la 5D MkII, ya se que el angular se acorta pasa a ser un 18,2mm pero sigue siendo una focal muy interesante y desaparecen los pequeños problemas (nada importante) que presenta con el FF.
Ejemplo con la Canon 1D Mk IV (APS-H):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/arojo/5064353196/
Ejemplo con la 5D (FF):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/arojo/2722252305/in/set-72157606484142998/
Saludos a todos.
|
|
|
Oct 8, 2010
|
|
breitwand
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 21, 2010
Location: Austria
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 21, 2010
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $2,120.00
|
|
Pros:
|
looks nice, contrast ok
|
|
Cons:
|
focus aberration at infinity, color aberration increasing at corners, generally too soft, disappointing
|
|
|
Maybe there are are some bad copies of the lens.
Then I definitely got one.
Definite blue-yellow color aberration in corners.
OK for amateur purposes, impossible to use professionally.
Cannot compare to Leitz.
|
|
|
Aug 21, 2010
|
|
berni123
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 25, 2009
Location: Croatia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 20, 2010
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: $2,200.00
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp, wide and excellent for architecture and landscape. Tilt and shift similar to what was only possible with Sinar / Cambo etc. EXCELLENT !!
|
|
Cons:
|
Price, but worth every cent. You must be carefull with lens
|
|
|
Because of TS-E 17mm, TS-E 24mm and EF 14mm, I bought the Canon (before was a Nikon fan) and start shooting architecture in "leica" format. Before I was using Cambo and Hasselblad. If you shot architecture or landscape that's for you and you would not regret!! My Hass. is waiting for "normal" priced full format digital Back. Hope it will come in 2-4 years.
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2010
|
|
mike reid
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Nov 26, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 4139
|
|
Review Date: Jul 4, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,300.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp, great colors, little distortion, built like a tank
|
|
Cons:
|
The lens coating helps but its no polarizer
|
|
|
A stellar performer for architecture and that wwwiiiiddddeee perspective which brings out the creativity. Very solid build quality. I often end up going for my 17-40 instead though when I need glare taken off water ie streams.
|
|
|
Jul 4, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
45
|
202694
|
Apr 8, 2018
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
89% of reviewers
|
$1,965.05
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.93
|
7.51
|
9.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
