Sarge_: I just wish there were a way to convert the optical effects to what you would see from a medium or large format sensor, to eliminate the distortion.
As a pro who shoots a lot of architecture, that's my biggest beef with shooting wide on a 35mm body; there's not much value as things get so ridiculously distorted.
Has anyone found any filters or software in general that can overcome the 'wide angle' distortion from these wide lenses?
I find combining 2 or more shots using the 24 TS or if absolutely necessary the 17 TS looks more realistic than these ultra-short lenses. There is one possible use for excessive perspective distortion; if the client wants to make a studio apartment look the size of an exhibition hall, an 11mm lens should do it.
AllOtherNamesTaken: According to Lenstip, the Tamron 15-30 is sharper, 1/3 the price, is stabilized, and has 5 times the warranty:
"When it comes to the duel with the Canon EF 16–35 mm f/2.8L USM II the Tamron wins hands down. The Canon was able to compete successfully only in the frame centre, on the edge of the frame it was definitely worse. Still it is possible to use filters with it, a quite important asset in this class of parameters.
To sum up the boasting of Tamron about the superior quality of their new lens proved to be true. The company managed to present a device which compares favourably with its rivals, is cheaper, has optical stabilization and a 5-year warranty period – it would be difficult not to recommend it. Independent producers have been proving for some time that they are no longer specializing in cheap equivalents of brand name lenses. The Tamron 15-30 mm is an excellent example of that strategy."
You give up 4mm, but you gain alot
Curious to see some more reviews down the road.
The Canon 16-35/2.8 is, and has always been (let's be honest) lousy, and the 17-40 is worse. The comparison, if one is to be made, is with Canon's 16-35 f/4. It has sharp corners, image stabilization and you probably won't need the 5-year warranty.
But none of this has to with the 11-24.
rrccad: what's just amazing is that there is no in camera correction for this lens because the profiles aren't out for it yet.
this is direct OOC - no distortion correction or anything.
In the era where manufactures are getting lazy with designs and leaning on software to correct for CA, and massive amounts of distortion and STILL charging alot for a lens, it's nice to see such a well corrected lens.
especially one that has never ever been done before as far as a ultra-UWA? and a zoom and constant aperture at that.
3K for such a lens? esoteric glass always costs.
It's really unfortunate that everything you've said here is lost on most people who grew up in an era where you rely on a computer to fix lens problems that should not have existed in the first place.
mlewan: I do not get it. Are newer software versions not supposed to be better than the old ones? NX-I seems to be a scaled down version of NX2 or even NX. Capture NX-D is a shrunk version of Capture NX2.
At the same time Apple takes its time to release "Photos" which will be an "Aperture for Dummies" product.
What is going on here?
Ok, I realise that it is costly to adapt software to new platforms and APIs, but should there not be at least some advantages with the new software?
mlewan - Yes, newer software is supposed to be better. And it's understandable that people automatically make that assumption. Sometimes it's true.
These showrooms in big cities are incredibly expensive but it might attract some interest. It looks like a Hallmark card store without the cards.
Everlast66: The first thing they put money into that will still have value in couple years time
Not unless they own the property.
SmilerGrogan: Please do your part to keep Ken Rockwell-isms out of DPR. If you're going to use the term "coma" please also use the right term for sunstars.
It is my understanding that the correct term is "diffraction spikes."
Rockwell is uncalled for. But we're stuck with him and pearls of wisdom such as jpeg files being superior to raw, lens sharpness does not matter and long lists of things "real" photographers do or don't do.
But if it wasn't Ken it would be someone else. Like Fred Picker implying he had something in common with Edward Weston and Paul Strand. Ah, the good old days....
MLPhoto88: Nice idea but this brand was originally started by a single photographer. Soooooooo just for money really. No offense but they are the same price as many Lowepro and Crumbler bags that go through extensive research by MANY photographers world wide, not a wash up who need money. I worked at a camera store for 8 years and not only did Think Tank have the highest profit but they always seemed a step behind Lowepro, Tamarac, Crumbler. Pretty much a copy cat. Lowepro coined the "sling bag" and "Urban Camera Bags" years ago and Think Tank is just coming out with one now!? Tell tale signs of a copy cat just producing to make money off people who think its the same.
"Curmbler" weighs a ton, even empty; Tamrac is out of business. All camera bags are huge profit (which is why an entire aisle is devoted to them.) Not sure what sort of extensive research goes into a camera bag, except at the advertising agency.
A bag is a bag. Most features cannot be patented so they copy each other. Do I think ThinkTank started their business as a way to make money? More than likely.
nawknai: To me, any Lowepro, Tamrac, or Thinktank bag looks like a camera bag.
If you don't want your bag to look like a camera bag to reduce the chances of theft by thieves, then stop putting your well-known logo on the front of your bag.
Also, nobody carries a bag that looks like a standard work-bag into the city, countryside, wilderness, or on vacation on the weekend unless they're going to work, or carrying something expensive in it. It's really not a great disguise.
Stop making camera-bags look like office bags. If I'm wearing a t-shirt, why the heck am I carrying a shoulder bag that looks like that? Oh yeah, it's because I'm either carrying my laptop around, or a camera, or both.
It's the manufacturer who wants the free advertising, not the user. At least this logo is small.
Now here is somebody with a great eye. And not just limited to nature pictures, either.
Thoughts R Us: It's funny to read the comments and see how many times people can post virtually the same thing...a variant of "this guy is clueless...out of touch...head in sand, etc." And then go on to complain about Canon sensors.
So the main indictment from what I see is that Canon sensors have less DR at low ISO than the competition. OK. But does that merit the vitriol? Does that mean their cameras are worthless? Aren't there other measures of a camera system...like lenses, support, ergonomics, color signature, QC, etc?
There's also the indictment that Canon doesn't pursue mirrorless with enough seriousness...with no admission that the mirrorless market isn't that big and is stagnating.
If you need more DR, then fine, go to another brand. But Canon has the most customers and most pro's stick with Canon, and it's not because they cannot switch. It's because Canon is for them the overall strongest system.
Now Canon is not perfect; no company is. But let's have some perspective.
Look at it this way. Canon's doing fairly well and everybody else is doing fairly poorly. Now say Canon goes out and buys a really great sensor. That will just accelerate the shake out.
So, by having mediocre sensors, Canon is helping all those marginal brands that have a small but fanatical following. Helps Nikon too.
GaryJP: Bit confused. Why are all the people who REALLY know how to run Canon posting on DPReview message boards and not earning a CEO salary?
Because we are too busy as globe-trotting professionals using our auto-everything cameras and amazingly, getting good results.
They always seem to get it right. TT goes out of their way to design a bag that doesn't attract attention; Tenba designs a bag with brightly colored covers you can use to attract attention, I guess.
I guess there's not much you can patent on a bag but these look very similar to the ThinkTank City Walker. LowePro has already copied the ThinkTank Retrospective so why not?
These look like great workshops. You can't go wrong with glaciers and ice.
allkar: "There's nothing in particular that we learned from Nikon or Sony ..."This is really sad.What a pity!
I'll bet they learned something from the Df, D600/D610 and D750. What to do and what not to do. Test reports and DxO are great but there is something to be said for letting somebody else do the "innovating" and seeing what sells.
For that much money it needs to be much thinner and it needs to make phone calls. Lollipop 5.0 supports raw. Olympus are behind. Fail.
I'm against price drops!
oselimg: Mr. Maeda is either a snob with his head in the sand or he feels so relaxed to the extend of being casual because Canon is coming up with something big. Just remember what happened when they introduced the EF mount. I think that a company like Canon with an extensive range of quality lenses and know-how wouldn't let things slip off their hands as easily as some commentators here think.
Canon needs to avoid over confidence. Just because the entire company is in a strong financial position and the camera division sells more than anybody else, and most competitors are not in good shape financially and the mirrorless cameras that were supposed to wipe out SLRs have yet to do so, is no reason to be complacent.
bronxbombers4: "If another company made a sensor that we believed to be truly the best quality, we would not hesitate to use it."
About as believable as his prior claim that nobody at Canon has ever heard of DxO or has ever heard that Canon sensors are behind in dynamic range.
Just more evidence, sad to say, it's time to look at Nikon/Sony.What a shame.
He wouldn't be where he is (or employed at all) if he acknowledged that a competitor's sensor was significantly better. Why not ask an executive at Volkswagen if he thinks Toyotas are really more reliable.
Pointless. But in fairness, some of the questions were silly too. "If, (in Canon's opinion), a better sensor existed, would you use it?" DPR answer: "Glad you asked! Sony sensors have ours beaten, hands down! Sometimes, I wanna hang my head in shame! I just told my wife, honey, buy a Sony, they rock!"
Q: "If you could sell the 11-24 lens for less, would you do it?" DPR answer: "Heck yeah. You know, I was just in a meeting and I suggested selling that hot new lens for $450 with a $500 rebate. That would make them fly out the door!"