Better lens than 17-40

Started Dec 3, 2013 | Discussions thread
24Peter Veteran Member • Posts: 3,186
Re: Better lens than 17-40

peter doncaster wrote:

Hi. It is interesting to note you have tried all these lenses. It seems the only reason I could justify the D800 and 16-35 is for cropping purposes. Must admit I see so many photos in a photo. Maybe my composition could be better. Is technology levelling off in terms of the quality . everything is pretty good. I must say I would like to try a TS-E lense. Nice photos. Sun Flowers and City Scapes.

Hi Peter - I'm not trying to undersell or in any way denigrate the 17 TSE. It is quite lens and there are many more skilled than I who could probably use it to it's full potential. I was just noting that for me - esp given the premium price one would pay for the lens - I'm not seeing it as a must have for my landscape photos.

Looks like you're overseas so not sure if there are rental options to "try before you buy", but here in the US there are several companies that rent gear on-line. I rented the 17TSE (as well as many other lenses from time to time) to see what I was missing. The strong point for the 17TSE is when you have prominent vertical lines that take up a good part of the image, e.g., buildings and perhaps to a lesser extent, a stand of trees in a landscape image. Here the shift function helps immensely. I can also see how the tilt function could help on a landscape image when you want the extreme foreground in sharp focus, in addition to your distant infinity point. In my experience, stopping down is usually sufficient to get everything in sharp focus, but I also tend avoid prominent foreground features on my landscape images, so you or others might benefit more from the tilting lens function.

 24Peter's gear list:24Peter's gear list
Nikon D750 Nikon D850
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow