11-24 To buy or not to buy ....

sacentre said:

I really like the look of this lens and the sample shots I've seen so far but have never owned a WA as wide as 11mm before. I do have the TS-E 17mm and 24mm is covered with the 24-70 f2.8 II.

I shoot mostly landscapes and architecture and am just an amateur so have no professional justification for lens purchases.

Although I prefer primes as a general rule, I was wondering if I'd be wasting my time and money adding the 11-24 zoom. I could always sell the 17mm I suppose. Canon's high-end zooms do appear to be getting better/sharper though over the years and I was very happy with the results I got with the 24-70 II compared to the 24-105 f4. Any thoughts?

Click to expand...

sacentre said:

I really like the look of this lens and the sample shots I've seen so far but have never owned a WA as wide as 11mm before. I do have the TS-E 17mm and 24mm is covered with the 24-70 f2.8 II.

I shoot mostly landscapes and architecture and am just an amateur so have no professional justification for lens purchases.

Although I prefer primes as a general rule, I was wondering if I'd be wasting my time and money adding the 11-24 zoom. I could always sell the 17mm I suppose. Canon's high-end zooms do appear to be getting better/sharper though over the years and I was very happy with the results I got with the 24-70 II compared to the 24-105 f4. Any thoughts?

Click to expand...

Georg13 said:

sacentre said:

I really like the look of this lens and the sample shots I've seen so far but have never owned a WA as wide as 11mm before. I do have the TS-E 17mm and 24mm is covered with the 24-70 f2.8 II.

I shoot mostly landscapes and architecture and am just an amateur so have no professional justification for lens purchases.

Although I prefer primes as a general rule, I was wondering if I'd be wasting my time and money adding the 11-24 zoom. I could always sell the 17mm I suppose. Canon's high-end zooms do appear to be getting better/sharper though over the years and I was very happy with the results I got with the 24-70 II compared to the 24-105 f4. Any thoughts?

Click to expand...

Hi!

I would never sell my 17mm TSE lens, since it is the best lens for architecture photography (together with the 24mm TSE mkII, which I don't own)).

Since I allways wanted some wider lens below 17mm, the 11-24mm is the optimal extension in the ultrawide area and since it is very well corrected and can produce absolutely undistorted images it is the lens I was waiting for indoor shooting - especially churches, where every addtional mm counts...

in addition the lens is sharp also into the edges and is amazing insensitive to flare, which is very important in that range for me

It always depends what you are shooting and if you need a lens going this wide (more than 126 degrees)!?

some sample shots form the last days (which I already postetd) can be found here:

http://www.photographie.wien/albums/2955edca2a04577f4e6d96adf897c557/

regards

Georg

Click to expand...

Georg13 said:

--
http://www.photographie.wien
http://www.pbase.com/georgh

Click to expand...

sacentre said:

Georg13 said:

sacentre said:

I really like the look of this lens and the sample shots I've seen so far but have never owned a WA as wide as 11mm before. I do have the TS-E 17mm and 24mm is covered with the 24-70 f2.8 II.

I shoot mostly landscapes and architecture and am just an amateur so have no professional justification for lens purchases.

Although I prefer primes as a general rule, I was wondering if I'd be wasting my time and money adding the 11-24 zoom. I could always sell the 17mm I suppose. Canon's high-end zooms do appear to be getting better/sharper though over the years and I was very happy with the results I got with the 24-70 II compared to the 24-105 f4. Any thoughts?

Click to expand...

Hi!

I would never sell my 17mm TSE lens, since it is the best lens for architecture photography (together with the 24mm TSE mkII, which I don't own)).

Since I allways wanted some wider lens below 17mm, the 11-24mm is the optimal extension in the ultrawide area and since it is very well corrected and can produce absolutely undistorted images it is the lens I was waiting for indoor shooting - especially churches, where every addtional mm counts...

in addition the lens is sharp also into the edges and is amazing insensitive to flare, which is very important in that range for me

It always depends what you are shooting and if you need a lens going this wide (more than 126 degrees)!?

some sample shots form the last days (which I already postetd) can be found here:

http://www.photographie.wien/albums/2955edca2a04577f4e6d96adf897c557/

regards

Georg

Click to expand...

Thank you, Georg. Yours was the kind of considered and thoughtful reply I was looking for and will certainly aid a purchasing decision.

Those are great shots by the way. Do you mind me asking how many of them could you have taken with your 17mm by standing a bit further away? How important would you say that 6mm was to you in those situations. Obviously, there will be situations like interiors where you're backed up against a wall and need the widest angle lens you have.

Click to expand...

biza43 said:

sacentre said:

I really like the look of this lens and the sample shots I've seen so far but have never owned a WA as wide as 11mm before. I do have the TS-E 17mm and 24mm is covered with the 24-70 f2.8 II.

I shoot mostly landscapes and architecture and am just an amateur so have no professional justification for lens purchases.

Although I prefer primes as a general rule, I was wondering if I'd be wasting my time and money adding the 11-24 zoom. I could always sell the 17mm I suppose. Canon's high-end zooms do appear to be getting better/sharper though over the years and I was very happy with the results I got with the 24-70 II compared to the 24-105 f4. Any thoughts?

Click to expand...

1. Do you need wider than 17mm?

Click to expand...

biza43 said:

2. Can you rent the lens?

Click to expand...

biza43 said:

--
www.paulobizarro.com
http://blog.paulobizarro.com/

Click to expand...

sacentre said:

I really like the look of this lens and the sample shots I've seen so far but have never owned a WA as wide as 11mm before. I do have the TS-E 17mm and 24mm is covered with the 24-70 f2.8 II.

I shoot mostly landscapes and architecture and am just an amateur so have no professional justification for lens purchases.

Although I prefer primes as a general rule, I was wondering if I'd be wasting my time and money adding the 11-24 zoom. I could always sell the 17mm I suppose. Canon's high-end zooms do appear to be getting better/sharper though over the years and I was very happy with the results I got with the 24-70 II compared to the 24-105 f4. Any thoughts?

Click to expand...

hotdog321 said:

sacentre said:

I really like the look of this lens and the sample shots I've seen so far but have never owned a WA as wide as 11mm before. I do have the TS-E 17mm and 24mm is covered with the 24-70 f2.8 II.

I shoot mostly landscapes and architecture and am just an amateur so have no professional justification for lens purchases.

Although I prefer primes as a general rule, I was wondering if I'd be wasting my time and money adding the 11-24 zoom. I could always sell the 17mm I suppose. Canon's high-end zooms do appear to be getting better/sharper though over the years and I was very happy with the results I got with the 24-70 II compared to the 24-105 f4. Any thoughts?

Click to expand...

There are light years of visual difference between 17mm and 11mm, of course. I you have deep pockets and a strong back, I think it might be worthwhile. I shoot architecture with a 16-35mm and still find myself backing though walls; I can't help but feel that the 11-24 would be an awesome architecture and landscape lens offering unique photographic perspectives.

And you're right about Canon's recent zooms--they seem to have made a serious commitment on their pro-quality "L" zooms. More often than not they are superior to fixed focal lengths.

My two cents, anyway.

--
photojournalist
http://craighartley.zenfolio.com/

Click to expand...

sacentre said:

hotdog321 said:

sacentre said:

I really like the look of this lens and the sample shots I've seen so far but have never owned a WA as wide as 11mm before. I do have the TS-E 17mm and 24mm is covered with the 24-70 f2.8 II.

I shoot mostly landscapes and architecture and am just an amateur so have no professional justification for lens purchases.

Although I prefer primes as a general rule, I was wondering if I'd be wasting my time and money adding the 11-24 zoom. I could always sell the 17mm I suppose. Canon's high-end zooms do appear to be getting better/sharper though over the years and I was very happy with the results I got with the 24-70 II compared to the 24-105 f4. Any thoughts?

Click to expand...

There are light years of visual difference between 17mm and 11mm, of course. I you have deep pockets and a strong back, I think it might be worthwhile. I shoot architecture with a 16-35mm and still find myself backing though walls; I can't help but feel that the 11-24 would be an awesome architecture and landscape lens offering unique photographic perspectives.

And you're right about Canon's recent zooms--they seem to have made a serious commitment on their pro-quality "L" zooms. More often than not they are superior to fixed focal lengths.

My two cents, anyway.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Rexgig0 said:

Whether something is "worth it" is a very individual thing. I saw an 11-24L on the shelf at the local Canon dealer yesterday, and when I got home, ran the numbers to see if I could realize the dream, even though I would be using it for personal shooting, as I am not in the photography business. (I do shoot evidentiary/forensic/crime scene images, as part of my larger duties, but about 28mm to 100mm can handle those needs.) If I had the resources, I would be there tomorrow morning at opening time to see if someone bought it after I left yesterday.

I decided it would be financially reckless to spend $3000 US, with a credit card, when I can pay cash for this lens, after I retire, as soon as this summer, to perhaps late 2018. So, yes, this lens is on my "to-buy" list, "worth it" to me, but I should be patient.

Click to expand...

sacentre said:

I really like the look of this lens and the sample shots I've seen so far but have never owned a WA as wide as 11mm before. I do have the TS-E 17mm and 24mm is covered with the 24-70 f2.8 II.

I shoot mostly landscapes and architecture and am just an amateur so have no professional justification for lens purchases.

Although I prefer primes as a general rule, I was wondering if I'd be wasting my time and money adding the 11-24 zoom. I could always sell the 17mm I suppose. Canon's high-end zooms do appear to be getting better/sharper though over the years and I was very happy with the results I got with the 24-70 II compared to the 24-105 f4. Any thoughts?

Click to expand...

rebel99 said:

sacentre said:

I really like the look of this lens and the sample shots I've seen so far but have never owned a WA as wide as 11mm before. I do have the TS-E 17mm and 24mm is covered with the 24-70 f2.8 II.

I shoot mostly landscapes and architecture and am just an amateur so have no professional justification for lens purchases.

Although I prefer primes as a general rule, I was wondering if I'd be wasting my time and money adding the 11-24 zoom. I could always sell the 17mm I suppose. Canon's high-end zooms do appear to be getting better/sharper though over the years and I was very happy with the results I got with the 24-70 II compared to the 24-105 f4. Any thoughts?

Click to expand...

i wouldn't buy a lens just for the look, as you have indicated ;-) if you have the canon tse 17mm then you know wide that is and the question that arise is: do i really need wider than 16mm or 17mm FL lens? the new 11-24 has a hefty price as well, unless i have a big load of cash sitting somewhere, i'd really take a hard look asking myself whether i seriously need this wide of a lens. i have the tse 17mm lens and things look wayyyyy out there when i look through the view finder. canon tse 17mm/tse 24mm primes (i have both) are probably the sharpest lenses i have ever seen but then again, i respect everybody's personal decision!

syd

Click to expand...

Georg13 said:

sacentre said:

I really like the look of this lens and the sample shots I've seen so far but have never owned a WA as wide as 11mm before. I do have the TS-E 17mm and 24mm is covered with the 24-70 f2.8 II.

I shoot mostly landscapes and architecture and am just an amateur so have no professional justification for lens purchases.

Although I prefer primes as a general rule, I was wondering if I'd be wasting my time and money adding the 11-24 zoom. I could always sell the 17mm I suppose. Canon's high-end zooms do appear to be getting better/sharper though over the years and I was very happy with the results I got with the 24-70 II compared to the 24-105 f4. Any thoughts?

Click to expand...

Hi!

I would never sell my 17mm TSE lens, since it is the best lens for architecture photography (together with the 24mm TSE mkII, which I don't own)).

Since I allways wanted some wider lens below 17mm, the 11-24mm is the optimal extension in the ultrawide area and since it is very well corrected and can produce absolutely undistorted images it is the lens I was waiting for indoor shooting - especially churches, where every addtional mm counts...

in addition the lens is sharp also into the edges and is amazing insensitive to flare, which is very important in that range for me

It always depends what you are shooting and if you need a lens going this wide (more than 126 degrees)!?

some sample shots form the last days (which I already postetd) can be found here:

http://www.photographie.wien/albums/2955edca2a04577f4e6d96adf897c557/

regards

Georg

Click to expand...

Photomonkey said:

Try before you buy.

Click to expand...

SwedishGoose said:

Photomonkey said:

Try before you buy.

Click to expand...

This would be great if possible.... I am an amature and have wanted to rent to try out lenses before but here in Stockholm there seems to be noone renting out to individuals, only to companies. Guess I will have to start a company then....

Click to expand...