# WA lens advice 16-35 II or the TSE 17



## J.R. (Jun 9, 2013)

Hi CR folks,

My gear is lacking at the wide end. I used to have the 17-40 but sold it off earlier this year with the thoughts of upgrading to the 16-35. 

I've tried a few copies of the 16-35 II but have been left unimpressed with the IQ. The upgrade doesn't feel an upgrade to me so I'm looking at the TSE 17mm. 

As I already have the 24-70 II, I'm only missing the range between 18-24 which I believe I can crop or zoom with my feet. 

Thoughts on this ... downsides besides losing the AF and 2.8 aperture? 

Thanks in advance. 

Cheers ... J.R.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 9, 2013)

The bulbous front element of the TS-E 17L needs TLC, and using the TS movements generally means tripod and Live View. The 16-35 is much more of a 'grab-n-go' lens.


----------



## Dylan777 (Jun 9, 2013)

Skip 16-35 II. Nothing special @ f2.8. I'm thinking 14mm prime, since 95% of my landscape shots @ 16mm.


----------



## J.R. (Jun 9, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> The bulbous front element of the TS-E 17L needs TLC, and using the TS movements generally means tripod and Live View. The 16-35 is much more of a 'grab-n-go' lens.



Thanks Neuro.

What do you mean by TLC?

Additionally, how is the IQ of the TSE with a 1.4x extender attached?


----------



## J.R. (Jun 9, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> Skip 16-35 II. Nothing special @ f2.8. I'm thinking 14mm prime, since 95% of my landscape shots @ 16mm.



Thanks ... The 14mm prime crossed my mind too. But from what I've heard you can stitch the TSE's images quite well and make it a panoramic shot ... That said, I wouldn't mind a canon 14-24 which is as good as the 24-70 II.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 9, 2013)

Tender Loving Care.  

Also, no front filter threads on the TS-E 17L. 

IQ is very good with the 1.4x - check TDP's ISO 12233 crops.


----------



## J.R. (Jun 9, 2013)

neuroanatomist said:


> Tender Loving Care.
> 
> Also, no front filter threads on the TS-E 17L.
> 
> IQ is very good with the 1.4x - check TDP's ISO 12233 crops.



Ok .

No filter threads is a bummer though. Any workarounds?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 9, 2013)

Hitech makes an adapter and a WA holder (need bigger filters than 4x6", IIRC). There are DIY options on google/YouTube.


----------



## Sebring5 (Jun 9, 2013)

I purchased the TSE 17. My alternate choice was the Zeiss 15mm 2.8. Another option is the Zeiss 18mm 3.5 and the TSE 24. No regrets on the TSE 17. Its great as a grab and go wide angle-works just like the Zeiss products with focus confirmation. And there are always the tilt shift functions for creating unique perspectives.


----------



## hendrik-sg (Jun 9, 2013)

+1 for the TSE

ist amazingly sharp, has no CA and no distortion. yes ist a worthfull Piece of Equipment, and the lens cap must be attached exept for Shooting. i let the cap hang on the lens, and this way ist ready really fast. For me the gap between 17 and 24 is acceptable, so i Need no WA Zoom. for me the only disadvabtagee of this amazing lens is that its unusable in rain, therefor an umbrella holder is required 

Shifting Needs mor time, because metering doesnt work, means one has to meter unshifted, go to Manual mode shift and shoot.

tilting is a matter of luck without tripod and live view... 

so much plesure


----------



## Dylan777 (Jun 9, 2013)

J.R. said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > Skip 16-35 II. Nothing special @ f2.8. I'm thinking 14mm prime, since 95% of my landscape shots @ 16mm.
> ...



Count me in for that


----------



## wayno (Jun 9, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



I'd prefer a 16-35 or 17-40 that is a close IQ equal to the 24-70ii. When you use the 24-70ii enough it's interesting how you start to take for granted corner to corner sharpness...


----------



## Random Orbits (Jun 9, 2013)

J.R. said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > Skip 16-35 II. Nothing special @ f2.8. I'm thinking 14mm prime, since 95% of my landscape shots @ 16mm.
> ...



Once you get used to TS-Es, you'll wish that all your lenses had those movements! But it's manual and you'll have to have a different workflow to get the best out of it. A lot of people have chimed in that it requires a bit more care because of its convex front element, but care should also be taken with water. There are hinges and slots for the movements, and they are not sealed.

Shift is easy to do handheld, but controlling the DOF precisely to throw more of the frame in focus will require live view/tripod. Exposure bracketing and post processing can simulate NDs. Whereas filters put all the work up front, the TS-17 will require less work up front but more at the backend. Yes, some filter setups are starting to come out for these lenses, but I'm not keen on carrying a bag of lenses and then another bag for the larger filters. Some can't be simulated (i.e. polarizer) but some tilt movements can't be simulated in post either. It's a trade off.

I see more of a difference between AF/MF rather than MF and tilt shift. If you don't use the TS functions, then you'll essentially have an awesome non-weather resistant MF lens...


----------



## J.R. (Jun 10, 2013)

Thanks for the replies. I'm going to buy the TS-E 17mm next month. 

The only thing that I am left wondering is whether it would be smarter to get a used 17-40 as well for a "grab and go lens" as Neuro mentioned above.

Cheers ... J.R.


----------



## J.R. (Jun 10, 2013)

Random Orbits said:


> Once you get used to TS-Es, you'll wish that all your lenses had those movements! But it's manual and you'll have to have a different workflow to get the best out of it. A lot of people have chimed in that it requires a bit more care because of its convex front element, but care should also be taken with water. There are hinges and slots for the movements, and they are not sealed.
> 
> Shift is easy to do handheld, but controlling the DOF precisely to throw more of the frame in focus will require live view/tripod. Exposure bracketing and post processing can simulate NDs. Whereas filters put all the work up front, the TS-17 will require less work up front but more at the backend. Yes, some filter setups are starting to come out for these lenses, but I'm not keen on carrying a bag of lenses and then another bag for the larger filters. Some can't be simulated (i.e. polarizer) but some tilt movements can't be simulated in post either. It's a trade off.
> 
> I see more of a difference between AF/MF rather than MF and tilt shift. If you don't use the TS functions, then you'll essentially have an awesome non-weather resistant MF lens...



Thanks ... I used a TS-E 24mm for over a month earlier this year and loved it. I was initially planning to get that lens but I've heard that the TS-E 17 works pretty well with the 1.4x extender so that's basically two lenses in one (with the extender attached). The 24-70 II is excellent @ 24mm where the TS functions are not required so I'm now going to get the TS-17.

The TS functions are a steep learning curve but the shots were excellent when I got it right. 

I'm quite used to shooting with a tripod since I had issues with my left wrist last year. Though the ailment is gone, I find myself using the tripod more often than not so this should not be a problem. 

Still feel that not having the option to use filters is a bummer so I will have to improve my PP ... I guess one can't have everything


----------



## Random Orbits (Jun 10, 2013)

J.R. said:


> Thanks for the replies. I'm going to buy the TS-E 17mm next month.
> 
> The only thing that I am left wondering is whether it would be smarter to get a used 17-40 as well for a "grab and go lens" as Neuro mentioned above.
> 
> Cheers ... J.R.



If you can swing it... absolutely! Sometimes, you just won't be able to bring more gear, and something like that will fit the bill.


----------



## minim2 (Jun 10, 2013)

I was also thinking about buying 14L or 17 TSE. After playing with friends 14L for 2 days, I realized learning curve with these lenses will be huge for me. getting a good composition with such a wide lens is not always easy. past weekend I stumbled upon Samyang 14 2.8 in one shady shop in a shady market area. I ended up buying it.

I am planning to spend my weekend with the lens but, so far, sample shots from the lens is really impressing me (esp for the price I paid for the lens). It feels solid and gut feeling says that my 17-40 is already jealous with it.

Two sample shots direct from the camera with no processing (I am yet to learn on how to process images from this lens). one is outside the shop I bought it from and other one near my apt.


----------



## minim2 (Jun 10, 2013)

and yes, I bought it for slightly less than 300 USD. I will see if this focal length grows on me or not. I am pretty sure with correct composition and technique, this lens can give me lot of memorable images (it is really sharp and I, somehow, find it at-par if not better than my 17-40).

I know I am muddying the water but I thought of sharing my experience as I was also thinking about same few weeks ago.


----------



## Deleted member 20471 (Jun 10, 2013)

How about the Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 18mm f/3.5? I was also looking for a sharp WA lens for my 5D, I choose the Carl Zeiss 18/3.5, and the lens is extremely sharp corner to corner – only the 17 TS lens can compete with, and the Carl Zeiss lens have 82mm filter thread.

The Swedish magazine Foto have rated the Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 18mm f/3.5 as one of the sharpest tested lenses, http://tidningenfoto.se/de-skarpaste-objektiven-fotos-tio-i-topp-lista/#Carl%20Zeiss%20Distagon%20T*%2018/3,5%20ZF


----------



## alexanderferdinand (Jun 10, 2013)

Tested a 17-40 over a weekend. Center ok, edges very soft plus heavy CAs.
Owned a 16-35 II: Center very good, edges: sigh. Soft again, even at f8....

Sold it, bought a Tokina 16-28/2,8. And this lens I like to use now.
@ Neuro: although it has a bulbous front element, it doesnt need TLC. But it gets it anyway....

Only a suggestion.

Good luck!


----------



## ejenner (Jun 10, 2013)

J.R. said:


> Still feel that not having the option to use filters is a bummer so I will have to improve my PP ... I guess one can't have everything



You can - it just gets relatively expensive and you loose a little bit of shift (you still get plenty though, like +/- 8mm). Even for this FL I need a polarizer so got the Cokin X-Pro system. Fit it onto a modified spare lenscap and it's nicer to use that a regular filter system IMO. You can also get grads and I presume ND filters if you want.


----------



## deleteme (Jun 10, 2013)

J.R. said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Tender Loving Care.
> ...



I use this from Fotodiox. Beautifully made and works ....wonders. Shown here with a circular polarizer.


----------



## J.R. (Jun 11, 2013)

Normalnorm said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Awesome ... thanks for the help!


----------

