# Sharpest Ultra-wide Lens for Full Frame



## killswitch (Sep 30, 2012)

I currently have the Canon 60D and will upgrade to either 5D Mk III or 6D. I currently own the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 DX Pro and absolutely love it. However, once I make the jump to full frame I am contemplating buying one of the following UWA lens. I currently have the Canon 24-70L as well.

1) Canon 16-35 f2.8L
2) Canon 17-40 f4L
3) Canon 14 f2.8L II [not too eager as it's way too expensive  ]

Though I hoped there was a 14-24 version from Canon. 

Of the 3 mentioned, which one delivers greater contrast and sharpness. If there are any other lens from Canon or other brands that will delivers stellar sharpness in the center of the frame as well as in the corners then I am open to suggestions. Thanks in advance!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 30, 2012)

Sharpest will be the TS-E 24L II, followed by the TS-E 17L, then the 24/1.4L II, then the 14L. The Zeiss 21mm is close to the Canon TS-E lenses. Of the zooms, the 16-35L II beats the 17-40L, especially in the corners (but there's no such thing as a truly sharp UWA zoom).


----------



## RuneL (Sep 30, 2012)

killswitch said:


> I currently have the Canon 60D and will upgrade to either 5D Mk III or 6D. I currently own the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 DX Pro and absolutely love it. However, once I make the jump to full frame I am contemplating buying one of the following UWA lens. I currently have the Canon 24-70L as well.
> 
> 1) Canon 16-35 f2.8L
> 2) Canon 17-40 f4L
> ...



I love the 16-35, but the sharpness question, I have no idea, these are all shot with it, I find it a decent performing lens that is also built amazingly. They don't build them like that anymore. I guess it's pretty close to the 17-40 4.0 though.


----------



## killswitch (Sep 30, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sharpest will be the TS-E 24L II, followed by the TS-E 17L, then the 24/1.4L II, then the 14L. The Zeiss 21mm is close to the Canon TS-E lenses. Of the zooms, the 16-35L II beats the 17-40L, especially in the corners (but there's no such thing as a truly sharp UWA zoom).



Okay, Strange there are no listing of TS-E 17L in BnH. Also, it seems if I end up getting the 16-35L i will need a bigger filter(i.e 82mm) >_< As I have now are all 77mm >_<

Any idea which one between 16-35L and 14L tends to render shaper images wide open and at f8. I shoot mostly at f8 using the tokina as that is the sweet spot for that lens. No idea about the ones I listed in the original post though.

Update: Whoops, I was looking at the USED section which is why TS-E 17L didnt show up. Sorry, my bad!


----------



## killswitch (Sep 30, 2012)

RuneL said:


> killswitch said:
> 
> 
> > I currently have the Canon 60D and will upgrade to either 5D Mk III or 6D. I currently own the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 DX Pro and absolutely love it. However, once I make the jump to full frame I am contemplating buying one of the following UWA lens. I currently have the Canon 24-70L as well.
> ...



Lovely shots. I love the train tunnel shot the most. What were the settings for that particular shot?


----------



## RuneL (Sep 30, 2012)

killswitch said:


> RuneL said:
> 
> 
> > killswitch said:
> ...



Hey killswitch, thank you, it was shot at 35mm wide open - 2.8 @ 1/5. I love how it has pretty awesome depth, despite the aperture. 
This is the old one though (which I though you wanted), the 16-35 2.8 with the 77mm filter thread. I never bothered to get the new one, but I bet it's probably sharper.


----------



## Albi86 (Sep 30, 2012)

The Zeiss 21/2.8 is considered to be almost a benchmark in this class, if you don't need anything wider.


----------



## TommyLee (Sep 30, 2012)

my first really wide was the 10-22 on a 20D...I resisted wide lenses...didn't get why they were so EXCITING

10-22 was really an eyopener
with 5D2 came ...soon a 16-35 II which I fell in love with ..it is very sharp @ 16mm

recently with my 5D3 I got the 14 L II ...
this is wonderful

and yes a 24 TSE II is sharper ...prolly 17TSE also (rented them both)

but the 14L is small ...and .... AUTO-FOCUS..
so it gets used a lot ... in a moment... if needed

no tripod

I can say that only the 100 macro and then 100L macro are used more now...
16-35 II is a close substitute (and is less easily 'flared') with some use @ 35 also... in walkaround

14L II and 85L II can do a lot ...
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/3368222485/albums/places-and-things-around-me

go with 14L II if you can afford it...
else
the 16-35L II

just my idea
TOM


----------



## JoeDavid (Sep 30, 2012)

The term "ultra-wide" usually means around 20mm and wider. The 17mm TSE L is about as sharp as you'll get in that range and of course B&H has it but it's not cheap:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/606803-USA/Canon_3553B002_Wide_Tilt_Shift_TS_E_17mm.html


----------



## 1982chris911 (Sep 30, 2012)

Well unfortunately the sharpest lens in this range is the Nikon 14-24 f2.8 which can only be used with an adapter - from the Canon offerings for UWA it should be like this: 17mm TSE > 14mm f2.8 MKII > 16-35mm f2.8 MKII > 17-40mm f4.0 > 14mm f2.8 MKI > 16-35mm f2.8 MKI


----------



## extremeinstability (Sep 30, 2012)

http://www.lenstip.com/239.4-Lens_review-Samyang_14_mm_f_2.8_ED_AS_IF_UMC_Image_resolution.html

$400 better than Canon 14mm in everything but distortion, build(still built really well) and no autofocus(big-whoop at 14mm). I just received a Canon 24mm L F1.4 and this Samyang and was comparing corners, but then found the Canon's whole right side was crazy soft, so needs to be fixed. But just looking at the left side corners of the two, the Samyang's corners are sharper at F2.8 than the Canon stopped down to F2.8. I'll have to do it again when the Canon comes back fixed. After comparing the Canon 14mm with it on there in all categories I really couldn't see why I'd even want to have the Canon, even without the $2200 to $400 price gap. I'm initially a whole lot impressed. Vignetting largely gone at F5.6. This on 5D II. Anyway, their review results should speak volumes for the thing....


----------



## killswitch (Sep 30, 2012)

extremeinstability said:


> http://www.lenstip.com/239.4-Lens_review-Samyang_14_mm_f_2.8_ED_AS_IF_UMC_Image_resolution.html
> 
> $400 better than Canon 14mm in everything but distortion, build(still built really well) and no autofocus(big-whoop at 14mm). I just received a Canon 24mm L F1.4 and this Samyang and was comparing corners, but then found the Canon's whole right side was crazy soft, so needs to be fixed. But just looking at the left side corners of the two, the Samyang's corners are sharper at F2.8 than the Canon stopped down to F2.8. I'll have to do it again when the Canon comes back fixed. After comparing the Canon 14mm with it on there in all categories I really couldn't see why I'd even want to have the Canon, even without the $2200 to $400 price gap. I'm initially a whole lot impressed. Vignetting largely gone at F5.6. This on 5D II. Anyway, their review results should speak volumes for the thing....



Damn, that is one tempting looking lens. Need to do some research. Anyone else had any experience with this particular Samyang glass? Checked out some shots in pixel-peeper.com. Looked promising. Wonder how well the resolution is when paired with a 5d. I will see what I can find.


----------



## TommyLee (Sep 30, 2012)

extreme.....

yes I bet that Samyang is the best deal ...for sure.. for a lot of reasons
I almost did that too.
and it would have been fine for me - I am sure.
I await their 24 TSE

I just fell in love with the ease of autofocus and the small size of the 14L II

many times... renting...... I found a small 'tick' increase in quality, sharpness
24L I , 24L II, 16-35 II, 14L II, 17 TSE, 24 TSE
kinda SHARP in that order (I have the 24 I, 16-35 II and 14 II)
but the handy size and function of 14 II is great for me... more CA than the rest for sure...but easily corrected...


----------



## extremeinstability (Sep 30, 2012)

Photozone says the same thing about its resolution. Here are a couple good images from there to get a good idea. Just look at the roof tiles on the edge of the one.

http://photozone.smugmug.com/photos/927896116_wyL7s-O.jpg

http://photozone.smugmug.com/photos/927855521_a8QQ8-O.jpg

Full frame, 14mm, F2.8.....all at $400...this seems to be the most "silly" lens to me at the moment. I am surprised just how looooonnnngggggg the manual focus spin is on this thing too. There is no tight turn you are there and gone again on focus. You get it looking right and it's a lot more spin before you start to go past. I now know at night I don't even need to worry about trying to find something to live view focus on. 

When I was looking into the Zeiss options I was letting that mustache distortion scare me. So it's kinda silly I looked right on past distortion with this one. I guess it makes sense though. It might have more distortion than the Canon, but it has more resolution anyway. Fix the distortion with a profile and any resolution you might lose in the process, you sorta had to give up in the first place. I would have never dreamed of picking up such an off brand lens, for something that I'd probably use a lot, but it has made a lot of sense after looking into the thing. It is really damn good. Open up the Canon 14 via lens tip in another window and just compare each category. The biggest let down I've seen with the Canon 14 and also the 24 even more-so, is the coma crap. A good use for these fast wide lenses is night scenes with stars. Well the coma is a killer on the Canon's, less so the 14, but still. $2200 vs $400 just seems silly when looking at the results.


----------



## manofiron (Sep 30, 2012)

I had some experience with this Samyang - as others said, the only thing that may annoy is the moustache-style distortion. Everything else is ok.

Tokina 16-28 / 2.8 is also worth a look.


----------



## killswitch (Sep 30, 2012)

manofiron said:


> I had some experience with this Samyang - as others said, the only thing that may annoy is the moustache-style distortion. Everything else is ok.
> 
> Tokina 16-28 / 2.8 is also worth a look.



Yeah I was looking at the 16-28 from Tokina. So, lens tip is a good source for comparison? I had no idea about this site.


----------



## TriGGy (Sep 30, 2012)

I read somewhere in the net that the 16-35mm II gets soft from 24-35mm, but I don't know if that's just the writer's perception of the lens. Better to research even more. If true, what this means is use the lens to make most out of the 16-23mm focal length and leave anything longer to the 24-70 or 24-105.


----------



## Standard (Oct 1, 2012)

I have the Samyang 14mm (also goes by Rokinon, Bower, Pro-Optic, Walimex...The Samyang brand cost a little more than the other brands) and it's sharp. And I mean tack sharp. I literally can read with no problem the fine print on the sides of cereal boxes at 15 plus feet when the image is zoomed in close. Sure, it's manual focus but I use it solely for landscape photography at f/16 on a sturdy Gitzo tripod so it's not an issue one bit. I simply focus using Live View at 10x and it would nailed the focus every time. I've recently installed an AF confirm chip to get correct EXIF info (quite easy to do once you'd figured it out). The only gripe I have is that the lens doesn't take filters, either on the front or rear (so the Lee Filter System and handholding filters are out of the question, although I've successfully added a homemade magnetic cutout nd filter gel on the lens back). I've looked at both the 14L II and Zeiss 15mm/18mm UW lenses (although I do love the look of the Zeiss 21mm) and this by far is the best bang for the buck with fabulous high image quality.


----------



## RLPhoto (Oct 1, 2012)

killswitch said:


> I currently have the Canon 60D and will upgrade to either 5D Mk III or 6D. I currently own the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 DX Pro and absolutely love it. However, once I make the jump to full frame I am contemplating buying one of the following UWA lens. I currently have the Canon 24-70L as well.
> 
> 1) Canon 16-35 f2.8L
> 2) Canon 17-40 f4L
> ...



If you were will to spend for a 14-24L, Why no look at the 15mm Zeiss? Its stunning.


----------

