06-14-2010, 01:02 PM
Thanks for the replies guys!
[quote name='thw' date='14 June 2010 - 09:38 PM' timestamp='1276515518' post='491']
Now, Canon only needs release a 14-24 f/2.8 lens of comparable optical quality to Nikon's classic lens, and that will lay down to rest some common internet myths. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
[/quote]
lol... lately I've come to realise how silly this wide-angle competition between Canon and Nikon [fans] is. IMO, anyone who calls themselves a demanding landscape photographer should either go 8x10 film or digital medium format instead of fooling around with tiny 35mm sensors and their CA-ridden wides. Splitting hairs over whether Canon or Nikon is better for wide-angles is a silly exercise.
That said (and I don't mean to sound biased)... Canon's TS-E 17L, TS-E 24L II and 24L II all surpass Nikon's 14-24 and Zeiss's 21 & 18 Distagons. The only hole is in the 14mm end. The easy solution to that is creating a hole in Nikon's line-up by going for a good sample of the Sigma 12-24 and shooting at 12mm <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
[quote name='toni-a' date='14 June 2010 - 09:47 PM' timestamp='1276516026' post='492']
not sure about that
a lens with a big protruding front elements isn't always a dream lens...
[/quote]
Nikon's front element problem is mainly because of its max aperture. I don't know who shoots landscapes at f/2.8 or has trouble focusing with a 14mm to need the f/2.8. Knowing Canon, I doubt they will make their 14-24 (if they make one) any slower than f/2.8, unfortunately.
[quote name='thw' date='14 June 2010 - 09:38 PM' timestamp='1276515518' post='491']
Now, Canon only needs release a 14-24 f/2.8 lens of comparable optical quality to Nikon's classic lens, and that will lay down to rest some common internet myths. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />[/quote]
lol... lately I've come to realise how silly this wide-angle competition between Canon and Nikon [fans] is. IMO, anyone who calls themselves a demanding landscape photographer should either go 8x10 film or digital medium format instead of fooling around with tiny 35mm sensors and their CA-ridden wides. Splitting hairs over whether Canon or Nikon is better for wide-angles is a silly exercise.
That said (and I don't mean to sound biased)... Canon's TS-E 17L, TS-E 24L II and 24L II all surpass Nikon's 14-24 and Zeiss's 21 & 18 Distagons. The only hole is in the 14mm end. The easy solution to that is creating a hole in Nikon's line-up by going for a good sample of the Sigma 12-24 and shooting at 12mm <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' /> [quote name='toni-a' date='14 June 2010 - 09:47 PM' timestamp='1276516026' post='492']
not sure about that
a lens with a big protruding front elements isn't always a dream lens...
[/quote]
Nikon's front element problem is mainly because of its max aperture. I don't know who shoots landscapes at f/2.8 or has trouble focusing with a 14mm to need the f/2.8. Knowing Canon, I doubt they will make their 14-24 (if they make one) any slower than f/2.8, unfortunately.