|
|
|
-
-
-
No, you don't suck because of the 17mm TS-E: it is Canon's infamous Achilles Heel with no clear application and behaving more like an uncorrected fisheye. And tell me what your first reaction would be to the huge front element copping a nasty scrape. The TSE 24mm (original version) is the bees' knees of them all for landscape and the best choice (I have used it since 1996).
Inspiring photos of Zion National Park. I guess I'll have to wait 4 more years before retirement to get there!
.::Garyh
♦
Canon EOS1N ('Brutus', 1993—), TS-E 24mm f3.5L, 20mm f2.8, 17-40 f4L, 70-200 f2.8L
Pentax 67 ('Pentaximus', 2010—) + SMCP 45mm f4, 55mm f4 & 165mm f4LS;
Zero Image 6x9 multi-format pinhole (2008—); Sekonic L758D;
Olympus XA, Nikon Coolpix P7700
"If you're not having fun, then you're not doing it right!"
♦
-
Hello I love Australia.
Yes the 17mm is not for everyone, but in the right hands it sings.
-
That 17mm works beautifully for interior images; my d***** tech loves it - very little distortion that needs to be corrected! Sure it has the most bulbous front element I have *ever* owned (my 300 f2.8 the biggest), but the cap protects it nicely.
I was blown away by it's lack of barrel distortion (compared to a previous 17mm I owned), and that was *the* major reason I paid $2500 to add it to my kit. It's an absolute joy to use, and a real workhorse for the architectural imagery I produce for clients.
-
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
-
Canon 17TS is sold 
|
|
Adv Reply
