« on: Today at 07:01:49 PM »
I don't think 99% of people will use 11mm effectively.
The ability to use a lens 'effectively' is not a prerequisite for desiring (or purchasing) that lens. Also, 'effectively' is a judgement call...and in my judgement many people also utterly fail to use a fisheye lens effectively. IMO, a (rectilinear) UWA shot often needs a close subject for a focal point...but for many, the objective is simply to 'get it all in' and if 16mm isn't wide enough, wider is better. Most people with that objective would likely not choose to 'get it all' but have it all warped with a fisheye lens.
Given that many people with FF cameras have a 24-xx L-series zoom, perhaps the combination of the 8-15 fisheye with an 11-24/4 would offer the best creative potential.
In my case, I had the 16-35/2.8 II and swapped it for the TS-E 17mm as my ultrawide lens (well, actually I also have the Rokinon 14/2.8 used mainly for astro). I'd love an even wider TS lens.
I think the problem is the projected cost of the 11-24 alone is so high getting another overlapping lens is probably out of the range of most.