« on: July 23, 2014, 10:15:05 AM »
Unlike many Google translations, this one is a bit more readable...
I note the comment that the 16-35 mk2 was good for APS-H ;-)
The multiple aspheric lens surfaces allow them to ease some of the compromise between reducing distortion and field flatness. The two front lens elements make quite a significant contribution to this and will likely be seen again in new ultra wide zoom designs.
I still want a TS-E14 though ;-)
If the coverage of the TS-E17 is anything to go by, a TS-E14 with any notable shift would be somewhere between huge, expensive and impossible.
Take a look at this to see the effective angle of view of the imaging circle of the TS-E17 compared to a traditional rectilinear 14mm lens (panoramic comparison, near the bottom of the page):
No scientific fact here, but I'd estimate a TS-E14 with similar levels of shift as the 17 to project an imaging circle with an angle of view something equivalent to a 10mm rectilinear FF lens.