December 09, 2016, 10:46:10 PM

Author Topic: Review: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L via DXOMark  (Read 14280 times)

StudentOfLight

  • 5DSR
  • *******
  • Posts: 1330
  • I'm on a life-long journey of self-discovery
Re: Review: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L via DXOMark
« Reply #30 on: July 25, 2015, 08:57:27 AM »
The proof of the pudding .. and all that.

This is the most challenging lens I have, but it´s getting under my skin. Any claim, especially from those who have not used it, that this is a poor performer ... looks stupid. This is plain and simple a fantastic lens, especially considering it´s going all the way to 11mm.

I´m on travel, so no proper post processing capability here, but I thought this image, even though not great in any way, shows a key quality. If I had told you this was a 24mm shot, you would have believed me. This is shot at 12mm! (f6.3, ISO320 on a 5DSR). Feel free look at corner sharpness and CA and whatever else you suspect is wrong.
Eldar thanks as usual for you insight and willingness to share your real-world experiences with potential buyers. Given your vast experience with Otii, Arts, TS-E, great-white ...etc I can trust your opinion on how un-"horrib" this ground-breaking 11-24 is.

11mm (and even 12mm for that matter) is a whole other ballgame. My natural tendency towards telescopic-vision and lack of patience means I already find it challenging to work with 14mm effectively.
Fantasy Gear:
TS-E: 45mm f/2.8 L,  EF: 40mm f/0.8,  100mm f/1.4,  18-28mm f/2, 28-85mm f/2, 
EF with 1.4xInt: 100-300mm f/4 ,  500mm f/5.6 L

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Review: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L via DXOMark
« Reply #30 on: July 25, 2015, 08:57:27 AM »

Jack Douglas

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3270
  • http://www.gohaidagwaii.ca/blog/eagle-photography-
    • Jack Douglas Waller
Re: Review: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L via DXOMark
« Reply #31 on: July 25, 2015, 06:56:24 PM »
Ah, I have the advantage on many of you guys since I don't even know what "effectively" means and I can just shoot like a like a little kid! ;)

Seriously, I am beginning to see the challenges, but I will remain ever thankful to have the extra width.

Jack 
6D   11-24 F4   24-70 F4   70-200 F2.8 II   300 F2.8 II   1.4X III   2X III   400 DO F4 II  1DX II

Eldar

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3055
    • Flickr
Re: Review: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L via DXOMark
« Reply #32 on: July 26, 2015, 06:02:26 PM »
This is the view of Geiranger, one of the most popular tourist sites we have and a World Heritage place.

This is a rather strange use of such a wide angle (for me), but since the vista point further up was covered in clouds, I thought I´d try using this wide angle to create the same view. Not the same thing, but still ...

5DSR, 11-24 @11mm, 1/200s, f8.0, ISO100
Canonite and Zeissoholic ...

Jack Douglas

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3270
  • http://www.gohaidagwaii.ca/blog/eagle-photography-
    • Jack Douglas Waller
Re: Review: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L via DXOMark
« Reply #33 on: July 26, 2015, 11:18:36 PM »
Wouldn't find me complaining about this shot Eldar!  Wide looks just fine to me.

Jack
6D   11-24 F4   24-70 F4   70-200 F2.8 II   300 F2.8 II   1.4X III   2X III   400 DO F4 II  1DX II

privatebydesign

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5626
  • Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Re: Review: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L via DXOMark
« Reply #34 on: July 27, 2015, 09:28:26 AM »
This is the view of Geiranger, one of the most popular tourist sites we have and a World Heritage place.

This is a rather strange use of such a wide angle (for me), but since the vista point further up was covered in clouds, I thought I´d try using this wide angle to create the same view. Not the same thing, but still ...

It almost feels unnatural to look at such a wide view...anyone else?

This lens does 126.5 degrees at its widest and human (binocular) vision is 114.

Interesting.

I think you will find that is the perspective of the terrain, not a visual aberration. Certainly I have now shot enough at 11-14mm and realise the lens doesn't 'distort' reality to any appreciable degree, but your perspective and use of juxtaposition can. In this image by Eldar, a straight forward scenic shot with no perspective trickery it is impossible to tell the focsl length used without some knowledge of the actual scene.

Look here http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=24975.msg529944#msg529944 there might be some projection distortion, but no 'unnatural feeling'.
Too often we lose sight of the fact that photography is about capturing light, if we have the ability to take control of that light then we grow exponentially as photographers. More often than not the image is not about lens speed, sensor size, DR, MP's or AF, it is about the light.

Eldar

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3055
    • Flickr
Re: Review: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L via DXOMark
« Reply #35 on: July 27, 2015, 04:49:13 PM »
At 11mm you will have strange artifacts at the edges. That is unavoidable, unless the scenery is discontinued at the right places. I agree that it looks unnatural and this looks a bit funny. But I did so at 16mm with the 16-35 f2l8L IS II also. I have shot a number of other shots, where you don´t get that over exaggerated line distortion on the edges.

However, this is a fantastic lens!!
Canonite and Zeissoholic ...

Eldar

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 3055
    • Flickr
Re: Review: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L via DXOMark
« Reply #36 on: July 27, 2015, 04:51:52 PM »
Here is one (posted on another thread), where I have just cropped to 1:1. It is a lot more difficult to judge the focal length here (... it is 11mm).
Canonite and Zeissoholic ...

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Review: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L via DXOMark
« Reply #36 on: July 27, 2015, 04:51:52 PM »

Oakville

  • SX60 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 4
Re: Review: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L via DXOMark
« Reply #37 on: July 28, 2015, 01:13:14 AM »
It would be nicer to see the same places shot with 11-24 and 16-35 for instance - most people can get 16-35 even it is not cheap but still more affordable lens. Showing only images from 11-24 - they are amazing but to be able to appreciate it you have to have something to compare to.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

www.OakvilleWeddingArtPhotography.com
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Canon 70D, Canon Rebel T3i, Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM, Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM, Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM, Canon EFS 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM, Canon EFS 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM, Canon EFS 10-22mm f/3.5-5.6 USM, Canon EFS 55-250mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM, Canon 430EX II

romanr74

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 473
  • I see, thus I am
Re: Review: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L via DXOMark
« Reply #38 on: July 30, 2015, 06:44:39 AM »
This is the view of Geiranger, one of the most popular tourist sites we have and a World Heritage place.

This is a rather strange use of such a wide angle (for me), but since the vista point further up was covered in clouds, I thought I´d try using this wide angle to create the same view. Not the same thing, but still ...

5DSR, 11-24 @11mm, 1/200s, f8.0, ISO100

Now that I see this I agree - these corners are HORRID.
EOS 5D Mark III; EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye; TS-E 17 f/4.0L; EF 85mm f/1.2L II; Macro EF 100 f/2.8L IS; EF 11-24 f/4.0L, EF 16-35 f/2.8L II, EF 16-35 f/4.0L IS, EF 24-70 f/2.8L II, EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Review: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L via DXOMark
« Reply #38 on: July 30, 2015, 06:44:39 AM »