What I'd really like is a nice sharp 17mm. Something like the TS without the movements. I'd even settle for f4. I'd even take the 17-40 f4 if it was sharper. But in this age of super teles and zooms, is my request so difficult? A sharp 17mm, corner to corner? Zeiss 18mm?
I have the Zeiss 18/3.5 on my 5D mk III, and the lens is very sharp corner to corner. This lens is also rated as one of the ten sharpest lenses tested by the Swedish magazine Foto, http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=sv&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Ftidningenfoto.se%2Fde-skarpaste-objektiven-fotos-tio-i-topp-lista%2F%23Carl%2520Zeiss%2520Distagon%2520T*%252018%2F3%2C5%2520ZF. småbildskamera = full frame camera.
Seriously. Imagine what innovating Canon would have to do if Zeiss had AF lenses we could use in our mount. I've pondered getting one of their magical wide primes for some time for landscape work, which I'd shoot largely in LiveView. But AF would be so useful for non-tripod work.
What's the genesis of not having AF on Canon/Nikon-mount Zeiss lenses, anyway? It's not a patent thing, is it, b/c the other 3rd party lens folks reverse-engineer AF function into their hardware... Is it a trade agreement or something, and if so, why would Zeiss leave all that money on the table? Did they strike an AF-exclusivity deal with Sony? Just curious.
I wonder if AF just interferes with the optics somehow? More electronic bits inside make less room for sweet sweet glass.