Review - Canon TS-E 24 f/3.5L II

[symmar22]

hi

between this 24 and 90 tse , which one give the better color

since the price is so high with the 90 tse, but no L

I used this lens on the fireworks couples time, I love the result very much.

No worries if the 90mm is not an L, sharpness is simply amazing, can't see any colour difference with the 24mm, no distortion, super flat field, no CA. Quality speaking it would deserve the "L" without hesitation. The optical formula being a simple telephoto with a 6/5 (lenses/groups), with no UD, aspheric or other special glass, I guess Canon sees it as too simple to deserve the red ring, though it is a stellar lens.

[Cannon Man]

I absolutely love this lens! I have used it for 1.5 years now and i always have it with me!

I had little time to take this shot. I'm really happy i got the railing sharp as well as the boat with some nice bokeh on the side.

[castillophotodesign]

i have a question maybe someone can help me out. is the version I of this lens any good? is it a lot less sharp? why is version II so much better? about how much would you pay for a  used version I? Thank you!!!

[symmar22]

i have a question maybe someone can help me out. is the version I of this lens any good? is it a lot less sharp? why is version II so much better? about how much would you pay for a  used version I? Thank you!!!

I am afraid to say the version 1 is a very average lens considering it's price, much less sharp as the v2, tons of CA, soft angles. I tried it about 15 years ago for a job where I needed it, it did not impress me much, mounted on an EOS 1n with film. The CA shows like hell on digital sensors. To get an idea, check this link :

 http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-TS-E-24mm-f-3.5-L-II-Tilt-Shift-Lens-Review.aspx

If you can get one for cheap, it'll do the job, problem is they are relatively scarce and IMO a bit overpriced on the second hand market. With film, I found the old Nikkor 28mm PC was sharper, though without tilt.

The last one on eBay went in the US for 805$.

[Kernuak]

I'd be interested in hearing from anyone who is used to using both and has made a direct real world comparison for similar scenes. That said, the results are probably just as meaningless, as I needed a wide aperture for shooting the northern lights, which is the reason I went for the f/1.4 over the TS/E and Zeiss 21mm, otherwise it would have been a hard choice to choose between the three.

I have both the TS-E and 24L II.  The TS-E is sharp in the corners at f/3.5, but truthfully, I rarely shoot at any aperture other than f/8.  In comparison, I generally only use the 24L II at f/1.4 to f/2.8.  At f/1.4, it is fairly soft.  At f/2 to f/2.8, it sharpens a lot.  I have not compared their relative sharpness at the same apertures.

I look at the two lenses as having very different purposes in my bag.  To my eye, the TS-E appears to be my sharpest lens.  It is my favorite landscape lens (followed by the TS-E 17) because the tilt offers edge-to-edge sharpness and the shift straightens walls and provides for shift panos.  The 24L II is perfectly suited for the Northern (or Southern) Lights or anytime that you need a sharp, wide, fast lens with AF.  For the Northern Lights, I would only use the 24L II.  It would also double as an excellent landscape lens.  Of the two, the 24L II is more flexible and more usable as a walk around lens.

I cannot speak to the Zeiss 21mm.  For my shooting, I would prefer the 24L II over it because of the AF, which I find very helpful.

Thanks, I would agree about the different purposes, although they do of course overlap when it comes to landscapes. For a scene where you want a slow shutterspeed, the standard format lens would suit, whereas the TS/E would work better for freezing motion more (such as a large wave in storm conditions) and still get sufficient DoF. I think this is where the perception of the TS/E being sharper comes from, as typically, you'd be at f/4 or f/5.6, which is about the aperture that is as sharp as either of them get, instead of f/11 or even f/16 with the standard 24mm. When I shoot landscapes, I always manually focus (unless it's too dark to see), but I have used AF for a few portraits, so it has come in handy.

[RobertG.]

This superb lens is especially useful for landscape photography. A precise composition was never easier than with this lens.

The noticeable vignetting, when lots of shift is applied, can be quite useful. In portait orientation, when fully shifted the light fall off at the upper or lower end (depending on the shift direction) is about 1-2 EV, which helps a lot with the sky. Several shots taken this way create a super wide angle panorama when stichted together. It shows almost no distortion and no grad ND filter is needed.

BTW, with a Lee filter holder and wide angle adaptor ring the last 2-3mm of shift show very strong vignetting. With a 105mm pol filter on top of the Lee filter holder the last 3-4mm of shift can not be used without distracting vignetting.

The two attached pictures were taken from the same position. Picture 1 was made of 9 stiched shots (with lots of overlapping). Picture 2 is the same view in landscape orientation. Both are re-sized small jpegs out of camera without further reprocessing.

[eml58]

I have the 24 II and find this an amazing enough Lens I intend to purchase the 17 as well, I have a question though, does anyone have experience of the Schneider 50 f/2.8 and the Schneider f/4.5 Tilt Shift Lenses, although expensive these seem a step up from even the Canon L Lenses, but I was interested in any opinions from anyone that has used these Lenses.

[Ivan Muller]

One thing I forgot, the 24mm TS-E is compatible with the extender 1.4 (though I can only speak for version 2), that gives a very decent 34mm TS-E.

I am quite interested in that 1.4 extender and would appreciate some more info if you dont mind..when you say decent, would that be at max shift also and would you say its good enough for professional use..?

[TrumpetPower!]

One thing I forgot, the 24mm TS-E is compatible with the extender 1.4 (though I can only speak for version 2), that gives a very decent 34mm TS-E.

I am quite interested in that 1.4 extender and would appreciate some more info if you dont mind..when you say decent, would that be at max shift also and would you say its good enough for professional use..?

I'm drawing a blank, but somebody posted a while back a "making of" video for a promo shot for a new luxury hotel -- the kind where crews truck in spotlights and they coordinate which room lights are on and off and what-not. The photographer, as I recall, used the 24 with a 1.4x TC.

Perhaps somebody with a better remembery than mine can post a link to the video....

Cheers,

b&

[symmar22]

One thing I forgot, the 24mm TS-E is compatible with the extender 1.4 (though I can only speak for version 2), that gives a very decent 34mm TS-E.

I am quite interested in that 1.4 extender and would appreciate some more info if you dont mind..when you say decent, would that be at max shift also and would you say its good enough for professional use..?

I actually use it for work were the 24mm focal is too wide, there is a slight loss in contrast / sharpness, but for me, the IQ loss is marginal, considering you get a very useful focal for a TS lens. I did not notice any problem with max shift, but of course what is acceptable is highly subjective.

Do you already have a 24mm TS-E ? If yes, you could probably rent a 1.4x extender to make up your own mind.

 Once again for me, the results are surprisingly good, though I always use a stable tripod, a cable release and LiveView focusing to minimise vibration and guarantee perfect focus.