Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L USM

[1982chris911]

My pic taken with 5D MK III and 11-24mm f/4

This one is wonderful. As I am going to visit Antelope Canyon also this year two questions about your picture: Did you make an exposure blending here or is it a single file ? Also how did you experience the problem with the sky being too bright and therefore nearly impossible to include in the frame while in Antelope Canyon? The 5DIII seems to make a quite good job here.

 

[Click]

So I got a couple of days 'off' this weekend and decided to play with the 11-24 in ways I don't normally get to shoot.

First three are at 11mm and the fourth is at 20mm. All shot with a 1Ds MkIII and 100iso, various apertures and shutter speeds. I have about 10 others I really like from the couple of days too, it is fair to say I am loving this lens!

P.S. Thanks ejeneer, I know I will use it for product shots and a few other 'specials', the more I play with it the happier I am.

I really like the first picture. Beautiful shot. Well done.

 

[1982chris911]

Tokyo international Forum at 11mm

 

[1982chris911]

Arashiyama Sagano Bamboo Forrest (Kyoto) at 11mm

 

[1982chris911]

Regensburg Germany at 16mm

 

[Click]

Arashiyama Sagano Bamboo Forrest (Kyoto) at 11mm

I like the perspective of this picture. Nicely done 1982chris911.

 

[1982chris911]

Arashiyama Sagano Bamboo Forrest (Kyoto) at 11mm

I like the perspective of this picture. Nicely done 1982chris911.

Thank you very much.

Hehe well that is the easier perspective ... It was way more difficult to also get one of the path leading there without ppl. on it (had to wait about 3hrs at that spot). https://500px.com/photo/111640039/arashiyama-sagano-bamboo-forest-by-christian-krieglsteiner-?from=user_library

 

[1982chris911]

Hagashiyama (Kyoto) Yasaka-no-to Pagoda at 24mm

I also tried this location with the 16-35mm f4 IS and 24-70mm f2.8 with different farming ... However the 11-24 results are much nicer as the lens is practically free of internal reflections and the sun or in this case light stars are much nicer with the 9 blade diaphragm of the 11-24mm

 

[privatebydesign]

And a few more.

11mm, f8, 4 sec, 100iso.

14mm, f10, 1/200 sec, 100iso

11mm, f5.6, 1/1250 sec, 100 iso

11mm, f5.6, 1/500 sec, 100 iso

As for the others, thanks for the comments.

3kramd5, thanks, it is pretty much straight out of camera too, I did ETTR 2/3 stop and reduced it 2/3 stop in post, but the colours are true.

insanitybeard, yes they are Venus and Jupiter, it was taken on Sanibel Island off the West coast of Florida about 40 minutes after sunset. It is a 148 second exposure.

Sporgon, Yes that third shot is pretty impressive tones wise, and again, I have done very little to it, -0.8 exposure and -100 Higlights. As most times I ETTR'd until I was losing info I didn't want to, given the brightness of the sun it wasn't much of an ETTR either, besides, we both know the limitations of that technique ;D . The only Canon files I have seen and played with so far that I would trade for my 1Ds MkIII's are from the 5Ds. If the 1DX MkII doesn't deliver on the MP front (21+) then I think I will be getting a couple.

 

[Eldar]

Lots of impressive shots folks. Serves as an inspiration to those who struggle ... But I am a pretty stubborn guy, so I´ll keep on trying.

This is the view from our Crete breakfast table, slightly cropped to get rid of some very distorted leaves to the right.

5DSR, 11mm, 1/400s, f6.3, ISO100

 

[1982chris911]

Lots of impressive shots folks. Serves as an inspiration to those who struggle ... But I am a pretty stubborn guy, so I´ll keep on trying.

This is the view from our Crete breakfast table, slightly cropped to get rid of some very distorted leaves to the right.

5DSR, 11mm, 1/400s, f6.3, ISO100

From my experience with this lens I feel that the classical use case of a wide angle to play with objects in the foreground and use the lens to more or less separate them from the background does not really work anymore at 11mm - the results often look comical. A strong volumetric distortion starting at about 50% of the frame and getting stronger outside is also a problem one encounters with many subjects at 11mm ... So the main use for this lens really seems to be grand natural landscapes without straight features and some special cases in interiors ... However the lens is fabulous and becomes far more useable in the classical wide angle sense once you leave the 11mm towards the 14-24mm range... I would more think of it at 2 lenses (11mm-14mm special effect + high level ultra wide from 14-24mm)

 

[Eldar]

Lots of impressive shots folks. Serves as an inspiration to those who struggle ... But I am a pretty stubborn guy, so I´ll keep on trying.

This is the view from our Crete breakfast table, slightly cropped to get rid of some very distorted leaves to the right.

5DSR, 11mm, 1/400s, f6.3, ISO100

From my experience with this lens I feel that the classical use case of a wide angle to play with objects in the foreground and use the lens to more or less separate them from the background does not really work anymore at 11mm - the results often look comical. A strong volumetric distortion starting at about 50% of the frame and getting stronger outside is also a problem one encounters with many subjects at 11mm ... So the main use for this lens really seems to be grand natural landscapes without straight features and some special cases in interiors ... However the lens is fabulous and becomes far more useable in the classical wide angle sense once you leave the 11mm towards the 14-24mm range... I would more think of it at 2 lenses (11mm-14mm special effect + high level ultra wide from 14-24mm)

I'm a bit stuck at the wide end with this lens. I have the 16-35 f4L IS and Zeiss 15/2.8 also, which are both excellent lenses. The 16-35 is more versatile, smaller and lighter and the Zeiss has IQ to die for and both take regular filters (the Zeiss at the price of a good lens ...). So that leaves my interest for the 11-24 in the focal range 11-14. If I can't make good use of that, I suspect this lens will start collecting dust. However, having seen what others are capable of getting out of it, I'll try to tweak my (stiff) imagination and creativity to put it to good use

 

[1982chris911]

Lots of impressive shots folks. Serves as an inspiration to those who struggle ... But I am a pretty stubborn guy, so I´ll keep on trying.

This is the view from our Crete breakfast table, slightly cropped to get rid of some very distorted leaves to the right.

5DSR, 11mm, 1/400s, f6.3, ISO100

From my experience with this lens I feel that the classical use case of a wide angle to play with objects in the foreground and use the lens to more or less separate them from the background does not really work anymore at 11mm - the results often look comical. A strong volumetric distortion starting at about 50% of the frame and getting stronger outside is also a problem one encounters with many subjects at 11mm ... So the main use for this lens really seems to be grand natural landscapes without straight features and some special cases in interiors ... However the lens is fabulous and becomes far more useable in the classical wide angle sense once you leave the 11mm towards the 14-24mm range... I would more think of it at 2 lenses (11mm-14mm special effect + high level ultra wide from 14-24mm)

I'm a bit stuck at the wide end with this lens. I have the 16-35 f4L IS and Zeiss 15/2.8 also, which are both excellent lenses. The 16-35 is more versatile, smaller and lighter and the Zeiss has IQ to die for and both take regular filters (the Zeiss at the price of a good lens ...). So that leaves my interest for the 11-24 in the focal range 11-14. If I can't make good use of that, I suspect this lens will start collecting dust. However, having seen what others are capable of getting out of it, I'll try to tweak my (stiff) imagination and creativity to put it to good use

Actually a really good thing about the 11-24 is its sunstars - maybe include the sun in some landscape. The stars stopped down look amazing especially if the sun is partly obscured (e.g. on a roof or mountain range) ... here the lack of major flare and ghosting make this kind of picture much nicer than with other lenses, which I used (don't know about the Zeiss? but I guess that should have equal characteristics as the 11-24mm). I have the 16-35 too well in some cases IS is just nicer but also the ability to use screw in filters ... mostly I carry both lenses and also use both

Secondly I guess the Zeiss 15mm 2.8 is also your second problem ;D as it is probably the best ultra wide in the world IQ wise (However very specialized lens) ... So I guess that limits your use of the 11-24mm more than for most others only having Canon glass ... where the 14mm is only so la la and the rest only starts at 16mm

 

[1982chris911]

To better illustrate what I mean you should look at the flare characteristics at f16, where the 11-24 looks by far the best to me.


Compared to Zeiss 15mm
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Flare.aspx?Lens=794&Camera=453&FLIComp=2&APIComp=4&LensComp=977&CameraComp=453&FLI=0&API=5

Compared to Canon 16-35mm f4 IS
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Flare.aspx?Lens=949&Camera=453&FLIComp=0&APIComp=4&LensComp=977&CameraComp=453&FLI=0&API=4

Compared to Canon 14mm
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Flare.aspx?Lens=454&Camera=453&FLIComp=0&APIComp=4&LensComp=977&CameraComp=453&FLI=0&API=5

Usually I REALLY hate flare but the 11-24mm flare made up of these little colorful prisms and rainbow highlights has even a certain artistic quality to it which you can play with in the frame ... I did this here for example:
Kiyomizu-dera Sunset (Kyoto) by Christian Krieglsteiner, auf Flickr

 

[Eldar]

To better illustrate what I mean you should look at the flare characteristics at f16, where the 11-24 looks by far the best to me.

Agree. I don't remember the last time I went all the way to f16 though, but that's certainly something I can change.

 

[1982chris911]

To better illustrate what I mean you should look at the flare characteristics at f16, where the 11-24 looks by far the best to me.

Agree. I don't remember the last time I went all the way to f16 though, but that's certainly something I can change.

It will get really interesting how this works once I get my 5DsR ... the diffraction limit is way lower than with the 5D MKIII ... really a big question mark how much f16 kills details on the 5DsR as with the 5d MkIII it is not that bad

 

[privatebydesign]

It will get really interesting how this works once I get my 5DsR ... the diffraction limit is way lower than with the 5D MKIII ... really a big question mark how much f16 kills details on the 5DsR as with the 5d MkIII it is not that bad

At the same size enlargement the diffraction will be identical.

 

[Click]

Hagashiyama (Kyoto) Yasaka-no-to Pagoda at 24mm

I also tried this location with the 16-35mm f4 IS and 24-70mm f2.8 with different farming ... However the 11-24 results are much nicer as the lens is practically free of internal reflections and the sun or in this case light stars are much nicer with the 9 blade diaphragm of the 11-24mm

I really like this picture. Nicely done.

 

[1982chris911]

It will get really interesting how this works once I get my 5DsR ... the diffraction limit is way lower than with the 5D MKIII ... really a big question mark how much f16 kills details on the 5DsR as with the 5d MkIII it is not that bad

At the same size enlargement the diffraction will be identical.

Not really as f16 (Diameter of Airy Disk: 21.3 µm) is above the diffraction limit of the 5d Mk III (Maximum Circle of Confusion @f16: 15.67 µm )but way above the diffraction limit of the 5DsR (Maximum Circle of Confusion @f16: 10.39 µm) ... the added details of the 50,6MP 5DsR would not have any benefit if that effect cancels out all additional details ...

 

[privatebydesign]

It will get really interesting how this works once I get my 5DsR ... the diffraction limit is way lower than with the 5D MKIII ... really a big question mark how much f16 kills details on the 5DsR as with the 5d MkIII it is not that bad

At the same size enlargement the diffraction will be identical.

Not really as f16 (Diameter of Airy Disk: 21.3 µm) is above the diffraction limit of the 5d Mk III (Maximum Circle of Confusion @f16: 15.67 µm )but way above the diffraction limit of the 5DsR (Maximum Circle of Confusion @f16: 10.39 µm) ... the added details of the 50,6MP 5DsR would not have any benefit if that effect cancels out all additional details ...

You are missing the point; at the same size enlargement the diffraction will be identical. Pixel density/size does not impact the diffraction blur in a picture, it just impacts the sensors ability to render that blur.

The fact that the 5DSR will resolve the diffraction blur won't make that blur better or worse, it just defines it more accurately. In actual fact what has proven to be the case each time this kind of thing has happened is people have realised more MP is never worse from a resolution/diffraction point of view, indeed the improvements in sharpness and resolution often go beyond the numbers the 'diffraction limits' suggest would be a maximum resolution and a higher MP sensor will garner more detail past those 'limits'.

So again, the diffraction blur on any two images when shot with two different sensors with different pixel densities is identical if shot with the same aperture value. In real life shooting with good technique a 'diffraction limited' sensor will realise more detail even when the 'numbers' say they shouldn't.