Wondering how many on CR have this lens now. I was expecting to see more samples photos posted.
Jack
Jack
Upvote
0
Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L USM
- Thread starter DominoDude
- Start date
Here's a vertical. Again, one of those shots of an impressive feature but I was unable to locate anywhere advantageous, plus I was getting sprayed since the fall actually extends much higher and was more vigorous than the shot conveys. Thought for a minute I had a dead animal in there on the rock - slime. 11mm uncropped.
Jack
Jack
Attachments
Upvote
0
Well I picked mine up this morning, to tell the truth I was a touch underwhelmed, it is short and fat and very heavy. I ran a few 'bench' tests on it vs the 17TS-E and the 16-35 f4 IS at f4, f5.6, f8 and f11. The IQ of the 16-35 f4IS is the best of the bunch at 16mm, but it doesn't tilt or shift and it doesn't go to '11'! IQ stays pretty solid at modest apertures even down to 11mm, the only thing that does become apparent is a little CA which is easily removed with one click in Lightroom.
As somebody who uses a 17mm almost every day and shift stitches regularly the initial impression is that 11mm is kinda ok, the 17mm stitch shift gives a much wider horizontal fov but loses the 3:2 aspect ratio. The projection distortion from the 11mm is not as bad as from the stitched 17mm. I haven't done a comparison between the 11-24 and a defished 15mm yet, I suspect there will be very little difference in fov, I will do the comparison soon.
So after a modest introduction to my new lens and a reality check as to its capabilities compared to my current solutions, I have to say I really like the images out of it and I feel for my own photography it will make me more adventurous. As so many have already said, the 16-35 f4 IS is a much better general ultra wide and I am seriously considering keeping mine for practical purposes, IQ and the IS, but the 11-24 isn't going back, it can take images no other lens in the world can!
Here are a couple of 11mm shots both at f4, not much point in posting much above that as the 16-35 f4 L IS would be 'better', first is the obligatory 'cat' photo and the second something more dynamic that shows the really nice colour and contrast even at f4.
As somebody who uses a 17mm almost every day and shift stitches regularly the initial impression is that 11mm is kinda ok, the 17mm stitch shift gives a much wider horizontal fov but loses the 3:2 aspect ratio. The projection distortion from the 11mm is not as bad as from the stitched 17mm. I haven't done a comparison between the 11-24 and a defished 15mm yet, I suspect there will be very little difference in fov, I will do the comparison soon.
So after a modest introduction to my new lens and a reality check as to its capabilities compared to my current solutions, I have to say I really like the images out of it and I feel for my own photography it will make me more adventurous. As so many have already said, the 16-35 f4 IS is a much better general ultra wide and I am seriously considering keeping mine for practical purposes, IQ and the IS, but the 11-24 isn't going back, it can take images no other lens in the world can!
Here are a couple of 11mm shots both at f4, not much point in posting much above that as the 16-35 f4 L IS would be 'better', first is the obligatory 'cat' photo and the second something more dynamic that shows the really nice colour and contrast even at f4.
Attachments
Upvote
0
Jack Douglas said:
I agree, the 11mm works for that shot, of course we are still posting snapshots, but they are snapshots you can't take with any other lens.
I really like the way the lens 'paints', sounds incredibly pretentious and it is probably down to the strong vignetting, but it seems to render graduated scenes very nicely. My earlier sign shot, and this one (I hate end of month bookkeeping!) also at 11mm and f4, both have that smoothness to them that I haven' put my finger on yet. This new shot is mounted on my new small tripod that I got mainly to use with this lens and a hotshoe mounted 600-EX-RT.
Attachments
Upvote
0
Keep them coming, privatebydesign. For me it'll take a number of shots to begin to see what I think is working. I wish I could see the result of all of them in poster size as that's where I believe the impact would be felt the greatest.
So the goal is to have something interesting up close, probably along the edges etc. Do you have a mental checklist that you would go over before using the widest settings? - tough question perhaps.
Jack
So the goal is to have something interesting up close, probably along the edges etc. Do you have a mental checklist that you would go over before using the widest settings? - tough question perhaps.
Jack
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Thanks click. I see this lens at 11 in two lights for me. There are shots where 11 serves a utilitarian role in getting what you want into the picture. Then there are shots where you'd like to make a special impact and it's pretty hard to accomplish that. I'm watching all the postings trying to decide why they do or don't work for me and then trying to watch for situations where I can emulate what I've seen. A lot more challenging than shooting a bird. 
Critical (hopefully helpful) comments regarding my shots most welcome any time.
Jack
Critical (hopefully helpful) comments regarding my shots most welcome any time.
Jack
Attachments
Upvote
0
A quick simple comparison of some 1:3 panoramas using a 6D the EF 11-24 and the EF 8-15 fisheye, normal and defished in LR. Shot on a tripod with remote trigger. Makes me consider a 5DS.
Light was constantly changing as clouds streamed overhead, but I'm pleased with 11mm for single shot panoramas. Adjusted exposure in LR to make them consistent, otherwise no changes other than the crop.
In order: 8-15, 8-15 defished in LR 6, 11-24.
EF 8-15 f/4 L at 15mm by dvmtthws, on Flickr
EF 8-15 f/4 L at 15mm, defished in LR by dvmtthws, on Flickr
EF 11-24 f/4 L at 11mm by dvmtthws, on Flickr
Light was constantly changing as clouds streamed overhead, but I'm pleased with 11mm for single shot panoramas. Adjusted exposure in LR to make them consistent, otherwise no changes other than the crop.
In order: 8-15, 8-15 defished in LR 6, 11-24.
EF 8-15 f/4 L at 15mm by dvmtthws, on Flickr
EF 8-15 f/4 L at 15mm, defished in LR by dvmtthws, on Flickr
EF 11-24 f/4 L at 11mm by dvmtthws, on Flickr
Upvote
0
Thought it would be fun to do a simple head to head comparison on my M3 with the EF-M 11-22 f/4-5.6 IS STM and EF 11-24 F/4 L USM. Not that I'd probably ever shoot with the 11-24 on the M3, it's more about how well does the 11-22 stand up to its big brother. M3 was tripod mounted, using AF multi for the focus. Both lenses were shot wide open at f/4. Images straight out of LR, no adjustments. Can you tell which one is which without checking the EXIF? Both appear sharp center, the first appears to be a bit softer on the edges. I think the 11-22 holds it's own nicely.
A by dvmtthws, on Flickr
B by dvmtthws, on Flickr
A by dvmtthws, on Flickr
B by dvmtthws, on Flickr
Upvote
0
Similar threads
