Trying to decide on a prime for landscape photography

[aamati]

My current go-to lens for landscapes (on a full frame 5D III) is a Canon 17- 40mm L f.4. For some time now I have been thinking about picking up a prime for landscapes. My thinking is that I want an ultra sharp, reasonably fast (f 2.8 or faster), wide angel (22-24mm) prime, with the hopes of greater sharpness and a faster lens. But I will be using the lens primarily for landscapes and usually use a tripod and try to stop down to the f8-22 range when I want to maximize depth of field. But it would be nice to have a faster lens for star fields and low light handheld shots.

I’ve been looking at the Canon 24mm L f1.4, the Zeiss Distagon 21mm f 2.8 and the Canon 24mm f2.8 IS. Though each has its advantages and disadvantages I am struggling with which way to go. Although it does not have the same build quality (although I am told it is a solid lens) the 24mm 2.8 IS is supposed to be almost as sharp as the f1.4 and is less than half the cost. And since I am normally stopped down I am wondering if the difference in sharpness is worth it.

My understanding has always been that a prime will outperform a zoom at the same focal length in terms of image quality, but I’m wondering if either the 2.8 or the 1.4 will provide superior performance in the f 11 range, over the 17- 40mm L f4.

I’ve seen reviews of the Zeiss Distagon 21mmm f2.8, with some reviewers saying it can’t be beat in terms of sharpness, while others rate it close to or on a par with the Canon 24mm f2.8 IS.

What are your thoughts on these primes for landscape photography, and have you had any experience, positive or negative, with these lenses.

 

[Eldar]

There are two primes that outshine the rest when it comes to landscapes and those are the 17mm f4L TS-E and 24mm f3.5L II TS-E.

 

[NWPhil]

Eldar is spot on, but if you are considering using a UWA for nightscapes, then the Zeiss 21mm might be a better option - does not display the 'comma" effect and it's a 2.8

I would consider too the Rokinon 14mm - buy new so you can test it first - it has some QC issues;
The Zeiss 21mm is easy to find used in good shape. Combined, they would be less expensive than eiher TSE bought brand new.

All these lenses, and others you mention are good; but all have shortcomings - rent the one's you like the most and find out by yourself.
Currently you have a 17-40, so you might want to be more on the wider side of the range, and then only the 14 or the 17 will do.

ps: neither the rokinon or the tse 17 accept filters as the others -with the first you can squeeze a 82mm, very carefully in the shade threads; the tse has now an expensive aftermarket filter holder

 

[gigabellone]

I never owned any of the lenses you mention, but i'm looking for a landscape prime myself, so i can share the results of my research with you.

MTF charts show that the 17-40 is good enough when stopped down to f/8-11, so i think you're fine with it when shooting landscapes and long exposures. However, if you want take pictures of stars you're going to need a fast aperture and decent sharpness. The 24/1.4L is sharp.in the center, but somewhat disappointing in the corners when used wide open, showing low sharpness and high vignetting. It also shows coma when shot wide open. Stopping down to f/2.8-4 improve things a lot, but if you're stopping down to f/2.8, you might as well save a grand and get a 24/2.8 IS that boasts decent performances right from the fastest aperture. If you need the fast aperture for creative purposes, nothing can touch the canon L.

There's a brand now Zeiss 15/2.8 that's getting lots of praising reviews, but it costs something in the whereabouts of 3000$. The other Zeiss lenses show good sharpness in lab tests, so they are worth a thought, if you can get over the fact they don't have the autofocus.

My considerations: the 24/2.8 IS is a good all-arounder, delivering good performances in all the fields of interests at a fair price. If money wasn't a concern, i would have bought the Zeiss 15/2.8 as a dedicated landscape/starfield lens, and something else for street and handheld low light photography.