Who is going to buy the 11-24 f/4L?

[e_honda]

I will buy the f2.8 version, but not this slow poke.

That lens will be Canon enthusiasts' next unicorn.

 

[pwp]

I'm planning to stay up tomorrow night just so I can be one of the first to preorder this badboy. I can see myself making good money with one of my clients who always loved my Sigma 12-24 II work.
Anyone else plan to buy one?

I also have the Sigma 12-24 (MkI) and I bring it out a few times a year. It's a fun lens though commercially acceptable output can only be realised shooting at f/11. Wide open it looks like soup. If the new 11-24 f/4 can deliver the goods at f/4, then I'm a buyer. It will open up possibilities you wouldn't bother attempting with the Sigma. The clincher would be if it comfortably out-performs my current 16-35 f/2.8II which delivers kind of acceptable files. Beyond f/5.6 my old 17-40 outperformed my 16-35 f/2.8II. Darn! I should have kept it!

If the 11-24 f/4 proves to be a capable lens, I could see it replacing my 16-35 II which I mainly use in the 16-24mm range anyway. Anyone seen a price?

-pw

 

[LOALTD]

Word on the street is $3,000.

 

[bholliman]

The 16-35mm F/4L is plenty for my needs.

+1. 16mm is wide enough for my purposes 99% of the time. I will probably buy an inexpensive fish eye at some point. I just don't see myself ever buying this one. Right now a 50mm prime and 300/2.8 II are next on my wish list.

 

[CaptainZero]

I'm in property management, and I use my 10-22 every day. When on vacation, I use better lenses, but I don't do that much with wide angles. My 24-70 is wide enough, usually. If not, I'll stitch them together.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love it, but replacing my 24-70 2.8 (and my 100-400) with version 2 would come ahead of this.

 

[PVS]

I'm looking forward to 11-24L but in my limited experience any lens which focused less than focal-length-times-ten was a very good to excellent corrected lens. With this lens not fitting the less-than-ten-times-the-focal-length-mfd criteria I hope my ten-times rule proves wrong.

 

[Ruined]

I will buy the f2.8 version, but not this slow poke.

Its pretty clear if you want f/2.8 you are going to be sacrificing significant IQ from the f/4 with these UWAs, or have something extremely large + expensive to match the f/4 IQ.

 

[dslrdummy]

I don't do tripod work so the Tammy 15-30 is more in line with my needs. With the VC and at f/2.8 it will make a great walk around lense in difficult light. Matt Granger's review has pretty much sold me.

 

[Hjalmarg1]

It all depends on the reviews. I rather have the canon 100-400mm first because little league season is right around the corner. Meanwhile, i'm quite happy with the Nikon 14-24mm even though it's not that fun to actually use.

The 16-35 f/4L IS is fine for my needs, along with my 15mm FishEye. I'm an enthusiastic amateur and I've already spent more than I ever thought I would spend on photography gear.
If I buy one more lens it'd be the EF 100-400/L II

 

[CaptureWhatYouSee]

11 is way too wide for a FF.... the supposed target buyer.
16 is borderline usable.

I'd buy it for $500 as a novelty.

 

[zlatko]

11 is way too wide for a FF.... the supposed target buyer.
16 is borderline usable.

I'd buy it for $500 as a novelty.

11mm is way too wide for me too. The widest I like is 20mm.

 

[Rahul]

11 is way too wide for a FF.... the supposed target buyer.
16 is borderline usable.

I'd buy it for $500 as a novelty.

11mm is way too wide for me too. The widest I like is 20mm.

Yes, but cropping the extreme FOV will offer numerous creative opportunities which may not be possible with the current gear. Ugh... now I'm thinking a 5Ds and 11-24L - there goes my 600L fund.

 

[cervantes]

Since we have one for the 5Ds bodies, why not one have one for the lens.

I'm planning to stay up tomorrow night just so I can be one of the first to preorder this badboy. I can see myself making good money with one of my clients who always loved my Sigma 12-24 II work.

Anyone else plan to buy one?

Didn't you say that your new "gears" resolution was not to preorder any new lenses???

 

[andrewflo]

Although I'd love to have my hands on it, I simply can't imagine a responsible reason to buy one.

Only paid work I use wide angles for is Real Estate. If the same room/framing can be shot at a longer focal length, usually wider than 17mm is not preferable.

Only time I can imagine having no choice but to use <16mm are very very small spaces like bathrooms.

And for $3k, I think I'll settle with having only most of a bathroom in a single shot as opposed to all of it.

 

[Viggo]

Currently shopping around for a mint used 16-35 IS, but since I have the same disorder as a lot of us here, I will own the 11-24 at some point in time. 8)

 

[Eldar]

Since Canon has the balls to charge $3k for this lens, it is clear that we will see a great lens. Unless they are back to the over pricing strategy they were on prior to the new 16-35 and the 100-400 lenses.

I really question what I will be using it for though. The 16-35 f4L IS is a stellar performer and, unless you carry two bodies, it is a lot more versatile than 11-24. I have never felt the need for something wider than 15mm (I didn´t believe I needed that either ...), so I wonder if this will become the great lens occupying its place in my bag, without being used. Alternatively, will it be good enough to justify selling the 16-35 and the Zeiss 15mm?

But I guess, the only way to find out is to follow of my weak character and get one :

 

[RGF]

hard decision. I assume based upon speculated price that the 11-24 is stellar.

But I have more use for 100-400 II.

 

[Ruined]

I am not. I see this as a niche lens. I'd rather have 25-35mm, screw-in filters & $2000 over 11-15mm. I am sure this describes the vast majority of users also when given this choice.

 

[Sabaki]

11-24mm on full frame

16-38mm on crop (not really, but close enough)

VERY interested to see the specs on this. It would be a massive spend for me but I would much rather spend $3000 on a lens than a body

 

[Rahul]

I have never felt the need for something wider than 15mm (I didn´t believe I needed that either ...),

;D I've had similar experiences with a lot of photography gear I bought which I initially felt I never needed, nor had use for. It's funny how you feel the need for something after you buy it.