kirkcha said:
Eldar said:
Great review of a great lens Dustin. I fully agree that this focal length is a sweet spot. Unfortunately, I became a bit intellectual when I got the 16-35 f4L IS and thought it would not be used, so I sold it. Needless to say, I regret that decision.
Eldar, I see you also have the TS-E 24mm and wondering your thoughts between that and the Zeiss 21mm. I realize these are completely different animals but I am trying to decide between these two for a great landscape lens and wondering your thoughts. I also have the 16-35 f4, which I love and looking to add another lens. I am leaning towards the TS-E 24 just for all the possibilities but since you regret selling the Zeiss would like your thoughts.
BTW, another great review Dustin, now you got me thinking again. lol
Thanks
Kirk
These are both great lenses in every way, but a bit difficult to compare. The 21mm is much easier to use. I think Dustin gave a good description of that. Compact, light, easy to focus and phenomenal IQ. It is a good wide angle, walkaround lens, easy to handhold and it is f2.8.
The 24 TS-E is very different and, in my view, in a class of its own, especially for architecture and landscapes. I have never used it as a walkaround lens. To me this is a much slower lens to work with, taking advantage of the tilt&shift capability and it is always tripod mounted. I know some lock it in neutral position and use it as a hand holdable prime, but I have never done that. I even met an event photographer who used it hand held, with shift, to correct the height difference between floor and podium and also tilt to get the focusing plane where he wanted it. But that takes a lot of practice and is way beyond my skills.
In your case, especially since you already have the 16-35, I would get the TS-E. In fact, if someone asked me what the best landscape lens you can buy, regardless of money, make or mount (without looking at some of the very expensive medium format stuff), I'd say the 24mm TS-E II. Some may say that the 17mm TS-E is a better option, because it works very well with the 1.4xIII and 2xIII extenders and thus gives you the same focal length. But the IQ from the 24 is better and it uses standard filters (there are also filter options for the 17mm TS-E, but they are bigger and more cumbersome).
There are a couple of reasons for regretting selling the 21mm. First is the Zeiss IQ. I have some difficulty describing this, but, as Dustin also points out, they are special. Second is size, weight and mechanical feel, which is outstanding. But the main reason is probably missing it alongside my other Zeiss primes. I have a sling bag, where I have room for the 5 Zeiss lenses (now 4, until the (hopefully) 24/1.4 Otus comes along). I then use an Ec-S focusing screen in my 1DX or a similar custom made S screen in my 5DIII. That works very well with any lens at f2.8 or faster. At f4 the viewer becomes rather dark and that makes it less attractive to use the 16-35 f4L IS. And it just feels awkward to mix an AF zoom with the Zeiss manual focus primes.
In your case, in my view, you should stay with your 24mm TS-E decision. You will not regret it.
