Affinity Photo - professional photo editing with 50% off!

17-40 vs 24mm TS-E


arhb Plus
12 3.4k 68 United Kingdom
18 Jul 2015 4:48PM
Putting aside the tilt/shift capabilities, is there a massive difference in IQ between these 2 lenses(at 24mm of course)?
I realise there are reviews out there, but I want an EPZ point of view.

Needed for architecture ans interiors.

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

TonyPrower 9 40 3 Iceland
18 Jul 2015 5:59PM
No comparison, the ts would win every time. You are comparing a specialist prime with a budget lens.
parallax Plus
10 204 United Kingdom
18 Jul 2015 6:36PM
Yes the TSE 24L is top class. Will wipe the floor with the 17-40L.
arhb Plus
12 3.4k 68 United Kingdom
18 Jul 2015 6:51PM
Thanks guys - I shall be buying the mk1 for finiancial reasons -
unless for some reason or another, the mk2 is a must?
LesF 13 182 9
18 Jul 2015 8:47PM
Having at some point owned the 17-40, 24mm TS Mk1 and Mk2 there is not a tremendous difference between the 17-40 and the Mk1 TS, the TS will just about edge it.
Looking at the difference with a Mk2 TS against a 17-40mm it's no comparison the 24 TS is far superior plus it's also superior to the MK1 TS.
The 24mm TS MK 2 is one of the sharpest lenses edge to edge that Canon produce but as you probably know it's not cheap

mikehit 10 8.0k 13 United Kingdom
18 Jul 2015 9:14PM

Quote:No comparison, the ts would win every time. You are comparing a specialist prime with a budget lens.


17-40.....budget lens?
arhb Plus
12 3.4k 68 United Kingdom
18 Jul 2015 9:58PM

Quote:Having at some point owned the 17-40, 24mm TS Mk1 and Mk2 there is not a tremendous difference between the 17-40 and the Mk1 TS, the TS will just about edge it.
Looking at the difference with a Mk2 TS against a 17-40mm it's no comparison the 24 TS is far superior plus it's also superior to the MK1 TS.
The 24mm TS MK 2 is one of the sharpest lenses edge to edge that Canon produce but as you probably know it's not cheap




Thanks Les, that is a more interesting perspective -
if you could mention one noticeable aspect about the Mk1 TS over the 17-40, what would it be(non tilt/shift aspect)?

Also, how would you say the Mk2 has raised the bar over the Mk1?


LesF 13 182 9
19 Jul 2015 10:00AM

Quote:Thanks Les, that is a more interesting perspective -
if you could mention one noticeable aspect about the Mk1 TS over the 17-40, what would it be(non tilt/shift aspect)?

Also, how would you say the Mk2 has raised the bar over the Mk1?



In your first post you mention using the lens for architecture / interiors, here the TS Mk1 wins, although you will get a wider view with the 17-40 by the time you've spent time srtaightening the persectives etc you'l will undoubtably loose some of that wider view point, by setting up the TS Mk1 correctly what you shoot is what you will see in you final image. If you need a wider view take a number of requires images by using the shift and these will easily stitch, therefore you have the versitlilty with a TS.

Overall the Mk2 TS is a far sharper lens than the Mk1 specially around the edges away from the centre

Hope this helps, the 17-40 is an L lens and is no slouch TS lens are manual and can take time in setting up and figuring out the best options
TonyPrower 9 40 3 Iceland
19 Jul 2015 4:55PM

Quote:17-40.....budget lens?


Yep Smile (in terms of Canon "L" glass)
LenShepherd 11 4.0k United Kingdom
20 Jul 2015 10:17AM
I have an issue with the question.
You can do far more very easily in Lightroom 6 of PhotoShop to correct converging verticals than with a T&S lens using tilt.
A better question might be should I use a T&S lens or post process?
My answer is if you need shift for dof not to be parallel to the sensor - then obviously yes. Otherwise T&S lenses cannot match current post process technology.
Another issue with T&S lenses is the more extensive the movement used the more corner quality degrades.
parallax Plus
10 204 United Kingdom
20 Jul 2015 11:50AM
Perspective correction using a T&S lens like the 24L Mk2 is preferable to software correction anytime.
Software correction just interpolates and softens the image. It's not true geometric correction.
thewilliam 11 6.1k
20 Jul 2015 1:37PM
I'd have thought that we'd only buy the T&S lens for the tilt and shift features. We can't do tilt in "post".

The designer has to make the image circle much larger than with a normal lens and this always comes with a price. Firstly, the T&S lens is effectively for medium-format and so it could never perform as well as a 35mm format lens, everything else being equal. Secondly, because fewer are made and sold, the design costs need to be recovered over fewer units.

The economy of scale is why the Nikon 18-55 kit lens, and possibly the Canon equivalent, is such a good performer for the price.
themak 6 1.0k Scotland
20 Jul 2015 2:07PM

Quote:The economy of scale is why the Nikon 18-55 kit lens, and possibly the Canon equivalent, is such a good performer for the price.

Have you got a job lot of these you're trying to shift? Wink
ade_mcfade 15 15.2k 216 England
20 Jul 2015 2:47PM
Just replaced my trusty 17-40 with the new 16-35 F4.... the 24TS and 17TS were tempting, but needed the versatility of a zoom and speed of Autofocus as I'll probably use it in many scenarios...

I wrote a blog on why I chose it - may help? Who knows... here it is anyway

http://www.mcfade.co.uk/blog/why-i-bought-the-canon-16-35-f4l/
thewilliam 11 6.1k
20 Jul 2015 4:02PM

Quote:
Quote:The economy of scale is why the Nikon 18-55 kit lens, and possibly the Canon equivalent, is such a good performer for the price.

Have you got a job lot of these you're trying to shift? Wink



In the good 'ol days I'd have used the 50mm f1.8 as the exemplar good performer at a low price. These used to come with the camera and if it had been a crap performer, the punters would never have bought further marque lenses.


Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.