Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Contax N 17-35mm f2.8 vs Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L?  (Read 7011 times)

timescapes

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 60
Contax N 17-35mm f2.8 vs Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L?
« on: June 29, 2008, 02:51:29 PM »



How does the Contax N Vario-Sonnar T* 17-35mm f2.8 compare with the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II?

My main use for the lens is landscape astrophotography for timelapse on a 1DsM3.  Because I like to shoot very wide, at night, with the iris wide open, I worry about distortion and softness at the edges of frame.

Are there any other lenses I should be looking at along these lines?  I like the idea of a zoom around this focal length, but if there is a really good prime I could shoot with at f/2, for example, that might be the ticket.  

Actually, all manual control of focus and iris is fine with me, too, since I always use manual settings for this type of night timelapse photography.

thanks
Logged

KevinA

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 972
    • Tree Without a Bird
Contax N 17-35mm f2.8 vs Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L?
« Reply #1 on: June 30, 2008, 06:06:23 AM »

Quote


How does the Contax N Vario-Sonnar T* 17-35mm f2.8 compare with the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II?

My main use for the lens is landscape astrophotography for timelapse on a 1DsM3.  Because I like to shoot very wide, at night, with the iris wide open, I worry about distortion and softness at the edges of frame.

Are there any other lenses I should be looking at along these lines?  I like the idea of a zoom around this focal length, but if there is a really good prime I could shoot with at f/2, for example, that might be the ticket. 

Actually, all manual control of focus and iris is fine with me, too, since I always use manual settings for this type of night timelapse photography.

thanks
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=204354\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

For low distortion the Sigma 12 24mm is excellent . For sharp corners, Canon don't make anything neither does anyone else for Canon. The new Nikon wide gets rave reviews, I believe it can be used with adaptors.

Kevin.
Logged
Kevin.

NancyP

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2223
Re: Contax N 17-35mm f2.8 vs Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L?
« Reply #2 on: April 06, 2017, 12:58:25 PM »

Look at the Tamron 15-30 mm f/2.8, a fair number of landscape astrophotographers have spoken highly of it. I have not used it. Apparently it is a brick of a lens. My current astro lens set (and general landscape wide angle lens set) is Samyang (branded under multiple names) 14mm f/2.8, Zeiss 21 mm f/2.8 (my favorite), and my day and night workhorse and normal-ish prime Sigma Art 35 f/1.4. But I bought these several years back, and since then there have been many new releases, including the Canon 16-35 f/2.8 III.  The Canon 11-24 is f/4, a pity, but if it were f/2.8, the thing would be in the range of the supertelephotos in price and weight.  :P Plus, there is the ever-growing list of ultra-wide primes, including from some newbies in China. Irix 11mm, Irix 15mm, Korean Samyang improved 14mm f/2.4, Sigma 20mm f/1.4 (!), Sigma 14 f/2.8, etc.

For coma testing, look at lenstip.com, a Polish site, the only one that I know of that posts coma tests (of laser pointer or LED) on all tested lenses. Many landscape astrophotography sites or forum threads will have coma examples from corners of starfield images.
Logged

JJon

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 40
Re: Contax N 17-35mm f2.8 vs Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L?
« Reply #3 on: July 03, 2017, 10:50:16 PM »

You may be 9 years too late on this one.

Look at the Tamron 15-30 mm f/2.8, a fair number of landscape astrophotographers have spoken highly of it. I have not used it. Apparently it is a brick of a lens. My current astro lens set (and general landscape wide angle lens set) is Samyang (branded under multiple names) 14mm f/2.8, Zeiss 21 mm f/2.8 (my favorite), and my day and night workhorse and normal-ish prime Sigma Art 35 f/1.4. But I bought these several years back, and since then there have been many new releases, including the Canon 16-35 f/2.8 III.  The Canon 11-24 is f/4, a pity, but if it were f/2.8, the thing would be in the range of the supertelephotos in price and weight.  :P Plus, there is the ever-growing list of ultra-wide primes, including from some newbies in China. Irix 11mm, Irix 15mm, Korean Samyang improved 14mm f/2.4, Sigma 20mm f/1.4 (!), Sigma 14 f/2.8, etc.

For coma testing, look at lenstip.com, a Polish site, the only one that I know of that posts coma tests (of laser pointer or LED) on all tested lenses. Many landscape astrophotography sites or forum threads will have coma examples from corners of starfield images.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up