I bought a little landscape lens last year (the Canon EF-S 10-22mm zoom), and it seems to have nice color rendition and focus, but the distortion it has at the wider end is pretty pronounced. I guess my question is, if one really wants to purchase the best single lens for landscape work on a Canon, which wide-angle lens is the ideal choice for
1. Low distortion?
3. Color rendition?
For that matter, is a wide-angle lens even ideal for landscape? Would a more moderate lens (say 24mm) be better? Is taking the time to stitch a pano with a non-distorted lens preferable to taking a "wide-angle" shot with one ultra-wide lens--only to have it come out distorted?
I have been looking to upgrade from the 10-22mm (which I just sold on Ebay), but it seems all of the Canon ultra-wides essentially suck. In reading many reviews on lenses such as the 16-35 f/2.8L II, the 17-40 f/4, the 24mm f/1.4L II, etc. ... at best these seem to be average lenses.
I was wondering how many Canon people have actually tried the Zeiss Distagon T* 21mm f/2.8 ZE Lens for landscapes and such, on their own Canons, and compared this lens to the Canon offerings? In many of the reviews, several people said they actually "cringed" when comparing the shots they got from the Canon 16-35 (et al) to the Zeiss. From color rendition, corner-to-corner sharpness, etc., it seems the vote is unanimous that the Zeiss is the better lens. People also keep talking about "that 3D-look" with the Zeiss.
In short, for a Canon body, is there any wide-angle lens that can touch the Zeiss 21mm f/2.8? In the research I've been conducting over the last few weeks, it sure doesn't seem so, but I'd like to hear some live feedback.
Thanks for any replies,