Hi,
I can't say as I don't have the Sigma Art. My Canon 24/3.5 TSE LII may not be the greatest sample, in early tests the 16-35/4L performed much better. But I am pretty happy with the TSE now-days.
I generally use the 16-35/4 on the Metabones for most work. It beats all my other lenses, Distagons on the Blad, Sony 24-70/2.8ZA, Canon 24/3.5 TSE LII. For architecture work I mostly use the 24/3.5 TSE LII. It delivers when stopped down to f/11. For 20 mm or 35 mm shift I can still use the 16-35/4L on the HCam. Using the 24/3.5 TSE is convenient.
When shooting architecture, distortion matters a lot and the 24/3.5 has very little distortion. There is probably some distortion on the 16-35/4. To sum it up:
- The 16-35/4 is the sharpest wide angle I have
- The 24/3.5 is not as sharp, but does the job. Field curvature is tricky.
- The 16-35/4L is very usable with shifts in the 20-35 mm range.
Last holiday I was shooting with the 16-35/4L on the HCam Master TS for a day, prestopped at f/11. It worked out quite well. I will post a bunch of images from that shoot, here:
https://echophoto.smugmug.com/Technical/16-354l-and-Master-TS/ For tilted shooting I have a Contax 28-85/3.3-4 and a Contax 35-135/3.3-4.5. Those lenses have manual apertures and are easy to focus. They are decent performers, but probably not as good as top notch lenses of newer designs in untilted shooting.
I have seen some pretty good reports on the Canon 11-24/4L for shift work, but I don't own that lens. With the experience I have now, I would buy it instead of the 16-35/4L and the 24/3.5LII. But, the 16-35/4L is excellent and the 24/3.5 TSE LII does a god job, mostly.
Erik,
What, if any, are the IQ differences between the Canon TS and Stefan Steib's HCam V2, mounted with say a Sigma 24 Art alternative ? The only 'inconvenience' with Stefan's solution is having to preset the aperture before mounting it - personally I can live with that.
M