Well you are actually saying all nikkors wide angles are bad... that is saying a lot...( too much)
No, just the PC-E 24L.
The 14-24 has been unmatched until the last few weeks, and the new Canon 11-24, while wider and matching it for image quality, does not offer f/2.8.
again i would say ; look at the ALPA samples and decide how bad it is and how much sharper the 24mm TS Canon is.
They all have there problems -
The Canon TS-Es are not only sharper, but also have less CA (both transverse and longitudinal) and a greater range of shit.
Since I use these lenses for shifted panoramas, shift range is paramount. Also, the resolution of the Nikon at full shift is far worse than that of the Canon.
Finally, the inability to adjust tilt and shift angles relative to each other is very inconvenient on the Nikons (same with the Canon 45mm and 90mm tilt-shifts).
( now Canon goes from 21 to 50 MP we will find out more about Canon lenses)
I've been using the TS-E 24 and TS-E 17 (as well as the Nikon 14-24) on 36MP ever since the A7r came out. They hold up very well at that resolution.
In contrast, I found that the PC-E 24 didn't even hold up well at 24MP on the D3x.
I would like Zeiss to built the ultimate 24mmTS F4 lens, but i am afraid if it ever comes it will cost 5000$ or so.
if they make an f5.6 24mm TS for 2500 i will buy it at once
So would I. Actually, I'd like the f/3.5 version, since the f/5.6 version would become f/8 by the time you put a 1.4x TC on it.
Going on recent record, Sigma may be able to pull it off as well.