yst Posted September 2, 2018 Share #1  Posted September 2, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) Would some of you have the experience of comparisons between the TL 11-23mm f3.5-4.5, and the 23mm/f2.0 lenses?   Thinking of those two lenses, they are the same price, though at 23mm, there's 2.5 stops difference, while the 11-23mm has more range to select from...    I mainly using a 35mm/f14 ASPH-M on the M film cameras, therefore the 35mm range is preferably  needed also on the new CL, thinking of selling the 21/f2.8ASPH-M to get either the 11-23mm, or the 23mm/f2 but not quite sure which one is more appropriate or worth to have to use on the CL?    for upper range, I can use the 35mm, the 50mm for the 50mm-75mm (on the CL format).  Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 2, 2018 Posted September 2, 2018 Hi yst, Take a look here your experience with the 11-23mm zoom & the 23mm/f2.0?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
cdekter Posted September 2, 2018 Share #2  Posted September 2, 2018 The 11-23 is a spectacular lens with outstanding image quality. However, I'd be hesitant to recommend it as a 'main' 35mm-equivalent option due to the slower maximum aperture. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ehecatl Posted September 2, 2018 Share #3 Â Posted September 2, 2018 I don't have the 23mm f/2 though I do have the 11-23. It's pretty spectacular. When I was traveling around Peru this past summer, that lens pretty much stayed on my CL the whole time, though I was also carrying around my M9 with a VC 28mm f/1.9 lens. The 11-23, while slower, is really great for the flexibility, but if you plan to shoot at night, or in dark bars (like I do at times), then I would go with the 23 (or use the 35 f/1.4 with an adaptor, though you would lose the 35mm range). Â S 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivar B Posted September 9, 2018 Share #4  Posted September 9, 2018 I owned both lenses for a while. I never compared them directly, but I was so pleased with the 11-23 that I practically never used the 23mm. What speaks particularly in favour of course is the compactness of the 23mm. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill W Posted September 9, 2018 Share #5  Posted September 9, 2018 I own both. I only recently acquire the 11-23 but can already see that the 23 will see little use in the future. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donzo98 Posted September 9, 2018 Share #6  Posted September 9, 2018 The 11-23 is a spectacular lens with outstanding image quality. However, I'd be hesitant to recommend it as a 'main' 35mm-equivalent option due to the slower maximum aperture.  I agree... I love the 23 F2. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
grahamhoey Posted September 9, 2018 Share #7  Posted September 9, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have owned both lenses, I found I didn’t need the width of the 11-23 as the 18-56 was wide enough for me. It sound like you use the 35mm focal length a lot so I would think the size and speed of the 23mm would be preferable. I love the IQ and speed of the 35 1.4 and use it a lot. I have the same 21mm M lens you refer to above and use it a lot for street photography. With that lens I don’t miss AF as the DOF is so huge at middle f stops I know I ramble a lot but from what I sense of your needs get the 23mm if you really want to get rid of your 21mm M lens 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leonasj Posted September 11, 2018 Share #8 Â Posted September 11, 2018 (edited) ,sold both my 18 and 23,bought 11-23,along with 35/1.4,Artisans35/2,60,55-135,apo m75/2asph and r apo280/4,+1.4x,2.0x Edited September 11, 2018 by leonasj Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joeri Posted September 11, 2018 Share #9 Â Posted September 11, 2018 If you like your 35/1.4 on FF, I'd get the 23. Great little lens. Fits in a jacket pocket (on the CL). I used wide angle lenses 16-35) in my Canon days, but it's not my cup of tea. 2.5 stops is a lot! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hteasley Posted September 12, 2018 Share #10 Â Posted September 12, 2018 I have both. I generally carry the 23 over the zoom because the zoom is significantly larger, and the Summicron is of course faster. Â But the 11-23 is a spectacular lens. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbripley Posted September 12, 2018 Share #11 Â Posted September 12, 2018 I have the 23 and the 35. The 23 is main walk around street photography lens, being small and lightweight (and mostly fast enough). 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted September 20, 2018 Share #12  Posted September 20, 2018 The 11-23 is extremely sharp, however it distorts somewhat and needs correct in PP at the wide end I failed to get on with a slow zoom most of the time, so despite its positive points I prefer using the primes Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photon42 Posted September 20, 2018 Share #13 Â Posted September 20, 2018 I do like the CL with the 23 alone somewhat as my Q replacement. It is also handy indoors with its f2 and 35mm FOV. The zoom then is really not the right answer with its max f-stop at 4.5. The 11-23 normally goes with the 35 and a 75. I do actually like the zoom a lot in urban areas during day time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruskkyle Posted September 21, 2018 Share #14 Â Posted September 21, 2018 Can someone attest to AF performance with the 23mm & CL? I've read mixed reports with the older bodies. Â Thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gfweir Posted September 21, 2018 Share #15  Posted September 21, 2018 Can someone attest to AF performance with the 23mm & CL? I've read mixed reports with the older bodies.  Thanks   I've found it to be superb. I only ever use single spot for focus Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photon42 Posted September 23, 2018 Share #16  Posted September 23, 2018 Can someone attest to AF performance with the 23mm & CL? I've read mixed reports with the older bodies.  Thanks   No complaints. Slightly slower than the 18mm and significantly faster than the 35mm, but that was expected. I would think it is in the same ballpark as the Q, but I do not have the latter anymore. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now