Jump to content

Recommended Posts

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

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).

 

S

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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

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.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

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

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

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...