Wide angle zoom advise needed

[m9photo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Guys,

With the upcoming trip to Banff,Alberta Canada, I am planning to bring some of the gears I have with me. My current  cameras are SL and Canon 5DSr, lenses are the 50 SL Summilux (my only L currently), 17/4 TSE,  35/1.4, 85/1.2 and 135/2 all are Canon L lenses.

I'm planning to bring both cameras with 50 SL, 17 TSE, do you think by getting a wide and tele zoom lenses would be good idea? I was thinking the Sigma 14-24/28 with Canon native so I can use on the SL with my adapter.

Or 17 TSE is should be wide enough? if that's the case I would be looking for tele zoom to bring, any recommendation? Canon 70-200? 

Thanks in advance!

[LeicaR10]

m9photo,  It would be difficult for me to lend advice for your pending travel to Banff since you didn't mention your photographic genre intentions; landscape, wildlife, people and also if you are hiking (distance is a factor) or simply doing roadside photography, etc..  As a landscape photographer, I use either my Leica S or SL system depending on the length of planned hikes at Banff.  I found for the SL system 24-90 SL or 16-35 SL and 90 SL lenses  worked superbly for my photographs and my clients really liked the results.  Since I was hiking 10-25 KM a day the SL worked for me.  I use the M system when I elect really challenging long-distance remote hikes at Banff.  I won't offer advice for Canon as I let that system go in the mid 2000s.  Perhaps you can offer more insight as to your photographic genre and expected results.  In the meantime, I hope this helps.  r/ Mark

[m9photo]

Thanks Mark, it will be more landscape than anything else on this trip. Since I only have 17 TSE as my widest, I was wondering if that would be good enough.

Weigh is main concern, but I will not do extreme hiking in this case. I know I would probably need longer lens than what I have now.

[saxo]

Hiking, no short walk, and long lens I recommend APSC System. I use currently Fuji, because they have a good lens selection.

For ultra wide, I would go for full frame, but I' ve no recommendation for a zoom lens, because I use prime lenses in this case for IQ. I often found zooms for super wide angle difficult.

Edited September 1, 2019 by saxo

[HeinzX]

I think, the TSE 17 is wide enough. But if you would like a wider angle, the Canon 11 - 24. which I had longer  time ago,  is really excellent even if using filters with it on the front lens requires add. equipment. The lens  internal possibility is not a real alternative.

[Steve7]

I recently purchased the new Sigma L-mount 14-24/2.8 DG DN lens for use on my SL.  I'm very happy with it at both ends of its range.  If your considering expanding your L-mount range, it might be worth looking at.

Edited September 2, 2019 by Steve7

[LeicaR10]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

m9photo,  To answer your question in your post #3, the 17 TSE will certainly be wide enough.   Based on my experience at Banff, I would suggest your 135 is long enough.  You might well find your 17, 35 and 135 are all that you need.  If need be, use your feet to change focal length and crop.  Weight will wear you down...and more so, if you are being chased by a bear....Have a great trip, you will find Banff an amazing place to photograph.  r/ Mark

[colonel]

9 hours ago, Steve7 said:

I recently purchased the new Sigma L-mount 14-24/2.8 DG DN lens for use on my SL.  I'm very happy with it at both ends of its range.  If your considering expanding your L-mount range, it might be worth looking at.

Very interested in this lens

How are you findng it ? (weight, size, sharpness, focus, handling, etc.)

[su25]

15 hours ago, Steve7 said:

I recently purchased the new Sigma L-mount 14-24/2.8 DG DN lens for use on my SL.  I'm very happy with it at both ends of its range.  If your considering expanding your L-mount range, it might be worth looking at.

Can you use any GND and ND filters on that lens? Like Nisi ?

[Steve7]

@Colonel: the weight and size are very nice as is the AF and handling.  It's very sharp across the frame (@~5.6, haven't inspected 2.8 yet) and distortion is not at all catching my eye.  It is really a keeper.  My only reservation is that, when mounted, the SL give's me a "high-power lenses increase battery consumption..." warning.  I have written to Sigma asking about this but no response yet.  Will ask Leica as well.  I really like the lens.

@su25: no front filters are supported due to extending front element.  It does support sheet-type filters in a slot on the back of the lens; comes with a kit for this but I have not explored it yet.  

[bags27]

If you want something cheap, but still very good, the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro DX, with adaptor.

Voigtlander has terrific single focal very wide rectilinears (10, 12, and 15) for M mount that will weigh less and give you really interesting perspectives.

[RoySmith]

I am very impressed with the Leica 16-35 SVE. It works well with filters. I use the Formatt-Hitech 100mm filters.

Roy

[civitas]

I’ve spoken to NiSi and they are currently making a filter holder for the sigma lens 

[MarkinVan]

14 hours ago, RoySmith said:

I am very impressed with the Leica 16-35 SVE. It works well with filters. I use the Formatt-Hitech 100mm filters.

Roy

+1

[Donzo98]

1 hour ago, MarkinVan said:

+1

+2