JuzaPhoto uses technical cookies and third-part cookies to provide the service and to make possible login, choice of background color and other settings (click here for more info).
By continuing to browse the site you confirm that you have read your options regarding cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.
You can change in every moment your cookies preferences from the page Cookie Preferences, that can be reached from every page of the website with the link that you find at the bottom of the page; you can also set your preferences directly here
The Canon EF 11-24mm f/4 L USM is a wide-angle lens for FF and APS-C, manufactured from 2015 to 2023 (discontinued). The focus is done by Ultrasonic AF Motor (Ring-USM), it does not have image stabilization. The average price, when it has been added to the JuzaPhoto database, is 2615 €;
43 users have given it an average vote of 9.1 out of 10.
MOUNT
This lens is available with the following mounts:
Canon EF: this lens is compatible with reflex fullframe and APS-C Canon EF.
Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!
There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 242000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
Pros:Excellent lens from every point of view, optical, constructive etc.
Cons:Your shadow will haunt you
Opinion:I do not want to bore you with strictly technical considerations that I gladly leave to others. I bought it used last December, not really for a piece of bread, but it repays in satisfaction the economic effort expended. The optical quality is without question as well as the construction, it has a front lens that puts awe but is protected by the integrated hood not very long, given the angle of view, but there is. In use it allows incredible perspectives with the effect of making elusive in an unnatural way what is framed at the edge of the image. This phenomenon is sometimes annoying especially if at the edge of the image there is a subject with known dimensions that is deformed. It is clearly an extreme lens with all that this entails and must be known how to use. As anticipated in the "cons" one thing will persecute you, your shadow that will inexorably enter the field and therefore will force you to pay attention to how you are dressed. Seriously, it's an excellent optics.
Opinion:Exceptional lens, I use it for interior photography / furniture / architecture. Canon has done an excellent job, the build quality is excellent, the yield of the lens also, already at full aperture (except for a little vignetting). The distortion is exceptionally minimal and in any case lower than the old 24-70 or 24-105, in backlight not from big problems considering the extreme focal length, just a few small tricks. I have also used it for sports in some events, extreme lens and therefore not very easy to exploit, but if used well it can give truly spectacular results. Only negative note in my opinion, the weight, I certainly have no problems (yet) to carry around kilos and kilos of equipment ... but this "little one" is a nice brick, more than anything else obviously not having the bracket like the canvases, when you carry it over the shoulder, the body is not well balanced and this a little disturbs. However, it remains a great lens, wonderful from all points of view!
Pros:sharpness, focal length, flare resistance, use of slab filters, very low distortion, chromatic rendering, construction
Cons:Vignetting with 11/12mm slab filters, not attributable to the lens and easily resolvable in post
Opinion:A lens that returns in satisfaction the economic commitment made to purchase. The chromatic rendering, the sharp detail, the resistance to flare, given the size of the front lens and the absence of particular distortions, are a pleasant surprise. The maximum aperture at F/4, does not make the lens suitable for astrophotography, except this, is the best wide lens on the market. Coupled with the 24/70, I was led to the sale of the 16-35, which suffers more distortion, despite the minimum focal less extensive
Pros:Focal excursion, uniqueness, distortions controlled in a masterly way directly from the optical scheme, body that although not in metal is quite solid and allows temperature changes without problems that a metal construction would lead behind
Cons:Price
Opinion:It's a gorgeous lens, if it didn't cost a crazy figure it would be a recommended purchase. Unfortunately the online reviews are extremely misleading, and among those who can not read a graph MTF, and who defines a lens "professional" (to do what I still have to understand), you have to clarify. If you buy it hoping that your landscape photos suddenly become magical, you're throwing the money. What this lens guarantees you is an immense angle of field, with all the consequences of the case. It has a beautifully insignificant distortion, which at first impact could make you say "wow", pity that then takes over the other aspect: look at the world with a focal length of 11mm. If on the one hand the lines are beautifully straight, on the other you will notice how the subjects in the center seem far away from you, and almost "distorted" while not being. This means that your central subject will decrease in size, and you'll have to get used to that "vision". The yield to F4 is fairly low to medioframe\\edges, you have to close to F8 on dense sensors. You will find online reviews of photos made with 5d Mark III, which already makes you understand the preparation of these individuals, but it goes well. Not fully recommended for astrophotography without astrotracker due to the AC (in solvable daytime photos) and the low uniformity centro\\edges at F4. In conclusion, it is a beautiful lens, certainly innovative, but personally I would not buy it even if it cost €1,500 (bought fortunately used and resolute even more). I have not found in the focal so wide that magic that so decanta, but I found a lens extremely heavy, cumbersome and with problems of flare obvious given the exaggerated size of the front lens. In my opinion you can spend considerably less and buy a Sigma Art 14 1.8 or a 14-24, globally more balanced. The final weapon of this lens is its control over distortions, but in my opinion it does not justify the faults that it carries, and the price to which it is sold.
Pros:11mm, 12mm, 13mm, 14mm, 15mm sharpness, distortion correction at the mid focal, is unique in its kind
Cons:Weight, footprint, price, flare with point light sources.
Opinion:Before buying it I thought it was too extreme for my needs, I considered it more a demonstration of Canon's ability to achieve unique goals, but not useful for those who do not need it for ultraspecialist purposes. Since, after long thinking, I bought it (used, but still at a high price...) Practically no longer use the Pur excellent 16-35/4 l IS, because the expressive possibilities allowed by the range 11-16mm on full format are exceptionally... vast, and The combination with the 24-70/2.8 L II does not make me regret a bit longer focal length than the 24mm. Certainly compared to 16-35 this 11-24 can not be thought "alone" in a lightweight reportage logic. It is wrong, however, to believe that this objective is a specialist for architecture, Interior in particular: it is certainly useful in those situations, but in June I was taken to the Dolomites in the backpack together with 24-70 and 100-400: Well, despite the weight Of the whole was indisputably remarkable, it was absolutely worth it, because certain perspectives were greatly valued with Ultracorte focal lengths, provided you had the foresight to compose carefully, use the easel and place--every time you It was possible-a strong foreground to anchor the prospective momentum of the whole. The optical and constructive quality of this large wide angle is at the highest level. Personally I am not a fan of filters, not even ND, so I do not feel the lack of a frame dedicated to them. Only note is-sometimes-the onset of a certain flare (ghost more than decrease in contrast) in the backlight, but I think it is inevitable for a lens with these characteristics. A little bit of foresight in the shooting allows most of the time to remedy the problem. Even in the report has proved effective, obviously it is not a point of view for that, but when there are compact groups of focal people so short they allow you to literally "enter" The observer in the scene. Good light
The sample photos are selected automatically between all photos posted by JuzaPhoto members, using the camera and the lens selected in the techs. If you find evident errors (e.g. photos taken with cameras and lenses that are not available yet), you can contribute to improve the page by sending a private message to the user that has entered incorrect values in the photo caption.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
![[editors pick]](shared_files/layout/ep_badge.jpg){kind=icon}
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.
