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 accept the use of cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.
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 176000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
Pros:Construction, size, brightness, AF, sharpness
Cons:For the moment nothing
Opinion:I took this lens a few days so it can not be completely complete nor definitive this review, but I wanted to say some things right away. It's the first time I've seen the faces of sharp people with a 14mm even at TA. The mystery of diametrically opposed judgments on some Canon products continues, I would easily understand the small differences between one judgment and another but the abyss that there is between "wonderful" and "cyofeca" just can't understand it. I have not taken pictures of stars or others that are normally done with these focal points, I have taken some shots of those I always do and behaves very well, several spans above various Samyang or Sigma that I had in the past and with size and weight decidedly contained p er an f2.8 . We'll see later if something terrible comes out.
Opinion:I had in practice for a weekend by my trusted shopkeeper this lens (I wanted to replace my Voigtlander 15 with ring for practicality and for autofocus) I was deeply disappointed, very soft up to f8 and with a value for money unacceptable, I didn't even like the lower colors definitely at 16-35 f4. Returned
Cons:Nothing except having to buy a dedicated holder to use the slab filters from 150, but incidentally it is a 14.
Opinion:I had to test this beautiful lens for about a month, I promised myself to buy it as soon as possible, excellent sharpness already at full aperture, L-series construction, distortion where are you? Compact and light, the AF is very fast and precise, in the photos of Interiors excels, in short, for me it will become part of my professional kit very soon. I wonder if anyone who wrote catastrophic judgments on this lens, knows what he's talking about, I reckon not.
Pros:Only the mechanics of a series "L" for the price to which it is proposed.
Cons:High amount of CA at the edges; The protrusion of the lens, compared to competitors, is more prone to carry with if ghosting; From F 8 We can have a sufficient sharpness even at the edges.
Opinion:I was looking for, and given the test done in the field, not satisfactory, I still try a fixed L series of canon; Thanks to a very dear friend who lent me a weekend to test its validity I decided to move on. As the possessor of the excellent Tokina 11-16 F 2.8 Fixed on the entire focal length, I can certainly affirm that it remains more competitive in terms of overall yield, while being a zoom and costing only 1/4 of the Canon 14mm. Test done on the field also with the Canon 8-15 F4, it remains more performing on the whole focal length and above all with greater homogeneity, having also, for those who look for it, a very funny and captivating perspective for certain particular conditions of shooting. Here the price of the lens remains absolutely unfeasible compared to the overall performance, both because L series and because of fixed optics! If in the production following the first step of 2007 have brought some improvement, you should try the goodness of the last pieces produced to have a certain term and final comparison.
Opinion:I wonder about the Canon engineers when they designed this lens what they had in mind. It is less sharp than the Samyang 14mm f/2.8, along the edges pulls out hallucinating chromatic aberrations (which do not disappear by closing the diaphragm), the sharpness at TA is tremendous in the peripheral area such as to render it unusable for nighttime photos. Ok is reasonably sharp in the center, but what do I do with a 14mm with a uniform sharpness exclusively at F11 (online graphics Videsi)? By the way all this for €2,350 official Canon price. The only "value" is the autofocus, but that at this focal length leaves the time it finds. I wonder the people who wrote the other enthusiastic reviews how many degrees of myopia missing has, because objectively it is a lens that does not deserve even 3 \ \ 10, and the value for money is the worst that can be found in a goal. The only positive note is the lack of distortion, especially when compared to Samyang. Pity that then with a click the distortion of the latter disappears, and the only thing that remains from the comparison is the deep bitterness for having thrown €2000. Compare it for example to a Zeiss Batis 18mm f/2.8, and you'll understand how pitiful this comparison is, all considering the price of the batis of not even €1300. NB: I had both lenses, I tested them next to each other, and I have seen with my bitterness all that. But if you don't believe me there is a thorough online review that will clarify all your ideas.
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}
