What is the absolute best wide-angle lens I should get for landscape photography on my Canon R5? I finally upgraded to the R5 last year and I love the resolution but honestly my old EF 17-40mm with the adapter just isnt cutting it anymore especially when I am trying to catch those fine details in the rocks or distant trees and I keep seeing people rave about the native RF glass. Im actually planning a big trip to Zion National Park in about three weeks so the clock is ticking and I really want to have this sorted out before I hit the trails.
Ive been doing a ton of reading online and I keep getting stuck between the RF 15-35mm f/2.8L and the RF 14-35mm f/4L. I read that the 15-35 is the king for low light and astro stuff because of that f/2.8 but then some other people are saying the 14-35 is actually better for pure landscapes because it goes wider and its lighter to carry around all day which sounds great because my back isnt what it used to be lol. But then I saw some reviews saying the distortion on the 14-35 is kinda crazy at the wide end and relies too much on software correction which makes me worry about losing some of that 45MP sharpness near the edges.
My budget is right around $2,500 max so both are technically within range if I find a good deal but I dont want to overspend on the f/2.8 if I am gonna be stopped down to f/8 or f/11 on a tripod 90% of the time anyway. But then again what if I want to try some star shots at night while Im out in the desert? Does the extra 1mm on the f/4 lens actually make a noticeable difference in the field? I just cant decide if I should go for the pro 2.8 choice or the more practical f/4 version. Has anyone here used both on an R5 specifically? I really need to know if that edge-to-edge sharpness holds up because thats the main reason I got this camera in the first place...
@Reply #1 - good point! If youre worried about that edge-to-edge sharpness on the R5, the Canon RF 15-35mm f/2.8L IS USM is absolutely worth the extra weight. Its a beast! Unlike the f/4, it doesnt rely on heavy software corrections, so those 45MP files look super clean. Ngl, for Zion stars, youll love having that f/2.8 aperture... it makes a massive difference! It fits your $2500 budget perfectly too.
> I just cant decide if I should go for the pro 2.8 choice or the more practical f/4 version. I went through this exact struggle before my trip to Arches last year. Honestly, I bought the Canon RF 14-35mm f/4L IS USM thinking it would be the perfect practical choice but it was a total disappointment. Unfortunately, those reviews about the distortion are right. When you are shooting at 14mm, the software has to work so hard to fix the image that the corners look kinda mushy on that R5 sensor. It just wasnt as good as expected for such an expensive lens. I ended up swapping it for the Canon RF 15-35mm f/2.8L IS USM and the optical quality is night and day. If you want edge-to-edge sharpness for Zion prints, dont settle for the f/4. The weight is a pain on hikes but the files are way cleaner... you will definitely want that 2.8 for the desert stars.
Re: "@Reply #2 - spot on about the edge clarity! The R5 sensor is a beast and it really shows the flaws in older EF glass or heavily corrected zooms. Zion is gonna be incredible, you must be so stoked! I was there last fall and the light hitting those canyon walls is just pure magic. Before you drop the cash, I have a couple quick things to figure out:
Finally someone says it. Ive been thinking this for a while but wasnt sure.