[wim]

[quote name='PuxaVida' timestamp='1290265575' post='4283']

Because what I see is: At center they're almost the same (not a big surprise); on mid-frame 14-24mm seems to be better (in terms of acquity and contrast); and on the corner 17mm is very slightly softer. I checked the Nikon @ 16mm, an both at f/5.6. OTOH Wim says that he tried both on the same body and and Canon is better on the corners. So, I know Wim better than that site... <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> That's why...



Regards,



Serkan

[/quote]

<ROFL>



I know a few guys who have shot both TS-E 17 and Nikkor 14-24, or TS-E 17 and ZE 21, and they all have settled on the TS-E 17 - it just does better under real life shooting circumstances. And who am I to contradict (especially since I share the experience <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />).



However, they all say that this lens just performs, and is sharper than the tests out there seem to indicate (especially in the corners). Furthermore, flare resistance is incredible for a lens this wide, and it renders very, very nicely indeed.



I just love it - and I have it with me whenever I have the camera with me <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />.



Kind regards, Wim