Apeture Sweet Spot Sharpness for EF/EF-S Lenses

[PhilipJohnBasile]

We should compile a list for all of the lenses that we have that is the sweet spot for optimal sharpness in f stops. I am sure this would be a very helpfull guide. Would anyone like to start? You can state it below and I will add it on to this list. This would be a great sticky.

Canon Lenses
EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM
EF 17-40mm f/4L USM
EF 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM
EF-S 17-85MM f4-5.6 IS USM
EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM
EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
EF 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM
EF 28-105mm f/4.0-5.6 USM
EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
EF 28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 USM
EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM
EF 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 II
EF 28-90mm f/4-5.6 II USM
EF 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II USM
EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM
EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM
EF 70-200mm f/4L USM
EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM
EF 80-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II
EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM
EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III
EF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM
EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM
EF 14mm f/2.8L USM
EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye
EF 20mm f/2.8 USM
EF 24mm f/1.4L USM
EF 24mm f/2.8
EF 28mm f/2.8
EF 35mm f/1.4L USM
EF 35mm f/2
EF 28mm f/1.8 USM
EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
EF 50mm f/1.8 II
EF 85mm f/1.2L USM
EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM
EF 85mm f/1.8 USM
EF 100mm f/2 USM
EF 135mm f/2L USM
EF 135mm f/2.8 with Softfocus
EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM
EF 300mm f/4L IS USM
EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM
EF 400mm f/2.8L IS USM
EF 400mm f/4 DO IS USM
EF 400mm f/5.6L USM
EF 500mm f/4L IS USM
EF 600mm f/4L IS USM
EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro
EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM
MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macro Photo
EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM
EF 180mm f/3.5L Macro USM
TS-E 24mm f/3.5L
TS-E 45mm f/2.8
TS-E 90mm f/2.8

Sigma Wide Zoom Lenses
12-24mm F4.5-5.6
15-30mm F3.5-4.5
17-35mm F2.8-4 DG
20-40mm F2.8

Sigma Standard Zoom Lenses
24-60mm F2.8 EX DG
24-70mm F2.8 EX DG
24-70mm F3.5-5.6
24-135mm F2.8-4.5
28-70mm F2.8 EX DG
28-70mm F2.8-4 DG
28-105mm F2.8-4 DG
28-105mm F3.8-5.6
28-135mm F3.8-5.6
28-200mm F3.5-5.6 DG
28-300mm DG

Sigma Telephoto Zoom Lenses
50-500mm F4-6.3 DG
70-200mm F2.8 DG MACRO
70-200mm F2.8 DG
70-300mm F4-5.6 DG MACRO
70-300mm APO DG MACRO
80-400mm F4.5-5.6
100-300mm F4 DG
120-300mm F2.8 DG
135-400mm F4.5-5.6 DG
170-500mm F5-6.3 DG
300-800mm F5.6 DG

Sigma Wide Lenses
8mm F4 EX DG
14mm F2.8 EX
15mm F2.8 EX DG
20mm F1.8 EX DG
24mm F1.8 EX DG
28mm F1.8 EX DG

Sigma Macro Lenses
50mm F2.8 EX DG
105mm F2.8 EX DG
150mm F2.8 EX DG
180mm F3.5 EX DG

Sigma DC Lenses for Digital SLR Camera
10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC "5.6 Wide - 8 Tele"
17-70mm F2.8-4.5 DC MACRO
18-50mm F2.8 EX DC
18-50mm F3.5-5.6 DC
18-125mm F3.5-5.6 DC
18-200mm F3.5-6.3 DC
55-200mm F4-5.6 DC
30mm F1.4 EX DC HSM "2.8"

Sigma Tele Lenses
800mm f5.6 EX DG
500mm EX DG
300mm EX DG

Tamron Di II Lenses
SP AF11-18mm F/4.5-5.6 Di II LD Aspherical (IF)
SP AF17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF)
AF18-200mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF)
AF55-200mm F/4-5.6 Di II LD NEW

Tamron Di (Digitally Integrated) Lenses
SP AF17-35mm F/2.8-4 Di LD Aspherical (IF)
SP AF28-75mm F/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF)
AF28-200mm F/3.8-5.6 XR Di Aspherical (IF) Macro
AF28-300mm F/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF)
AF70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di LD Macro 1:2
SP AF200-500mm F/5-6.3 Di LD (IF)
SP AF90mm F/2.8 Di 1:1 Macro
SP AF180mm F/3.5 Di LD (IF) 1:1 Macro

Tamron Conventional Lenses
AF19-35mm F/3.5-4.5 Wide Angle Zoom
AF28-80mm F/3.5-5.6 Aspherical
AF28-200mm F/3.8-5.6 XR Aspherical (IF) Super Zoom
AF70-300mm F/4-5.6 LD 1:2 Macro
AF75-300mm F/4-5.6 LD Macro

Tamron SP (Super Performance) Conventional Lenses
SP AF24-135mm F/3.5-5.6 AD Aspherical (IF)
SP AF28-105mm F/2.8 LD Aspherical (IF)
SP AF14mm F/2.8 Aspherical (IF) Rectilinear
SP AF300mm F/2.8 LD (IF)

Tokina AT-X Pro Series
AF 100mm f/2.8 Macro
AF 12-24mm f/4
AF 28-70mm f/2.8
AF 28-80mm f/2.8
AF 300mm f/2.8

Tokina AT-X Series
AF 24-200mm f/3.5-5.6
AF 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6

Tokina AF Series
AF 19-35mm f/3.5-4.5

[jamest26]

I think this is a great idea. It'll definitely help out a newbie like me.

[Double Negative]

It's pretty simple for the most part. Stopped down two stops (or so) is usually the sharpest for any given lens. Around f/5.6 or f/8.0 or so on average (for the brighter lenses).

[PhilipJohnBasile]

On average but having the exact # or range would be awesome.

[Double Negative]

On average but having the exact # or range would be awesome.
Then stop down two stops from wide open on whatever lens you're using. ;)

[Thordic]

For the Sigma 10-20mm, its more than 2 stops. Its more like f/11 - f/13. Beautifully sharp when its stopped down a bunch. Not that its bad otherwise, but seems to me it gives me the best pictures when I have plenty of light and can stop it down a bunch.

[jfrancho]

No hard and fast number would work, since it depends on too many variables. A shot of a musician in a dimly lit club will be 'sharper' using a 50 f/1.4 set to 1/80 s. @ f/1.4 than set to 1/40 s. @ f/2.0. The list would anly work for well lit, motionless subjects while using a tripod, and MF. When do all those things come together? Rarely.

[jfrancho]

For the Sigma 10-20mm, its more than 2 stops. Its more like f/11 - f/13. Beautifully sharp when its stopped down a bunch. Not that its bad otherwise, but seems to me it gives me the best pictures when I have plenty of light and can stop it down a bunch.Going smaller than f/11 will cause diffraction which results in less sharpness.

[Thordic]

Ah, well, there you go, f/11 is the winner then :) (IMO)

And yeah, it depends on available light and whatnot, of course. f/11 doesnt work very well if its not a bright sunny day.

[PhilipJohnBasile]

you'd just need a tripod or a flash to fix that. JUst keep on pouring in content, i am sure you can find it from reviews or personal experience and i will update this baby.

[jfrancho]

I find it very hard to believe that it takes three whole stops down from wide open to get maximum sharpness from that lens. If that's true, it is a complete waste of money. Most lenses are quite sharp at 2/3 stop, and really sharp at one stop. We're talking f/5.6 in this case. Don't confuse optimum sharpness with maximum depth of field.

[Double Negative]

For the Sigma 10-20mm, its more than 2 stops. Its more like f/11 - f/13. Beautifully sharp when its stopped down a bunch. Not that its bad otherwise, but seems to me it gives me the best pictures when I have plenty of light and can stop it down a bunch.
F/11 is universally less sharp than f/5.6-f/8.0 at all focal lengths on this lens:

http://photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_1020_456/index.htm

Overall though, it's a ridiculously sharp lens.

[jfrancho]

you'd just need a tripod or a flash to fix that. JUst keep on pouring in content, i am sure you can find it from reviews or personal experience and i will update this baby.What flash would be better for the Grand Canyon, the 580EX or would the 430EX be enough?

[In2Photos]

What flash would be better for the Grand Canyon, the 580EX or would the 430EX be enough?

In this case you will need both, but the 430 will need to be placed on the other side of the canyon and used as a wireless slave.:lol:

[Jon]

In this case you will need both, but the 430 will need to be placed on the other side of the canyon and used as a wireless slave.:lol:A better solution would be to use the ST-E2 along with both flashes. Put the 580EX at the mouth of the Colorado and the 430EX at the headwaters and fire away.

[lost]

No hard and fast number would work, since it depends on too many variables. A shot of a musician in a dimly lit club will be 'sharper' using a 50 f/1.4 set to 1/80 s. @ f/1.4 than set to 1/40 s. @ f/2.0. The list would anly work for well lit, motionless subjects while using a tripod, and MF. When do all those things come together? Rarely.

He is talking about the lens sharpness. I would really like to see this completed and stickyed. The info is out there in Reviews all over the net but no one has compiled this in an easy to view format.

I can think of many circumstances where there is plenty of light and I can choose between f2.8 and f22. It would be nice to know weather F5.6 or F8 would produce sharper photos. A cheat sheet.

Some lenses reach maximum sharpness faster than others. So a rule of 2 stops is generally ok but when maximum sharpness is required the absolute number would help.

[PhilipJohnBasile]

F/11 is universally less sharp than f/5.6-f/8.0 at all focal lengths on this lens:

http://photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_1020_456/index.htm

Overall though, it's a ridiculously sharp lens.

So what would the sweet spot be?

[Double Negative]

So what would the sweet spot be?
Depends on the focal length. ;)

On the short end, it's f/5.6 - more towards the long end, it's f/8.

[Lester Wareham]

It can vary for corner and centre sharpness and from lens to lens to an extent. This is why it is worth the effort of testing your own lenses.

[PhilipJohnBasile]

and then posting it here ;)

[jfrancho]

He is talking about the lens sharpness. I would really like to see this completed and stickyed. The info is out there in Reviews all over the net but no one has compiled this in an easy to view format.

I can think of many circumstances where there is plenty of light and I can choose between f2.8 and f22. It would be nice to know weather F5.6 or F8 would produce sharper photos. A cheat sheet.

Some lenses reach maximum sharpness faster than others. So a rule of 2 stops is generally ok but when maximum sharpness is required the absolute number would help.I'm saying that optimum sharpness is going to be very difficult to measure down to an exact aperture for a given lens that will work for all situations with as much as possible being equal. The only perceptable difference between f/5.6 and f/8 on an F/4 lens is going to depth of field. If it's an f/5.6 lens, obviously f/8 will be sharper. There is no point goign all the way to f/22 since diffraction will occur. Remember, f/stops are logrithmic, ergo one stop down on a fast prime like 50 f/1.4 is only f/2. On a f/5.6 lens, it'll be f/8. Slap a TC one there and you're looking at f/16 -WHOOPS! that's in diffraction land.

[jfrancho]

and then posting it here ;)OK, I'll post my results:
EF 28mm f/1.8: f/2.2
EF 50mm f/1.4: f/2
EF 35mm f/2: f/2.8
EF 17-40 f/4: f/5.6
EF 70-200 f/4: f/5.6
EF-S 18-55 f/3.5-5.6: f/7.1-f/8
Tammy 28-300 f/3.5-6.3: unsharp at any FL below 135. Above 135mm f/11
See the pattern?

[FlashZebra]

We should compile a list for all of the lenses that we have that is the sweet spot for optimal sharpness in f stops. I am sure this would be a very helpfull guide. Would anyone like to start? You can state it below and I will add it on to this list. This would be a great sticky.

About 1/4 to 1/3 of the lenses on your list have been tested by PhotoZone.de.

This site codifies sharpness values at various F# and various focal lengths for zooms, so it would be easy to get this rolling if you have real interest. Please note that the sharpness values at this site are with regard to a 1.6 crop camera.

You would also need to decide which “sharpness” is to be codified, center, edge, or some combination of the two.

I would strongly urge you to avoid producing this list based on use testimonials. That will stall into a giant quagmire of opinion.

See:

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html

I am sure there are other lens tests available to supplement the info at PhotoZone.

If you would start the project with the data you have (say from PhotoZone) and explicitly state the required conditions for inclusion, others could supplement your start when they uncovered appropriate data.

A group project with a focus (as described in the previous paragraph) has a chance to succeed, but if you just throw a good idea out for an amorphous group like this to develop, it will just get buried in claptrap.

Good ideas are insufficent. Sweat and rigor are also necessary.

Enjoy! Lon

[snappa]

On old FD lenses the sweet spot on the vast majority was always f8 irrespective of their maximum/minimum aperture. I would be interested to find out if the 1.6x crop factor has changed this.

[FlashZebra]

Remember, f/stops are logrithmic, ergo one stop down on a fast prime like 50 f/1.4 is only f/2. On a f/5.6 lens, it'll be f/8.
Logrithmetic. What?

F-stops are no more “logarithmic” that any other number.

F-stops are based on a ratio of the diameter of an aperture opening to a lenses' focal length. But, the amount of light that enters a round opening is directly related to the area of the round opening, not it's diameter. And since successive diameters of round openings (or nearly round openings) relate to the area of the created opening by the square root of 2, there is a non-linear factor.

But, just because the F-stops are not linear, does not automatically cast it into the exclusive realm of logarithms.

The square root of the number 2 is the key (which is approximated by the value 1.4)

Enjoy! Lon

[jfrancho]

Yeah yeah, I used the wrong term. The rest of the post is true. While we're on the subject of incorrect info, Photozone.com is advertising portal, while photozone.de has good info about photography :).

[FlashZebra]

A better solution would be to use the ST-E2 along with both flashes. Put the 580EX at the mouth of the Colorado and the 430EX at the headwaters and fire away.
I will be at the exact starting point of the Colorado River (Milner Pass) in a about 10 days, I will be glad to place the required 430EX in the proper position. Just ship the flash pronto.

If you have interest in also capturing the eastern slope watershed, I can also rotate the flash 180 degrees and flash at the headwaters of the Cache la Poudre River (aka Poudre).

Someone else will need to place the 580EX at the Sea of Cortez for the Colorado River intrigue.

If the mouth of the Cache la Poudre River is of interest, I could possibly drive the Greeley, Co where the Cache la Poudre River empties into the South Platte. Greeley is a lot closer than the Sea of Cortez.

Enjoy! Lon