50mm f/1.8 II Has Spoiled Me: What to do?

[Vita Rara]

On the consensus opinion of this board I bought the EF 50mm f/1.8 II a while ago. Now I'm absolutely hooked on the sharpness of this lens. I have since purchased the 28mm F/2.8, although not as sharp it's a great lens. On a long motorcycle trip these two lenses were used almost exclusively by myself and my girldfriend. The EF-S 18-55 stayed in the bag the whole trip. We both couldn't stand the quality in comparison to the primes.

My problem is this. I thought I wanted a zoom for the versatility, but now I'm adicted to the tack sharpness of these primes.

So, my question is this. Are there any zoom lenses that will offer the sharpness of these non-L primes? I have never used an L zoom, such as the 24-70 or 70-200. Are they that good?

Thanks,

Mark

[Cadwell]

Well if you use this resource as a guide http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/easytxt.htm

You will see that the 50mm f/1.8 II scores 3.91 for optical quality.

The EF 24-70mm f/2.8L scores 4.16 and the EF 70-200 f/4L scores 4.17 so I would say, yes, the L zooms (some of them at least) are that good!

[Vita Rara]

Thanks, I didn't know about that page. *phew* More information to digest.

Mark

[Cadwell]

Thanks, I didn't know about that page. *phew* More information to digest.

Mark

No problem. Don't take the information there as gospel, there are some oddities (as with any such resource) but it is a useful guide. :)

[Andy_T]

But also ... don't forget that there are a lot of other great and affordable Canon prime lenses out there....

1.8/85, 2.8/135 SF, 2.8/200

And for the wide end there is the 15 mm fisheye...

Best regards,
Andy

[Vita Rara]

But also ... don't forget that there are a lot of other great and affordable Canon prime lenses out there....

1.8/85, 2.8/135 SF, 2.8/200

And for the wide end there is the 15 mm fisheye...

This is really my problem. I was contemplating a prime collection of the 28 & 50 that I have, and adding the 85, 135 and 200. I looked at the optical performance from photozone.de and they are all top performers.

What I find interesting though is that I went to a local store and shot the 50 f/1.8 II and the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 side by side at 50mm at f/2.8. In my eyes there was no contest at all. The prime blew away the Tamron, yet that site lists the Tamron with an optical performance of 4.14 and the 50mm at 3.91. So, it colors my interpretation of what the charts there say. I'm going to go back and shoot the lenses side by side again to be sure I didn't mess something up.

Mark

[Cadwell]

What I find interesting though is that I went to a local store and shot the 50 f/1.8 II and the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 side by side at 50mm at f/2.8. In my eyes there was no contest at all. The prime blew away the Tamron, yet that site lists the Tamron with an optical performance of 4.14 and the 50mm at 3.91. So, it colors my interpretation of what the charts there say. I'm going to go back and shoot the lenses side by side again to be sure I didn't mess something up.

Mark

Not really a fair test shooting one lens wide open and the other stopped down... most lenses are a little soft wide open. The Tamron sharpens up nicely from f/4 upwards.

Also optical quality is not solely down to sharpness. Issues like CA, flare and distortion come into play as well.

[Deckyon]

Until you do your own testing, take all these other sites and charts with a grain of salt. I happen to like the zooms as they give me a wide range of focal lengths without having to carry all the extra lenses. In my testing, I have found the L series extremely hard to beat, especially the 2.8 lenses.

Other than the lenses I have listed below (in my sig) the other lenses I have on my new list are the MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x macro lens, EF 400mm f/2.8 L IS USM super telephoto and the TS 24mm f/3.5L tilt/shift. These are for specific purpose rather an all around use. I see myself using my 24-70 f/2.8 L USM lens the most. I am picking up my equipment tomorrow (finally) and will have a better feel after that. I have spent the last couple months looking and testing, touching almost all of the Canon lenses in the process. Do your homework and you will not be disappointed.

Remember, take all this with a grain of salt until you do your testing.

[Vita Rara]

Not really a fair test shooting one lens wide open and the other stopped down... most lenses are a little soft wide open. The Tamron sharpens up nicely from f/4 upwards.

Point taken. So, would f/4 on the Tamron be considered being stopped down two stops? (ie 2.8 -> 3.5 -> 4) And if yes, what would be a fair f/stop to use for the 50mm in your opinion?

Also optical quality is not solely down to sharpness. Issues like CA, flare and distortion come into play as well.

True, is there anyplace that does detailed tests that enumerate these characteristics?

Thanks a lot for sharing your knowledge. I'm pretty new to thinking about photography at this level.

Mark

[Cadwell]

Point taken. So, would f/4 on the Tamron be considered being stopped down two stops? (ie 2.8 -> 3.5 -> 4) And if yes, what would be a fair f/stop to use for the 50mm in your opinion?


The full stops are 1.4, 2.0, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8, 11, 16, 22 so at f/4 the Tamron is being stopped down by 1 stop. Why not set both lenses to f/5.6 and see what they compare like?


True, is there anyplace that does detailed tests that enumerate these characteristics?


There are a number of review sites. The best place to start looking for links are here http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34867 and here http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=22081

[nosquare2003]

Not really a fair test shooting one lens wide open and the other stopped down... most lenses are a little soft wide open. The Tamron sharpens up nicely from f/4 upwards.

Also optical quality is not solely down to sharpness. Issues like CA, flare and distortion come into play as well.

I have to disagree with you. It is fair to compare the lenses at the same aperture -- unless we don't use the aperture at f/2.8.

For optical quality, the prime will beat the Tamron lens. But the price of Tamron lens is so competitive for its quality anyway.

I don't trust the link regarding the Lens Test (I've written once). It is not a real lens test but the average of other tests. What tests are included in the averaging? Are the tests (for averaging) the same as the prime and the zoom? What criteria for the lens tests? (For example, the build quality of the 50/1.8II is really poor and the autofocus speed is very slow. It will rate very low in this regards.) How subjective the lens tests are?

[Cadwell]

I have to disagree with you. It is fair to compare the lenses at the same aperture -- unless we don't use the aperture at f/2.8.



Yup, if you're going to use f/2.8 then you need to test it, but then test the 50mm f/1.8 wide open too... Fair's fair, after all. That would show a very different picture.

No, I don't agree with your assertion that the 50mm f/1.8 II will give better optical quality that the Tamron. The 50mm f/1.8 is a great lens and a fantastic bargain. It's optical quality is way better than Canon's consumer zooms but compared to an "L" zoom or a top of the line third party zoom it aint all that. I've done my own comparisons.

Of course, Canon L primes are a different matter altogether.

As regard to the web page referenced, I've said fairly clearly that it's a guide, nothing more. I have noticed that it gets quoted quite a lot on here when it supports the opinion that a Canon lens is the best ever and knocked when it doesn't come out in favour of the Canon. I wonder why that happens?

[nosquare2003]

Your points are noted (though we don't have to agree with each other).

By the way, I'd like to quote:

http://www.photodo.com/nav/prodindex.html

The 50/1.8II is not worse than the L primes in some aspects...

[kfong]

But if I can push your logic to the extreme, then I would assert that a pin hole
would have the best performance above ALL lenses.
Putting aperture aside, a pin-hole is
1. cheap,
2. fastest focusing (no focusing required),
3. No aberration of any kind,
4. zoom range is from 45mm to infinity.

Ken


Yup, if you're going to use f/2.8 then you need to test it, but then test the 50mm f/1.8 wide open too... Fair's fair, after all. That would show a very different picture.