Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses
Thread started 03 Oct 2013 (Thursday) 08:08
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

Photozone.de, MTF question?

 
travisvwright
Goldmember
travisvwright's Avatar
Joined Feb 2013
NC
Oct 03, 2013 08:08 |  #1

I'm considering replacing my Tamron 28-75, with a Canon 17-55, as I could use the shorter focal length some and faster AF. Wanting to compare sharpness I went to Photozone.DE brought up the analysis of both. They only have the Tamron tested on a 5D2, while the 17-55 is tested on a 50D. Because of that the total MTF number is reduced.

Is it fair to compare the two numbers are percentage of perfection, i.e. Tam MTF was 80% of upper limit Canon was 85% of upper limit so it's better even though the absolute MTF number is lower? I'm confused.


I come here for your expert opinion. Please do not hesitate to critique or edit.
70D, T3i, Tamron 28-75 2.8, Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC, Canon 50 1.4, Canon 100 2.8 Macro, Canon 85 1.8, Canon 10-18 4.5 STM

Franklin NC Photographer Travis Wright (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
davidfarina
Goldmember
davidfarina's Avatar
Joined May 2013
Oct 03, 2013 08:49 |  #2

Seriously? Who cares about MTF numbers?

Go and read some field reviews or look at sample photos here at the board


Sony A7RII | Sony A7S
EF 40 | EF 70-300L | FD 35 Tilt-Shift
FE 16-35 | FE 28 | FE 90
CV 15 4.5 III | CV 40 1.4 MC | Summilux 50 ASPH
Website (external link) | 500px (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
gnome ­ chompski
Goldmember
1,252 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Jun 2013
oakland, ca
Oct 03, 2013 11:27 |  #3

well, the Canon is an EF-S so they had no choice but to test it on a crop sensor. To be honest, the MTF tests are in a controlled setting, all factors being controlled. In real life, things might not line up so perfectly, so a lens that tests off the charts only really tells you that it has the ability to do so in a certain scenario, not that its guaranteed to. At least thats my take. I have razor sharp pics taken on my T2i, and I have soft garbage taken on my 6D, and vice-versa. Get the focal length that suits your needs, and unless its known to be a junk lens, my guess is that you will be just fine.


Tumblr (external link)
Flickr (external link)
Instagram (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,566 posts
Joined Nov 2008
Utah, USA
Oct 03, 2013 13:05 |  #4

travisvwright wrote in post #16342940external link
Is it fair to compare the two numbers are percentage of perfection, i.e. Tam MTF was 80% of upper limit Canon was 85% of upper limit so it's better even though the absolute MTF number is lower? I'm confused.

For the center, that's probably a good way to estimate.

For edges, it is complicated because those will be cropped off when using on a small sensor.


Taylor
Galleries: Flickrexternal link
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s

LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,566 posts
Joined Nov 2008
Utah, USA
Oct 03, 2013 13:06 |  #5

davidfarina wrote in post #16343014external link
Seriously? Who cares about MTF numbers?

People who want to objectively compare the resolving power of lenses.


Taylor
Galleries: Flickrexternal link
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s

LOG IN TO REPLY
davidfarina
Goldmember
davidfarina's Avatar
Joined May 2013
Oct 03, 2013 13:15 |  #6

tkbslc wrote in post #16343549external link
People who want to objectively compare the resolving power of lenses.

Sry but every lens has a little difference i care about what reviewers tell me and if their testing environments is similiar to what i plan to shoot with the lenses. Lookong at mtf charts seems like a waste of time to me. I want to see images and not numbers which can say what it wants. An image speaks for itself...


Sony A7RII | Sony A7S
EF 40 | EF 70-300L | FD 35 Tilt-Shift
FE 16-35 | FE 28 | FE 90
CV 15 4.5 III | CV 40 1.4 MC | Summilux 50 ASPH
Website (external link) | 500px (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,566 posts
Joined Nov 2008
Utah, USA
Oct 03, 2013 15:08 |  #7

davidfarina wrote in post #16343572external link
Sry but every lens has a little difference i care about what reviewers tell me and if their testing environments is similiar to what i plan to shoot with the lenses. Lookong at mtf charts seems like a waste of time to me. I want to see images and not numbers which can say what it wants. An image speaks for itself...

An image speaks for the lighting as much as the lens. Test a kit lens in sunlight and a L lens on a cloudy day and the kit lens is sharper.

MTF under controlled conditions levels the playing field.

And besides, the OP didn't ask for opinions on MTF testing.


Taylor
Galleries: Flickrexternal link
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s

LOG IN TO REPLY
davidc502
Goldmember
davidc502's Avatar
3,455 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Dec 2010
Tennessee
Oct 03, 2013 15:11 |  #8

tkbslc wrote in post #16343831external link
An image speaks for the lighting as much as the lens. Test a kit lens in sunlight and a L lens on a cloudy day and the kit lens is sharper.

MTF under controlled conditions levels the playing field.

And besides, the OP didn't ask for opinions on MTF testing.

It doesn't mean opinions can't be given about what MTF charts are worth to somebody.

Let the OP either accept or discard the information. At least someone is willing to give a opinion. Are you the MTF opinion police? lol

cheers,


_
My Gear is ---> Here

LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
FEChariot's Avatar
Joined Sep 2011
Oct 03, 2013 15:12 as a reply to tkbslc's post |  #9

I used to own the 28-75 and now own the Sigma 17-50. The sigma is significantly sharper. The Canon 17-55 is certainly no worse than the Sigma 17-50. That help?


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,566 posts
Joined Nov 2008
Utah, USA
Oct 03, 2013 15:18 |  #10

davidc502 wrote in post #16343843external link
Are you the MTF opinion police? lol

Mainly I don't like it when people jump all over the OP instead of attempting answering the question, and especially when their opinions are malformed.

I don't need a badge for that.


Taylor
Galleries: Flickrexternal link
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s

LOG IN TO REPLY
davidc502
Goldmember
davidc502's Avatar
3,455 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Joined Dec 2010
Tennessee
Oct 03, 2013 16:22 |  #11

tkbslc wrote in post #16343855external link
Mainly I don't like it when people jump all over the OP instead of attempting answering the question, and especially when their opinions are malformed.

I don't need a badge for that.

The guy said he was sorry. What else do you want before you put the imaginary badge down? :lol:


_
My Gear is ---> Here

LOG IN TO REPLY
tkbslc
Cream of the Crop
24,566 posts
Joined Nov 2008
Utah, USA
Oct 03, 2013 20:46 |  #12

davidc502 wrote in post #16343986external link
The guy said he was sorry. What else do you want before you put the imaginary badge down? :lol:

It's a sash and a beret, thank you!  :p


Taylor
Galleries: Flickrexternal link
60D | ELPH 330 | iPhone 5s

LOG IN TO REPLY
travisvwright
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
travisvwright's Avatar
Joined Feb 2013
NC
Oct 04, 2013 07:56 |  #13

tkbslc wrote in post #16343831external link
An image speaks for the lighting as much as the lens. Test a kit lens in sunlight and a L lens on a cloudy day and the kit lens is sharper.

MTF under controlled conditions levels the playing field.

And besides, the OP didn't ask for opinions on MTF testing.

In my mind, an image also speaks for PP technique. Where these non-real world lab testing completely removes that.

I also get somewhat irked by the posts that don't answer the OPs question. It seems incredibly arrogant to dismiss his opinions and concerns to use his thread as a chance to spew your opinion as if it's so important it's worth stopping all other discussion for. But in this case I didn't see David as doing that.

And to his point besides MTF numbers or The Digital Picture side by side (which also didn't have an ASPC to ASPC comparision) how do you compare lenses you have no chance of ever seeing in person before purchasing? Reviews can be tough as I've found few reviewers are shooting candids of their kids running around. Or pictures of my grandma at a birthday party. And I feel the Lens Sample threads are all chock full of one-off then excruciatingly post processed ideal images not necessarily representative of what you should expect.


I come here for your expert opinion. Please do not hesitate to critique or edit.
70D, T3i, Tamron 28-75 2.8, Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC, Canon 50 1.4, Canon 100 2.8 Macro, Canon 85 1.8, Canon 10-18 4.5 STM

Franklin NC Photographer Travis Wright (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
eddie3dfx
Senior Member
486 posts
Joined Sep 2009
Oct 04, 2013 08:01 |  #14

FEChariot wrote in post #16343845external link
I used to own the 28-75 and now own the Sigma 17-50. The sigma is significantly sharper. The Canon 17-55 is certainly no worse than the Sigma 17-50. That help?

I owned the tamron 28-75 and found the sigma 24-60 to be much sharper.
The problem I had with Sigma was the horrible focus.
I ended up getting a 24-105 and sold the sigma. Both are great lenses, but the picture quality is better on the canon.


Canon 6D, Canon L 24-105, Zeiss Distagon 28mm 2.8, Planar 50mm 1.4, Planar 85mm 1.4, Sonnar 135mm 2.8 & Zeiss Mutar 2x, Canon 50mm 1.8
http://www.edwinraffph​otography.com/external link

LOG IN TO REPLY
YashicaFX2
Goldmember
1,003 posts
Joined Aug 2013
A quiet place in the country.
Oct 04, 2013 08:58 |  #15
banned

I own the 28-75 and I like it for what I do with it. Fast focus it isn't. I can't compare IQ directly, but here is my story. I own the 15-85 which is, IQ-wise, on par with the 17-55. IMHO, the 15-85 (and by inference the 17-55) will give you noticeably better IQ, especially away from the center of the frame. I couldn't justify the cost of the 17-55, so I went with both Tamrons: 17-50 non-VC and 28-75, instead. I got both of them used for $300 each. I don't need f/2.8 in that range often.


Dedicated APS-c shooter. Gripped 60D, 60 2.8, 10-22, 15-85, Σ70-200 OS and a big white something or other! Plus a 5D w/28-75.

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

1,843 views & 0 likes for this thread
Photozone.de, MTF question?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00217 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.03s
Latest registered member is cached
1023 guests, 503 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017