Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
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 16 May 2010 (Sunday) 12:30
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

(Sharper) alternatives to 24-70L

 
DetlevCM
Goldmember
Avatar
3,431 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 20
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Europe
     
May 16, 2010 15:17 |  #31

toxic wrote in post #10191256 (external link)
Except you don't need a 100% return to get maximum sharpness. If a lens reaches peak resolution at f/8, it will peak at f/8 whether it's mounted on a 4MP or 40MP camera.

In any case, the variance in resolution from f/5.6 to f/11 on a 24-70 is negligible and likely not noticeable in actual use.

Well, but an aperture smaller than the DLA cannot give you the peak sharpness.
Unless the difference in the lens' sharpness is quite large.

But assume your lens has its peak sharpness at f8.0
Then shooting at anything above that can be be worse or be equal - agreed? - now if your sensor has a DLA of f9,3 shooting with anything above 9,3 would be worse - and the OP used f11, as he stated, in his test image - hence he couldn't in any way get the peak result.

Or am I missing something?
And the way I understand the OP he want to know how sharp it can get - as it doesn't seem sharp enough to him.


5D MK II AF Satisfaction Poll | Reduced Kit List
A Basic Guide to Photographyexternal link | Websiteexternal link
Flickrexternal link | Artflakesexternal link | Blurbexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
DetlevCM
Goldmember
Avatar
3,431 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 20
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Europe
     
May 16, 2010 15:18 |  #32

Naturalist wrote in post #10191271 (external link)
Nadger, I'd like to see an uncropped sample image with data showing camera settings and, also, can you tell us if you had any filters over the lens?

Many claims of unsharp lenses are the result of improper technique or using low cost accessories.

The image the OP linked to is uncropped.


5D MK II AF Satisfaction Poll | Reduced Kit List
A Basic Guide to Photographyexternal link | Websiteexternal link
Flickrexternal link | Artflakesexternal link | Blurbexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TRune
Senior Member
308 posts
Joined Dec 2009
     
May 16, 2010 15:28 |  #33

nadger wrote in post #10190952 (external link)
Michael

Here's one test image. Shot tripod-mounted, mirror locked up, self-timer released, F11, RAW. Settings in DPP on default (sharpening setting 3). Focus point is on the gravel just left of the corner of the brickwork. 100% view it's not remotely sharp (anywhere) in my view.
Cheers

http://a5.vox.com …c9860b0137a5824​0bd860d-pi (external link)

I have the same experience as nadger. My copy of the 24-70L made the same kind of unsharp, no-focus-anywhere shots, and I sold it. What you see has nothing - nothing - to do with small aperture diffraction. Diffraction only affects the contrast level, not the focus of a picture.

Sharp wide angel lens for the 5DII: I got the 35L. It is a great lens, with a slightly better optical quality than the 24L. My favorite lens is the 85L. It is so sharp that you can cut yourself on it. Some samples on www.bentivi.dk (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jj_glos
Goldmember
Avatar
1,938 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 163
Joined Nov 2009
Location: Gloucester UK
     
May 16, 2010 16:04 |  #34

TRune wrote in post #10191333 (external link)
I have the same experience as nadger. My copy of the 24-70L made the same kind of unsharp, no-focus-anywhere shots, and I sold it. What you see has nothing - nothing - to do with small aperture diffraction. Diffraction only affects the contrast level, not the focus of a picture.

Sharp wide angel lens for the 5DII: I got the 35L. It is a great lens, with a slightly better optical quality than the 24L. My favorite lens is the 85L. It is so sharp that you can cut yourself on it. Some samples on www.bentivi.dk (external link)

Distraction does effect the sharpness of a capture. Good explanation here http://www.kenrockwell​.com/tech/diffraction.​htm (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FuturamaJSP
Goldmember
Avatar
2,227 posts
Likes: 81
Joined Oct 2009
     
May 16, 2010 18:50 |  #35

jj_glos wrote in post #10191501 (external link)
Distraction does effect the sharpness of a capture. Good explanation here http://www.kenrockwell​.com/tech/diffraction.​htm (external link)

lmfao! Ken Rockwell again!

well might as well post more poop by that guy:
http://www.kenrockwell​.com/nikon/24-70mm.htm (external link)

It's sharper than Canon so maybe you should just switch to Nikon


They asked me how well I understood theoretical physics. I said I had a theoretical degree in physics. They said welcome aboard! - Fallout New Vegas
blah blah blah
DA (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jj_glos
Goldmember
Avatar
1,938 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 163
Joined Nov 2009
Location: Gloucester UK
     
May 16, 2010 19:03 |  #36

FuturamaJSP wrote in post #10192170 (external link)
lmfao! Ken Rockwell again!

well might as well post more poop by that guy:
http://www.kenrockwell​.com/nikon/24-70mm.htm (external link)

It's sharper than Canon so maybe you should just switch to Nikon

You're not a fan then? :D

It's still a good article on diffraction though, putting aside any dislike of the author?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
District_History_Fan
Goldmember
2,286 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2008
     
May 16, 2010 19:32 |  #37

nadger wrote in post #10190597 (external link)
Hi all, I'm new here, so HELLO.

I'm looking to upgrade from my 400D/rebel to a 5DII but to spread the cost, I bought the lens first - 24-70L. I was expecting to be blown away by its sharpness but I was very disappointed and returned it. I have another copy now but it's no better. So. I've lost faith in this option and and now considering going for primes instead. The 100mm Macro will be first on the list but I would appreciate your ideas on a a (very) sharp option for a wide angle. I'm not in the market for a £1K+ lens though, so would be prepared to go for a third-party lens - as long as it's sharp. I shoot stock, so images have to sharp at 100% view.

Many thanks
N

Send your 24-70L to Canon for a tune up. Once dialed in, it is an awesome lens.


www.ericmcferrin.smugm​ug.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
toxic
Goldmember
3,498 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Nov 2008
Location: California
     
May 16, 2010 21:15 |  #38

DetlevCM wrote in post #10191275 (external link)
Well, but an aperture smaller than the DLA cannot give you the peak sharpness.
Unless the difference in the lens' sharpness is quite large.

The DLA is just the aperture at which diffraction effects start to affect resolution. Instead of getting 100% from your lens/sensor combination, you get 99%.

If a lens peaks at f/11 (in real-world use), it will peak at f/11 regardless of the camera's DLA. Maybe you won't get its maximum theoretical resolution, but having a DLA of f/1 doesn't mean its peak resolution on that camera is at f/1 or f/4 or f/8. It's still f/11. If anything, higher megapixels will increase the f-stop where you get maximum resolution by "burning through" the diffraction. You can read the post I linked to earlier for details.

The 24-70 peaks at about f/5.6 or f/8. By f/11, its resolution has deteriorated somewhat, but its not like a night-and-day difference from f/5.6. If the OP is unsatisfied with the 24-70's performance at 50mm (where it is performing near optimally), then 1) there is something wrong with the lens or camera, or 2) the OP has unrealistic expectations.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wem
Senior Member
783 posts
Joined Aug 2008
     
May 17, 2010 09:50 |  #39

ed rader wrote in post #10190893 (external link)
annie leibovitz used the 24-70L to shoot queen elizabeth.

http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=_LAY3qWFC8Y (external link)

ed rader

Very nice to watch. Thanks, Ed!


-
My gear list
My flickr (external link) page
wimvangestel.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
neil_r
Cream of the Proverbial Crop
Landscape and Cityscape Photographer 2006
Avatar
18,065 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jan 2003
Location: The middle of the UK
     
May 17, 2010 09:55 |  #40

ed rader wrote in post #10190893 (external link)
annie leibovitz used the 24-70L to shoot queen elizabeth.

http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=_LAY3qWFC8Y (external link)

ed rader


C'mon, the Queen is pushing 85 years old, that last thing she wants is a sharp image :-)


Neil - © NHR Photography
Commercial Site (external link) - Video Site (external link) - Blog - (external link)Gear List There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs. ~ Ansel Adams

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
7,503 posts
Gallery: 126 photos
Likes: 1282
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
May 17, 2010 10:22 |  #41

OP, take some photos of human subjects. I always use eylelashes as a test subject. You can determine a soft image instantly instead of using pebbles as a test subjects.

Annie is shooting small apertures so she could have used a 24-105L or any other capable lens. I bet majority of those photos were shot stopped down .


5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 24LmkII | 85 mkII L | | 16-35L mkII | 24-70 f/2.8L mkii| 70-200 f/2.8 ISL mkII| 600EX-RT x2 | 580 EX II x2 | Einstein's
Fuji - gone
Sony 2 x A7iii w/ Sigma MC-11 adapter | GM16-35 f/2.8 | Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 | GM70-200 f/2.8 |Sigma Art 24 f/1.4 | Sigma ART 35 f/1.2 | FE85 f/1.8 | Sigma ART 105 f/1.4 | Godox V860iiS & V1S

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
HKGuns
Goldmember
Avatar
1,469 posts
Joined May 2008
     
May 17, 2010 11:36 |  #42

It is obviously a defective lens, camera or technique. There are plenty of sharp 24-70mm lenses out there and debating the sharpness, or not, of this lens is pointless. As suggested earlier, send it to Canon if you're sure it is the lens.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wask_
Senior Member
Avatar
297 posts
Joined Mar 2010
     
May 17, 2010 13:02 |  #43

I use the 24-70 on my 7d and its sharp as f*.


- 7D -
Σ 30 f/1.4 | 50 f/1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nadger
THREAD ­ STARTER
Hatchling
7 posts
Joined May 2010
     
May 17, 2010 13:19 |  #44

Naturalist wrote in post #10191271 (external link)
Nadger, I'd like to see an uncropped sample image with data showing camera settings and, also, can you tell us if you had any filters over the lens?

Many claims of unsharp lenses are the result of improper technique or using low cost accessories.

Naturalist, the image I linked to is uncropped and the data is viewable in DPP. No filters were used.

I've read a few forums now and it seems that quality control at Canon isn't what it should be and there are massive differences between copies of this lens. On that basis It's going right back to the supplier tomorrow.

Thanks everyone for your thoughts.
Nadge




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digitalh3lix
Member
157 posts
Joined Apr 2008
Location: Boston
     
May 17, 2010 14:01 |  #45

35L


Gear List

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

7,093 views & 0 likes for this thread
(Sharper) alternatives to 24-70L
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


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


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is proxyrdp
1261 guests, 232 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.