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 15 Mar 2012 (Thursday) 07:57
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Why lenses for full frame wider than 50 mm are not that good?

 
pixel_junkie
Goldmember
Avatar
2,008 posts
Likes: 143
Joined May 2007
Location: Southern California
     
Mar 16, 2012 08:41 |  #46

paparios wrote in post #14090342 (external link)
I have also used the Canon 50mm f1.2L on my 5D MKII and I can also confirm that at f1.2 that lens is not jaw dropping in quality.

Miguel

That's the thing, test charts don't show that the 50L comes with a split personality disorder :) It is capable of producing some of the most amazing images and it can be one of the most spectacular lenses in the entire CANON line but it'll show you that side of it whenever it pleases, not whenever YOU want :lol:


Website (external link) | Blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
sebr
Goldmember
Avatar
4,628 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Sweden/France
     
Mar 16, 2012 08:42 |  #47

I am with Mr. the Kid on that one. An apparent weakness may not have any visible IQ impact real-life images. Wide open corner sharpness should not be the most important consideration when assessing the performance of a lens like the 35L because you will probably not need sharp corners when shooting a subject at f/1.4.


Sebastien
5D mkIII ; 17-40L ; 24-105L ; 70-200L II ; 70-300L ; 35L ; Σ85/1.4 ; 135L ; 100macro ; Kenko 1.4x ; 2x mkIII ; 580EXII
M5 ; M1 ; 11-22 ; 18-150 ; 22/2.0 ; EF adapter; Manfrotto LED
Benron Tripod; ThinkTank, Lowepro and Crumpler bags; Fjällräven backpack

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
paparios
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
500 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Oct 2007
     
Mar 16, 2012 08:56 |  #48

Billginthekeys wrote in post #14096419 (external link)
People are trying to explain to you that though under a perfect set of conditions isolating only one part of a lens' performance it may appear to have "weaknesses," in the real world most of the time you either won't be using the lens under conditions for those weaknesses to appear, and even if you are the likelyhood that they will actually be a detriment to a REAL image (not a picture of a printed out piece of paper), is almost impossible on any lens of the caliber you are talking about; say the 35L.
You insist that the corner sharpness of the 35L at F1.4 is a detriment to the lens, correct? Why? At F1.4 you will have a very thin depth of field, isolating one subject, and the rest of the image will melt into a creamy bokeh. Boken is by definition not sharp, not in focus, the opposite of sharp. Unless you have a habit of framing your subjects in the extreme corners of your focal plane (and then subjecting them to distortion, vignetting, ect.) the corners of the shot will be completely smooth at F1.4. So how can a unsharp area not being as sharp as other unsharp areas be bad? It just doesn't make sense. That, as we are trying to tell you, is one of the many differences between a test chart and the real world.

That is not to say test charts are worthless. Lets say I have a 70-200 2.8 IS and a 2X II TC, and I think the results are just "okay," and I want to see if there is a notable improvement in image quality by purchasing a 70-200 2.8 IS version 2 and a 2X TC III. I can go, bring up the comparison, and see if the change in results looks substantial enough for me to go out and drop an extra thousand dollars on that trade. Again, that is one example in my book where a test chart would be useful.

I am not here to insult you personally, but if you claim to have been a photographer for 28 years, how did you buy equipment for you gear before the internet and test charts? Did you ever with your film equipment draw lines on a piece of paper, take pictures of them with different lenses, then examine the results under a microscope to make vague and questionably important notes about the results of those tests? I am betting you didn't, in fact I am betting that sounds silly, but yet that is exactly what these review sites do now, simply because they can.

You keep saying "exceptional prices but not exceptional quality for the price." But you keep fixating on only ONE aspect of the lens, wide open corner sharpness performance. If that is truly the most important thing to you, and you don't mind not having autofocus, by all means go save the money and buy the Samyang. Ohh, and if you are willing to pay "exceptional prices" if you are getting "exceptional quality" and you are willing to live without AF, look at the results from Canon's newest wide angle TS-E lenses.

Well, I think several of you have got my OP in the wrong perspective and others have got it right. I'm not in any way trying to pontificate about this because I'm not a pro photographer nor I teach photography nor I live from photography. When I want to buy a camera or lens, I first try to get all the information about the devices, including tests and users opinions. Because of my location, I have to be very careful, since for me it is very difficult to try lenses and then return them to try another. All the lenses and cameras in my signature, besides the 18-55 kit lens, have been selected in this way and I'm very happy with my current bag. When looking for a fast wide angle lens for my 5DMKII (at f1.4) I'm considering taking pictures of groups of people (at family meetings), where the lighting is poor and you are forced to use ISO3200 or higher to get the job done. Of course I can use a tripod and/or a flash and get my pictures with a f4 lens (such as my 70-200). A 24 or 35mm prime at f1.4 on the 5DMK2 would nicely serve that objective. I have no problem in using manual focus, since in the film days that was the only way of taking pictures. Now on that wide angle lens I'm looking for the best quality and, for sure, that includes both the 24L and 35L at a considerable price. Those lenses are mechanically excellent and the optics are also excellent at the center. The only problem of those lenses is that the edges are not at the same level. It is true that DOF can mask some of these weaknesses, but in my intended use they could be a problem. Tests and users opinions on the Samyang 35 f1.4 indicate that this lens can be a good optical alternative to the Canons, while lacking a lot of features the 24L and 35L have.

The lenstip review conclusion of the Samyang is quite revealing about this:

"In this summary you can write just one thing: aces of the photographical market, it’s high time you got down to work seriously! If Samyang is able to launch a 540$ lens which, when it comes to the image quality, is only slightly worse than the Canon 35L, which can compete on equal terms with the Nikkor 1.4/35G and leaves far behind the Sony 1.4/35G; if such a lens is able to correct the lateral chromatic aberration, coma and vignetting the best of all instruments in this group and it is not worse when it comes to the distortion and astigmatism correction, what else could be said here?"

Miguel


Canon 5D MKII, Sony A7, Canon EOS M, Canon 7D, Sony A6000, Canon 50d with grip, Canon 400D with grip, Bower 14 f2.8, Bower 35 f1.4, EF 40 f2.8, Tokina 12-24 f4, EFM-22 f2 STM, EFM 18-55 f3.5-5.6 IS STM, EFS 18-55 f3.5-5.6, Tamron 28-75 f2.8, EF 85 f1.8, EF 100 f2.8L IS, EF 70-200 f4L IS, EF 75-300 f4-5.6, Sigma 150-500 f5-6.3, Sony E 16-50, Sony FE 28-70

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
plasticmotif
Goldmember
Avatar
3,174 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Tennessee
     
Mar 16, 2012 09:01 |  #49

Photozone quoting half-wits...hah.

OP has a point, but he can't quite make it correctly.

Lenses are easier to design optically and mechanically in the mid and telephoto and super telephoto range. That being said, there are fantastic lenses all around up to about 24mm on full frame even for cheap prices. Wider than 24 on full frame you cannot get 'exceptional' quality without spending a good chuck of change.

Photozone is a horrible lens review website. Don't go there.

SLR gear and real pictures are the only thing I need to judge a lens.


Mac P.
My Zenfolio (external link) My Photo Blog (external link) My Equipment
https://photography-on-the.net …p?p=14172975#po​st14172975

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CanonCleGuy
Senior Member
680 posts
Joined Oct 2011
     
Mar 16, 2012 09:37 |  #50
bannedPermanent ban

Don't come to a conclusion based on 1 or 2 online reviews especially when many people on this board(several of them are pros) suggest otherwise.

I say don't judge the performance and IQ(as a matter of fact any quality of an item) of a lens unless you used it or have seen it first hand. Sometimes you get a bad copy so I would say unless you used a good copy or tried several copies.

Sentences like these make me chuckle. You never used one and are writing a review on Canon line of wide angle lenses.

Now on that wide angle lens I'm looking for the best quality and, for sure, that includes both the 24L and 35L at a considerable price. Those lenses are mechanically excellent and the optics are also excellent at the center. The only problem of those lenses is that the edges are not at the same level.

Btw, I have a 35L which is super sharp. So I know what I am talking about. Please lets not take price into consideration. Canon lenses are better than almost of its third party counter parts (some exceptions like a good copy Sigma 50mm 1.4 is better than Canon 1.4).

P.S: I somewhere read your comment on 50L. At 1.2 50L is not about the IQ (although many of the copies are super sharp at 1.2). Its about the bokeh and feel that this lens produces. Its simply uncomparable.


5D Mark 3 | 7D + BG-E7 | 60D (Wife)
70-200 II L | 50 L | 100mm L | 17-40 L | 24-105 L | 2X III | 28-135 (Wife) Wishlist: BG-E11 + 24-70 L, 24-70 II L , 1DX :shock:
600 EX-RT | 430 EX II | Manfrotto tripod + head | Lowepro

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
paparios
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
500 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Oct 2007
     
Mar 16, 2012 09:51 |  #51

CanonCleGuy wrote in post #14096752 (external link)
Don't come to a conclusion based on 1 or 2 online reviews especially when many people on this board(several of them are pros) suggest otherwise.

I say don't judge the performance and IQ(as a matter of fact any quality of an item) of a lens unless you used it or have seen it first hand. Sometimes you get a bad copy so I would say unless you used a good copy or tried several copies.

Sentences like these make me chuckle. You never used one and are writing a review on Canon line of wide angle lenses.


Btw, I have a 35L which is super sharp. So I know what I am talking about. Please lets not take price into consideration. Canon lenses are better than almost of its third party counter parts (some exceptions like a good copy Sigma 50mm 1.4 is better than Canon 1.4).

P.S: I somewhere read your comment on 50L. At 1.2 50L is not about the IQ (although many of the copies are super sharp at 1.2). Its about the bokeh and feel that this lens produces. Its simply uncomparable.

Thank you for your advice. I notice that you do not yet have the 50L but you find it "uncomparable" while, at the same time, critic my "review" of the Canon line.

You could help me and others by stating, for instance, how you got to define that the 35L was better for you than alternative lenses. Was it after some friends advice you or by trying the lens at a shop?

Miguel

PS: Here are a couple of my experience with the 50L, taken with the 5DMKII


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Canon 5D MKII, Sony A7, Canon EOS M, Canon 7D, Sony A6000, Canon 50d with grip, Canon 400D with grip, Bower 14 f2.8, Bower 35 f1.4, EF 40 f2.8, Tokina 12-24 f4, EFM-22 f2 STM, EFM 18-55 f3.5-5.6 IS STM, EFS 18-55 f3.5-5.6, Tamron 28-75 f2.8, EF 85 f1.8, EF 100 f2.8L IS, EF 70-200 f4L IS, EF 75-300 f4-5.6, Sigma 150-500 f5-6.3, Sony E 16-50, Sony FE 28-70

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CanonCleGuy
Senior Member
680 posts
Joined Oct 2011
     
Mar 16, 2012 09:58 |  #52
bannedPermanent ban

paparios wrote in post #14096833 (external link)
Thank you for your advice. I notice that you do not yet have the 50L but you find it "uncomparable" while, at the same time, critic my "review" of the Canon line.

You could help me and others by stating, for instance, how you got to define that the 35L was better for you than alternative lenses. Was it after some friends advice you or by trying the lens at a shop?

Miguel

Let me start by saying I had 50L (look in sample photos thread). I sold it just to buy 85L II. As a matter of fact I traded it for 85L. My next lens purchase would be 50mm period.

And about buying my 35L, I looked through each and every sample in this forum related to 35L. Paid reviewers take around 1-2 hours to review a lens. But people on this people owned it for a certain period of time and most of them are honest unbiased posts(experiences). I also tried 35L at a local shop and then bought 35L. The main reason why any of the non-Canon lenses seem superior to similar ones is because of the price. But as I said I am not taking price into consideration. I still say 35L is superior to ALL of the cheaper 35mm alternatives.


5D Mark 3 | 7D + BG-E7 | 60D (Wife)
70-200 II L | 50 L | 100mm L | 17-40 L | 24-105 L | 2X III | 28-135 (Wife) Wishlist: BG-E11 + 24-70 L, 24-70 II L , 1DX :shock:
600 EX-RT | 430 EX II | Manfrotto tripod + head | Lowepro

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Numenorean
Cream of the Crop
5,013 posts
Likes: 28
Joined Feb 2011
     
Mar 16, 2012 12:19 |  #53

paparios wrote in post #14096212 (external link)
OK professor, fair enough. You are right and dead on. All these review sites serve no purpose at all. So could you teach us how did you get and use your Nikon 35 f1.4 and Takumar 50 f1.4 on your 5D? How is the AF of those lenses doing?

Miguel

The reviews YOU are looking at don't really serve much purpose other than for pixel peepers. As I said, they need to go and take some pictures.

Try looking at The Digital Picture. Much better reviews of lenses IMO. Some real world comments there, not test charts and BS about coma and crap.


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RaZe42
Senior Member
Avatar
518 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Feb 2010
Location: Finland
     
Mar 16, 2012 16:06 |  #54

FYI coma is very important to some people, namely astrophotographers. They need speed to reduce star streaking but unfortunately fast designs usually come with coma. Just look at the 24L.


Gear: Canon 5D Mk II | Olympus 21/3.5 | Zeiss Distagon 35/2 | Sigma 50/1.4 ASPH | Samyang 85/1.4 ASPH | Canon 100/2.8 L Macro
My modest Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
krb
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,818 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Where southern efficiency and northern charm come together
     
Mar 16, 2012 16:13 |  #55

pkilla wrote in post #14090858 (external link)
So how does the rockinon 35mm compare with the 35l

rockinon is samyang, and info about the samyang has already been provided.


-- Ken
Comment and critique is always appreciated!
Flickr (external link)
Gear list

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Numenorean
Cream of the Crop
5,013 posts
Likes: 28
Joined Feb 2011
     
Mar 16, 2012 16:17 |  #56

RaZe42 wrote in post #14099065 (external link)
FYI coma is very important to some people, namely astrophotographers. They need speed to reduce star streaking but unfortunately fast designs usually come with coma. Just look at the 24L.

Fair point. I don't do astrophotography though, so I couldn't think of any reason why it would affect my images.


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
WhyFi
Goldmember
Avatar
2,773 posts
Gallery: 245 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 838
Joined Apr 2008
Location: I got a castle in Brooklyn, that's where I dwell.
     
Mar 16, 2012 20:37 |  #57

paparios wrote in post #14096252 (external link)
And that "experience" was obtained how?

Uh, from having shot thousands of pics with a 5D/35L combo and from having shot thousands of pics with fully manual adapted lenses, like the Nikkor 35/1.4, Taku 50/1.4, Zeiss 50/1.7, etc. And if you think that your experience with MFing a 14mm lens is going to prepare you for something twice as long and four times faster, you've got another thing coming.

paparios wrote in post #14096252 (external link)
My "experience" come from having shooting manual film cameras (Canon AE1-program, Canon T70 and Canon EOS630) for 28 years before buying my first DSLR in 2007. Of course I'm still learning.

Uhhh, yeah. Other than focusing (on the AE 1 and T70), these are not much more manual than current digital bodies. In any event, your 28 years doesn't seem to amount to much, judging from your questions, statements and penchant for leaning on irrelevant review data.


Bill is my name - I'm the most wanted man on my island, except I'm not on my island, of course. More's the pity.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ChrisSearle
Senior Member
Avatar
352 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Nov 2007
Location: My time is divided between Totnes, UK, Mumbai, India and The Ardeche region of Southern France..
     
Sep 17, 2012 00:51 |  #58

CZ Distagon 21mm


Chris:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jeaunse23/ (external link)
5D Mk iii, 1D MkiiN, 1Ds Mkii. Zeiss 21 mm Distagon, Canon 24-105 L. Sigma 150 Macro. Canon 400 L. Sigma 50 Nikkor 24 mm 1.4 Ricoh GRD3 Canon G1X Fuji X100,Sigma DP2M and a bunch of other stuff.

My Sigma DP2M blog at:http://chrissearlesdp2​m.blogspot.in/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Canonswhitelensesrule
Goldmember
Avatar
3,648 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Surrey, B.C.
     
Sep 17, 2012 07:33 |  #59

The Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 ain't too shabby of a lens either.

Just check the sample photos in the lens sample thread for proof.


Photographers do it in 1/1,000th of a second...but the memory lasts forever! ;)
"It's only cheating if you get caught!" - Al Bundy
People who THINK they know it all really annoy those of us who DO!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
smorter
Goldmember
Avatar
4,506 posts
Likes: 19
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Sep 17, 2012 07:44 |  #60

pixel_junkie wrote in post #14096486 (external link)
That's the thing, test charts don't show that the 50L comes with a split personality disorder :) It is capable of producing some of the most amazing images and it can be one of the most spectacular lenses in the entire CANON line but it'll show you that side of it whenever it pleases, not whenever YOU want :lol:

+1

50L is one of the worst L lenses in reputation wise but one of the best "in practice"


Wedding Photography Melbourneexternal link
Reviews: 85LII

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

9,475 views & 0 likes for this thread
Why lenses for full frame wider than 50 mm are not that good?
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 mahadmalik
690 guests, 316 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.