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 27 Jun 2017 (Tuesday) 08:47
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Comparing Canon 24-70L 2.8 II sharpness with 50mm 1.8

 
Ascenta
Senior Member
Avatar
486 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 188
Joined Sep 2005
     
Jun 28, 2017 15:54 |  #16

I really want a 24-70 II, but the price is just scaring me away. Even the ebay listings are brutally competitive...not worth it IMO (after losing out on a few).




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
15,467 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 5506
Joined Sep 2007
     
Jun 28, 2017 16:44 |  #17

Ascenta wrote in post #18389173 (external link)
I really want a 24-70 II, but the price is just scaring me away. Even the ebay listings are brutally competitive...not worth it IMO (after losing out on a few).

the price reflects what people are willing to pay for it, it's not really all that outrageous. You can get it from the canon refurb store for like 1400 or so plus tax. THere are less expensive third party options, but considering the current prices for the sony and nikon equivalents.... they cost a whole lot more.


Sony A7rii/A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - CV 21/3.5 - FE 35/2.8 - SY 35/1.4 AF - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
johnf3f
Goldmember
Avatar
3,988 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 612
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Wales
     
Jun 28, 2017 17:44 as a reply to  @ Ascenta's post |  #18

Yes it is very expensive, nobody would deny that! The real question is "is it worth it"?

Personally I think it is. I came to the Canon 24-70 F2.8 L V2 from the 24-105 F4 L IS. My 24-105 was a nice one (early model) but once I tried the 24-70 V2 it was just a question of saving! We are all different and have different needs/budgets etc. For me it was a great upgrade but only you can decide if it is sufficiently better than your current kit to justify the price.

Happy pondering!


Life is for living, cameras are to capture it (one day I will learn how!).

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CheshireCat
Goldmember
Avatar
2,303 posts
Likes: 405
Joined Oct 2008
Location: *** vanished ***
     
Jun 28, 2017 20:18 |  #19

Alveric wrote in post #18389161 (external link)
Besides, who's gonna be pixel peeping anyway? (Other than the photographer himself, that is.)

Never underestimate pixel-level sharpness.
Being able to crop generously for perfect framing is quite important, especially with primes.


1Dx, 5D2 and some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CheshireCat
Goldmember
Avatar
2,303 posts
Likes: 405
Joined Oct 2008
Location: *** vanished ***
     
Jun 28, 2017 20:43 |  #20

Wilt wrote in post #18389003 (external link)
Don't waste your time...lab tests can test to far greater precision the MTF scores of lenses than any homemade testing. Read lens tests on photozone.de instead, they have tested both lenses on 21MP FF body. In short, they find the two lenses to be quite comparable in MTF.

Lab tests are just measuring lens optical performance on a black&white chart, on a single 2D plane, at chart distance.
They cannot replace properly executed tests on real subjects (e.g. landscape at infinity).
Photozone often tests also longitudinal chromatic aberration, which tells a bit more about optical performance, but still is not enough to assess the overall quality of a lens on real subjects.

Also, let's not forget about AF performance, color rendering quality, coating performance, reliability, and several other parameters which make the difference when shooting in the field.

There is more than one reason why we don't often see pro photographers using a 50/1.8, despite the good score it gets on lab test sites.


1Dx, 5D2 and some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CheshireCat
Goldmember
Avatar
2,303 posts
Likes: 405
Joined Oct 2008
Location: *** vanished ***
     
Jun 28, 2017 20:45 |  #21

Ascenta wrote in post #18389173 (external link)
I really want a 24-70 II, but the price is just scaring me away. Even the ebay listings are brutally competitive...not worth it IMO (after losing out on a few).

Well, you usually get what you pay for.


1Dx, 5D2 and some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
15,467 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 5506
Joined Sep 2007
     
Jun 28, 2017 20:52 |  #22

CheshireCat wrote in post #18389366 (external link)
Lab tests are just measuring lens optical performance on a black&white chart, on a single 2D plane, at chart distance.
They cannot replace properly executed tests on real subjects (e.g. landscape at infinity).
Photozone often tests also longitudinal chromatic aberration, which tells a bit more about optical performance, but still is not enough to assess the overall quality of a lens on real subjects.

Also, let's not forget about AF performance, color rendering quality, coating performance, reliability, and several other parameters which make the difference when shooting in the field.

There is more than one reason why we don't often see pro photographers using a 50/1.8, despite the good score it gets on lab test sites.

well, historically, the 50 f1.8 has had the most horrific AF known to man. People generally like the 85 f1.8, which isnt a whole lot better optically, but generally well respected for any type of photography.


Sony A7rii/A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - CV 21/3.5 - FE 35/2.8 - SY 35/1.4 AF - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CheshireCat
Goldmember
Avatar
2,303 posts
Likes: 405
Joined Oct 2008
Location: *** vanished ***
Post edited over 1 year ago by CheshireCat. (2 edits in all)
     
Jun 28, 2017 21:03 |  #23

Charlie wrote in post #18389374 (external link)
well, historically, the 50 f1.8 has had the most horrific AF known to man. People generally like the 85 f1.8, which isnt a whole lot better optically, but generally well respected for any type of photography.

Agreed.

In find the 85/1.8 a nice lens for the price, if one can tolerate plenty of longitudinal CA (purple/green fringing) and mediocre color rendering (I cannot :)).

The new 50/1.8 STM should have improved AF performance quite a bit. Though it still remains a cheap 50 for more than one reason.


1Dx, 5D2 and some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Arutemu
Goldmember
Avatar
2,802 posts
Gallery: 141 photos
Best ofs: 5
Likes: 2155
Joined Feb 2011
Location: Columbus/Yokohama
     
Jul 03, 2017 05:19 |  #24

sgogula wrote in post #18388049 (external link)
I did a quick test with both 24-70L 2.8 and 50mm 1.8 using the same settings(1/320,2.8,ISO 6400, 5D Mark III).

I am surprised in two ways:

1) Happy to see $100 50mm 1.8 is as sharp as expensive 24-70L 2.8 II.
2) Happy that my 24-70L 2.8 is as sharp as prime lens.

I am no scientist or optical engineer, but your testing and conclusions seem flawed. At f/2.8 the 50mm f/1.8 prime is already stopped down, so it benefits from improved sharpness, while the 24-70 is wide open at its maximum capacity of f/2.8. These are not "the same settings".


住めば/external linkFlickrexternal link
GEAR / FEEDBACK

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CheshireCat
Goldmember
Avatar
2,303 posts
Likes: 405
Joined Oct 2008
Location: *** vanished ***
     
Jul 03, 2017 08:07 |  #25

Arutemu wrote in post #18393011 (external link)
I am no scientist or optical engineer, but your testing and conclusions seem flawed. At f/2.8 the 50mm f/1.8 prime is already stopped down, so it benefits from improved sharpness, while the 24-70 is wide open at its maximum capacity of f/2.8. These are not "the same settings".

They are the same settings.

The "stopped down" myth derives from the fact that a lens with a faster maximum aperture typically needs more exotic design and glass, stricter tolerances, and consequently higher costs.

But this case is different. We are comparing a very cheap 50/1.8 prime with an expensive professional 24-70/2.8 zoom.
The Canon 50/1.8 is far from an exotic design (it is actually a very simple lens), but optimizing for a single FL is easy.
A zoom with great performance at f/2.8 on the entire 24-70 range is much harder to design than a 50/1.8 prime.
Keep in mind that the much higher price for the zoom gives you much better color rendering, coating, build, AF, et cetera.

You get what you pay for ;)


1Dx, 5D2 and some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2731
Joined Oct 2015
     
Jul 03, 2017 10:28 |  #26

CheshireCat wrote in post #18393082 (external link)
They are the same settings.

The "stopped down" myth derives from the fact that a lens with a faster maximum aperture typically needs more exotic design and glass, stricter tolerances, and consequently higher costs.

But this case is different. We are comparing a very cheap 50/1.8 prime with an expensive professional 24-70/2.8 zoom.
The Canon 50/1.8 is far from an exotic design (it is actually a very simple lens), but optimizing for a single FL is easy.
A zoom with great performance at f/2.8 on the entire 24-70 range is much harder to design than a 50/1.8 prime.
Keep in mind that the much higher price for the zoom gives you much better color rendering, coating, build, AF, et cetera.

You get what you pay for ;)

I mostly agree with this post. My beef is with the term professional. I am sure some professionals use one or another of the 50 1.8 lenses. I am sure some soccer-moms and other snap-shooters like me use the 24-70II. Gear isn't professional, none of it, in any field of endeavor.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CheshireCat
Goldmember
Avatar
2,303 posts
Likes: 405
Joined Oct 2008
Location: *** vanished ***
     
Jul 03, 2017 21:18 |  #27

Bassat wrote in post #18393180 (external link)
I mostly agree with this post. My beef is with the term professional. I am sure some professionals use one or another of the 50 1.8 lenses. I am sure some soccer-moms and other snap-shooters like me use the 24-70II. Gear isn't professional, none of it, in any field of endeavor.

Fair enough.
You should let Canon know, then. Check their definition of "L-lenses" here:
http://software.canon-europe.com …F_Lens_Work_Boo​k_2_EN.pdf (external link)

;)


1Dx, 5D2 and some lenses

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2731
Joined Oct 2015
     
Jul 03, 2017 21:35 |  #28

CheshireCat wrote in post #18393671 (external link)
Fair enough.
You should let Canon know, then. Check their definition of "L-lenses" here:
http://software.canon-europe.com …F_Lens_Work_Boo​k_2_EN.pdf (external link)

;)


Nice article. But it is not my fault that Canon doesn't know the definition of 'professional', either. If I take a photo and sell it, I am by definition, a professional; I got paid for my work. The lens used to make that photo is still just a lens. It is not a professional, be it a 50 II, or be it an EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS USM II. It is still just a lens.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
davesrose
Title Fairy still hasn't visited me!
3,614 posts
Likes: 489
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Atlanta, GA
     
Jul 04, 2017 10:11 |  #29

Bassat wrote in post #18393682 (external link)
Nice article. But it is not my fault that Canon doesn't know the definition of 'professional', either. If I take a photo and sell it, I am by definition, a professional; I got paid for my work. The lens used to make that photo is still just a lens. It is not a professional, be it a 50 II, or be it an EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS USM II. It is still just a lens.

I think Canon is adhering to the accepted term for "professional equipment". Photography is no different then other professions which do have specialized equipment for a certain segment. This equipment has lower demand, doesn't have as many units produced, and needs greater support. In the 6D2 thread, you also insinuated that Canon is just making up a price point, and it's not reflective of the R&D. There is economic and marketing reasons to have tiers of consumer/prosumer/prof​essional segments. Lower priced cameras have more demand, are cheaper to produce in large quantities, and therefore are sold in greater units. Expensive "professional" grade equipment has higher standards, requires more R&D, often requires targeted support....and therefore needs a higher price with less units sold.

While there are "professional" photographers out there that are shooting with a cell phone's camera, there's a greater majority that are shooting with "professional" grade equipment. My own profession in computer graphics is similar. I have bought specialized "workstation" grade hardware to be able to have stable and optimal performance in my 3D rendering in Maya, as well as compositing in Adobe AfterEffects. I could make do with a Nvidia GForce card, which is substantially cheaper then an Nvidia Quadro card, but I've always found limitations and obstacles with the GForce and Maya. Quadro cards are more expensive because they have passed certifications for full software support with 3D applications. The same is with processors: it's the graphics professional that is in more need of multiprocessor Xeon then the typical home user. It's the server application or data visualization that's in more need for ECC memory. So there's a reason for the manufacturer to charge more for "professional grade", and there's a reason for the "professional" to buy it. Also, if it's your livelihood, your equipment and software purchases are tax deductions too!


Canon 5D mk IV
EF 135mm 2.0L, EF 70-200mm 2.8L IS II, EF 24-70 2.8L II, EF 50mm 1.4, EF 100mm 2.8L Macro, EF 16-35mm 4L IS, Sigma 150-600mm C, 580EX, 600EX-RT, MeFoto Globetrotter tripod, grips, Black Rapid RS-7, CAMS plate and strap system, Lowepro Flipside 500 AW, and a few other things...
smugmug (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bassat
"I am still in my underwear."
8,075 posts
Likes: 2731
Joined Oct 2015
     
Jul 04, 2017 10:13 |  #30

I accept the term 'professional grade', which is easily truncated to 'professional'. I just like to nit-pick the snot of usage in the English language. Way too many native English speakers don't.




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

6,008 views & 12 likes for this thread
Comparing Canon 24-70L 2.8 II sharpness with 50mm 1.8
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 MJVSR
551 guests, 373 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.