Guess the lens

Well, from previous posts I have been having an issue with the sharpness of images - so I went to the shop this afternoon and we tried a few lenses on different bodys

Lenses are
Canon 24-105L f4
Canon 18-200
Canon 50 F1.8
Canon 100L 2.8
Tamron 24-70 2.8

And so I went to the shop with another £500 for the 24-105L lens and give back my 18-200 and 50F2.5

as i took a load of images - I just wondered what members thought of the different images and if they could tell which was which straight away

i have cropped to show roughly the same area - and tried to use the same exposure
F8 at 200ISO
all single shot focus - centre focus point

I used DPP to resize to 1000 pixels and the CS3 to save for web 50%quality to reduce files size and strip the EXIF

and in in the replies
this post
dpp_001a
dpp_002a

post #2
dpp_003a
dpp_004a

post #3
dpp_005a

post #2
dpp_003a
dpp_004a

post #3
dpp_005a

just for fun...and not based on really anything ...i'd say

1- 24-70mm
2- 50mm
3- 18-200mm
4- 24-105L
5- 100L

i'll be surprised if i get 1 right

Pointless.

Aside from focal length, all the shots look virtually identical in the samples you posted.

At F8, I would expect all lens to be sharp...even the cheap ones.

I think it's fair to say that that post 2 is shot with a 24-70... as you can see the barrel distortion pattern located near the...hahaha. I Agree with others, what was the intended point here? The only differences at web res would be really minor differences in sharpness, minor color, and distortion.

thats interesting -so where would the difference be seen then , I thought at 100% crop of pixels to meet the forum rules - it would see a difference between the lenses

I'm clearly new to all this - and if pointless - then how would you tell/see the quality of the lenses ?

really interested now in when you would see the difference -the most i would ever printout would be *8x6" /7"x5" and 6"x4" on a dyesub printer - or maybe send 1 or2 away

Based on this thread, and your other threads, I think you're expecting too much out of your lenses. Shoot more, measurebate less.

The quality of the lens can definitely be seen when looking at larger images. Especially when using a larger aperture. The difference is going to be much smaller when shooting at smaller apertures, probably F8 and above.

As far as prints are concerned I'm not entirely sure. My prints have all been larger than 8x6 but I have noticed a difference between large prints shot with my old 70-300mm and my newer 70-200L (when shooting similar subjects and similar focal distance).

It's possible to notice some difference I suppose even in these web resolution images but it's extremely small, slight color variation, and really minor sharpness differences (at least to my eye).

There are many different reasons to use L glass be it build quality, sharpness, color/contrast, focusing speed. But it really depends on the specific lens and the differences between it and other similar lenses. For example, there are 3 canon 50mm lenses. The 1.8 mk II has great image quality for the cost but the build quality is all plastic. The 1.4 has better bokeh and if I remember right it's a little sharper, and it has a metal mount. The 1.2 is WAY more expensive but has the best build quality, has 77mm filter threads, has f1.2 :P, and really nice creamy bokeh.

Comparing web resolution images isn't really a great test of the lenses which is why the test seems pointless. It's best to try all of the lenses yourself and fine what works really well for you. So many great images have been taken on really affordable equipment so it all comes down to what makes you happy and gives you the results you're after.

etaf wrote in post #14584021
I'm clearly new to all this - and if pointless - then how would you tell/see the quality of the lenses ?

shooting them wide open...if you're always going to be stopped down to f8 then there's no point to really get an f2.8 lens...that said even at f8 there probably is a difference between lenses, but is it really going to be that noticeable? maybe not...

so what pic was taken with which lens...since i guess i'm the only one that was up for a little fun, and everyone else is boring...

dpp_001a 24-105L f4
dpp_002a 18-200
dpp_003a 50 F1.8
dpp_004a 100L 2.8
dpp_005a tamron 24-70 2.8

etaf wrote in post #14584021
...I'm clearly new to all this...

Ummm...really? How so?
You joined the forum in 2005 and have made over 1100 posts.
That's hardly "clearly new to all this"

Not new to photography, New to the DSLR technology

I joined after having used an EOS5 and 600 film camera
and kit lens plus 135 & 50mm prime (all now sold)
and used a nikon scanner to get onto the web
took quite a few weddings, portraits, animals etc
then moved to a compact the PRO1 canon camera with L lens - but limited in what it could do
so 5 weeks ago purchased a
60D, tamron 18-270 and 50 2.5 macro

my first move into DSLR

The tamron had a focus fault
the 60D also had a focus fault - both replaced by shop - and canon repaired , as i used it today

currently
60D - 18-200 canon 50mm 2.5
and thought a 24-105L would be the way to go and produce cracking results - as seen on some of the images here on the forum - tack sharp

hope that helps a little as to what i meant as "clearly new to all this"

for someone that is new to the digital photography aspect...i think you should look into post processing just a tad bit...nothing crazy, just a little boost in contrast here and there, maybe some levels adjustments...the thing i felt with some of your other shots was a lack in some contrast, which is an easy fix...and i'm sure a lot of the 'cracking' shots you see around here have gone thru photoshop of some sort...