Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: CA with 24-105 a problem for slides?  (Read 2267 times)
FrankM
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


« on: February 13, 2006, 06:02:37 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,
I am new here and I hope you can help.
I am still a slide photographer (until there is no better possibility to show the pictures).
I used to have an old Eos 5 and upgraded recently to an used 1V. Apart of my 300/4 l I own a 28-105 3.5-4.5 which is not the best lens on the planet. Now I am looking for a new one in this range.
Nothing as easy as that: 24-105 L
Ive seen the MTF charts and read a lot of reviews. It seems to be the best lens in this category. But there are sometimes comments about the CA with that lens.
What are the problems caused by this CAs for me?
As a slide photographer I am not able to correct it.
The main thing is that canon seem to build new lenses always with the knowlege of the simply removable lens problems (with PS and Raw) and keep the eye on contrast and sharpness.

Should I better look for another lens with less CA? Which?
I would also buy primes but together not more expensive than the zoom.
The tele range is not the problem (85 1.8 or 100 macro) but what is a good wide angle prime lens?
Thanks
Logged
Sheldon N
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 808


« Reply #1 on: February 13, 2006, 11:07:32 AM »
ReplyReply

I just picked one up last week for use with my 20D, and am very happy with it. I don't think that CA will be a problem for you, that's something you probably wouldn't notice on your slides. CA complaints are a lot more prevalent nowadays because DSLR users take pictures of backlit tree branches and check them at 100% view for problems.

The main complaints I've seen with this lens are from full frame users that dislike the barrel distortion and vignetting. Some complaints of flare are also out there, but the majority of that problem was addressed by Canon.

I'd say that you'll be very happy with the lens, provided the barrel distortion and vignetting aren't a major sticking point for you. Regardless, it'll be worlds ahead of your 28-105 f/3.5-4.5. If the barrel distortion/vignetting are major issues, and you don't care about IS, then consider the 24-70mm f/2.8 L.

Hope this helps!

Sheldon
Logged

francois
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6874


« Reply #2 on: February 13, 2006, 02:23:00 PM »
ReplyReply

I've not encountered bad CA with FF bodies and the 24-105. On the other hand, distortion is present and very noticeable.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2006, 02:27:23 PM by francois » Logged

Francois
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6973


WWW
« Reply #3 on: February 13, 2006, 04:42:12 PM »
ReplyReply

I've taken about 2500 pictures with my Canon 1Ds and the 24~105 L, and I have not found any significant CA on the vast majority of those pictures, some taken in conditions where one would have expected it.

Nor have I had any major problem of vignetting.

It does display some distortion of straight lines when used in wide-angle mode. How much better or worse it is than any other wide angle lens at equivalent focal length I do not know. For those doing digital imaging this is VERY easily correctible in Camera Raw or in Photoshop using the Lens Correction tool.

I own one of the so-called defective lenses and did not change it because I didn't find it produces flare under most conditions (there are some conditions in which ANY lens will produce some flare), and my copy happens to be sharp as a tack.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad