Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Bad luck with Canon lenses?  (Read 17944 times)
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6945


WWW
« Reply #20 on: October 24, 2007, 09:22:56 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Yep, I have been using the ZD for about a year now. I am overall very happy about it. I posted this months ago already, but the image quality is plain outstanding up to ISO 100. Above, it remains usable up to 200, but I use it at ISO 50 95% of the time, the remaining 5% being ISO 100. I am a tripod guy anyway, so not a problem for me.

.............................


If any of these conditions is not met, then the 1ds3 will offer clear advantages.

Regards,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=148360\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Bernard, many thanks for this succinct and helpful assessment.
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
MarkKay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 587


WWW
« Reply #21 on: October 24, 2007, 10:02:50 AM »
ReplyReply

I tried two 16-35mm II lenses against my I.  The first I had was better at the corners at 16 -20mm but worse 24-35mm.  The differences were still there but less apparent by f8.  The second I had was all around worse. the only consistently better result with the II was CA.  I kept the version I.

Quote
This year I bought a 16-35mm F2.8 M2 to use it on a 1Ds2. I compared the files with the old M1. The old lens was much sharper then the new one. I got back to the shop and after testing 3 lenses the fourth was better than the old one.
I bought also the new 85F1.2 M2. This was immediately a little better then the 85mm F1.2M1
I also bought at the same time the 50mm F1.2. This was really shocking. This lens had a lot of CA. Even at f5.6 I went with the lens to Canon service. After the service the lens was much better but still the lens had at F5.6 more CA then all other (zoom) lenses I have, including the cheap Sigma 50mm macro.
I went back to the shop and after trying 4 lenses, the 5th was the best one. But at home I compared the lens again with other lenses I have and I am not happy, Still some CA at F5.6. At F1.4 the lens is in one corner not sharp at all.
I have no problems to spend even more money but is this bad luck that I attrack bad lenses? Is this problem going to be worse with the 1Ds3?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=148172\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8887


« Reply #22 on: October 24, 2007, 10:07:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Bernard, you are most probably correct about this. Those are the implications. But what about the idea of a price premium on the best samples? Some people would bite if the difference were reasonable, don't you think? You know, people who are willing to pay let us say 50 dollars per metre for the highest quality silk are not the same people who will pay no more than 10 dollars per metre for average quality silk. Perhaps the market can be differentiated this way - legitimately.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=148369\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I agree with this completely. We know it's not quite true that you always get what you pay for. Sometimes there are bargains and sometimes we get ripped off.

The idea of testing all lenses of a particular model then pricing them according to the results of those tests means simply that you get what you pay for.

Without such testing you're really into a lottery game. Perhaps most people prefer that. I don't. How do I test the performance of a 70-200/4 IS in the store in Bangkok? I suppose I could check its performance at 70mm and 105mm against the performance of my 24-105 IS zoom at 70 and 105mm, photographing empty lens boxes on shelves. If it's noticeably sharper, do I give it the thumbs up? What about performance at 200mm? Do I then bring out my 100-400 IS zoom?

It's always going to be problematical without objective standards.
Logged
Robert Roaldi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 491


WWW
« Reply #23 on: October 24, 2007, 10:32:56 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
But what about the idea of a price premium on the best samples? Some people would bite if the difference were reasonable, don't you think? You know, people who are willing to pay let us say 50 dollars per metre for the highest quality silk are not the same people who will pay no more than 10 dollars per metre for average quality silk. Perhaps the market can be differentiated this way - legitimately.

I have no expertise to add to this discussion but looking at the prices of "L" lenses, I would have thought that the "premium" for quality already exists. That is, the quality variability that has been mentioned so far seems acceptable (I guess) in $400 lenses but once you get to $1000-$2000, surely that is already specialized territory where I would expect a different level of quality delivery.

An ex-colleague used to joke about the post office registered mail service that it was like paying extra to get them to do their job.
Logged

--
Robert
robertroaldi.zenfolio.com
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6945


WWW
« Reply #24 on: October 24, 2007, 10:50:11 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I have no expertise to add to this discussion but looking at the prices of "L" lenses, I would have thought that the "premium" for quality already exists. That is, the quality variability that has been mentioned so far seems acceptable (I guess) in $400 lenses but once you get to $1000-$2000, surely that is already specialized territory where I would expect a different level of quality delivery.

An ex-colleague used to joke about the post office registered mail service that it was like paying extra to get them to do their job.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=148399\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes, if you are talking about the Canadian post office that is true - but it has improved in recent years. They are getting back to the service quality for a regular stamp that existed in the 1960s before all the upheavals took place.

Back to lenses, if you really want to see what expensive is, look-up comparable specs for Leica, Zeiss and Schneider lenses.
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
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8887


« Reply #25 on: October 24, 2007, 11:22:24 AM »
ReplyReply

The sad thing about this is we don't even know how much variation is taking place. All we've got are personal anecdotes. We've got no idea how many people out there have a sub-standard copy of a particular Canon lens but don't know it.

I almost fell into that category. I bought a Canon 400/5.6 non-IS prime as a result of seeing Michael's comparison of this lens with the 100-400 IS zoom.

If I hadn't already owned the 100-400 IS with which I could compare it, I'd probably still have this 400mm prime lens. Perhaps I'd even be praising it on forums like this and demonstrating what I thought were impressively sharp images of birds on branches.

However, when I tested it against my 100-400 IS zoom at 400mm, the zoom was sharper, so I returned the prime lens and got a refund.

I'm almost certain that that lens would have been sold to another customer who was not able to compare it with a zoom. With nothing to compare it with, he/she might have been quite satisfied with it's performance.
Logged
Conner999
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 454


« Reply #26 on: October 24, 2007, 11:53:08 AM »
ReplyReply

After coming to Canon from Nikon after years away from the hobby, I got fed up with the variable QC of Canon glass - despite their supposed 'premium' stance and cost (within the DSLR 'box').

This 'buy & try' method of fnding good copies of supposedly pro-level glass combined with the ski-slope depreciation curve of DSLR values post-purchase (not a Canon-specific issue), led to a radical change in my gear cabinet.

I sold my 5D and all my Canon glass save a nifty-fifty. Replacing it was smaller selection of top used Leica R glass (no duff copies yet seen and rarely, rarely heard of), an R8 (already fully depreciated), a used Nikon 5000 ED scanner, some EOS-R adapters and the cheapest DSLR body I could find that would do the job, spot meter and take a Leica adapter - a 30D.

One can only hope that Nikon's suprising come-back with the D3 will give Canon the kick in the ass needed to overcome it's (natural) 'I'm King-of-the Hill, take it or leave' complacency (sic).

That beig said, there is only so far you can go with factory mass-produced optics designed for a high-iso, AF, USM-happy and in many cases, JPEG-only market.

Canon (or Nikon) will only aim as high as the average customer's expectations.
« Last Edit: October 24, 2007, 11:54:55 AM by Conner999 » Logged
Ray
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8887


« Reply #27 on: October 24, 2007, 12:41:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Canon (or Nikon) will only aim as high as the average customer's expectations.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=148414\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I don't think that's correct. They are aiming higher than the average customer can comprehend.
Logged
djgarcia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 343



WWW
« Reply #28 on: October 24, 2007, 04:20:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Of course, aiming is one thing and hitting the target is another . I have to say occasionally they do.
Logged

Over-Equipped Snapshooter - EOS 1dsII & 1DsIII, Zeiss & Leica lenses
http://improbablystructuredlayers.net
wildlightphoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 652


« Reply #29 on: October 24, 2007, 09:35:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
... what about the idea of a price premium on the best samples?

It's what you pay for when you buy a Leica lens.  Leica does the testing for you, you don't have to waste your time cherry-picking through the dealer's stock of lenses rejected by someone else.  I'd rather use my time making photographs instead of testing lenses.
Logged
Huib
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 99


WWW
« Reply #30 on: October 25, 2007, 08:47:51 AM »
ReplyReply

It would be a great if Leica started to make lenses which fit on Canon mounth. And starting with the wide angles. Why they don't do it?
But a lens like the LEICA SUPER-ELMARIT-R 1:2,8/15 mm Asph will cost 7000 euro!!!!!!!!!   That's a lot of money
The SUMMILUX-R 1 :1,4/50 mm is a lot cheaper. Only 2600 euro.
« Last Edit: October 25, 2007, 09:01:54 AM by Huib » Logged

Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6945


WWW
« Reply #31 on: October 25, 2007, 08:53:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Good question, but it's not only the mount is it? There's all the electronics if they are to operate with the full features of the Canon lenses. Could there be copyright and commercial feasibility considerations holding them back from competing in this area?
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
Huib
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 99


WWW
« Reply #32 on: October 25, 2007, 09:03:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Good question, but it's not only the mount is it? There's all the electronics if they are to operate with the full features of the Canon lenses. Could there be copyright and commercial feasibility considerations holding them back from competing in this area?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=148579\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
If Sigma and Tamron can do it!
Logged

mahleu
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 572


WWW
« Reply #33 on: October 25, 2007, 09:22:02 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
If Sigma and Tamron can do it!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=148582\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

And tokina and quantaray and....

If we can get an adapter (which we can) then I see no reason for them not to make a canon mount lens (assuming there was enough demand). Of course then no one would buy leica bodies, people would opt for the best of both worlds.
Logged

______________________________________________________________________
Anyone selling a 1DSIII or 6D cheap?
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6945


WWW
« Reply #34 on: October 25, 2007, 09:34:02 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes I know about all those brands doing it - but look at who they are - they aren't Zeiss or Leitz and they are kind of specialized in making medium and low priced accessories for other companies' systems. Zeiss and Leitz don't have a range of DSLRs competing with Canon so in principle there may not be much conflict of interest for them to provide lenses compatible with the Canon system. Perhaps it is a line of business they just aren't interested in developing because they think the investment cost would not be worth the return at the price point they would have to enter and compete with Canon. It costs a fortune to enter such new lines of business.
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
mahleu
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 572


WWW
« Reply #35 on: October 25, 2007, 09:37:38 AM »
ReplyReply

From their film slr line they presumably have the technology to quite easily adapt for use on other brands. It would be lovely to have some of that glass with fast autofocus.

Whilst the 3rd party lenses traditionally undercut the manufacturers, this boutique glass would come at a premium. I can definately see a market for it.
« Last Edit: October 25, 2007, 09:39:50 AM by mahleu » Logged

______________________________________________________________________
Anyone selling a 1DSIII or 6D cheap?
Huib
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 99


WWW
« Reply #36 on: October 25, 2007, 09:40:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
It costs a fortune to enter such new lines of business.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=148589\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
But the market will be much bigger then there excisting market! The needed for the 1Ds3 owners will be high!
But Canon CAN make good lenses. You only have to be very lucky to get a good copy!!!
« Last Edit: October 25, 2007, 09:56:56 AM by Huib » Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #37 on: October 25, 2007, 10:24:04 AM »
ReplyReply

I e-mailed Leica about that very thing: lenses for other camera makes some time ago. They replied, but in typical commercial language gave me to understanf that they had a grand line of cameras all of their own which I should investigate if I wanted to use Leica glass.

Funny how representatives of companies and politicians are genetically prevented from giving a straight relevant reply to any damn thing that is asked of them.

At this juncture, with all the doubts flying around about Canon optics and the ill-placed confidence in other makers´products, I would refer you to

http://www.naturfotograf.com

where you will read, in the lens reviews of the Nikon system, that multiple shots at getting a good´un are not reserved for Canon alone.

I believe, from my own experience, that Nikon did NOT eff about with quality during the years up to the birth of the F4; I bought many lenses in many focal lengths and was very happy with what I got. Then, from my ill-fated experience of the F4s through to the present day, my feeling is that the company is working to a different rhythm, following the beat of a very, very distant drum.

Rob C
Logged

Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6945


WWW
« Reply #38 on: October 25, 2007, 10:37:12 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
IAt this juncture, with all the doubts flying around about Canon optics and the ill-placed confidence in other makers´products, I would refer you to

http://www.naturfotograf.com

where you will read, in the lens reviews of the Nikon system, that multiple shots at getting a good´un are not reserved for Canon alone.

Rob C
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=148606\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Not the least-bit surprised. The economics of manufacturing, quality-controlling  and pricing lenses shouldn't be monumentally different between Canon and Nikon.
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
djgarcia
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 343



WWW
« Reply #39 on: October 25, 2007, 01:21:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Good question, but it's not only the mount is it? There's all the electronics if they are to operate with the full features of the Canon lenses. Could there be copyright and commercial feasibility considerations holding them back from competing in this area?
I believe as long as there's no patent infringement you're OK if you can reverse-engineer the mechanism. Conurus has done the very thing and is providing fully-coupled conversions to the EOS mount for the Zeiss Contax N line of lenses. I have four converted lenses and love them. But that's just me. As usual YMMV.
Logged

Over-Equipped Snapshooter - EOS 1dsII & 1DsIII, Zeiss & Leica lenses
http://improbablystructuredlayers.net
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad