Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Wide premium lens for 1ds Mkiii  (Read 13438 times)
Christopher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 944


WWW
« Reply #20 on: February 03, 2008, 06:36:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I guess it depends on what reviews you read...
Canon 14mm MKII Review
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=172102\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I think it depend to what lens you compare it. It is fine until you see the Nikon zoom, or lLeica and zeiss glass :@
Logged

spotmeter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 310


WWW
« Reply #21 on: February 04, 2008, 08:42:16 PM »
ReplyReply

The Zeiss 25mm ZF is very sharp, as is the Contax 21mm.  Both need adapters for the Canon.  The best adapters are sold by Cameraquest.
Logged

eleanorbrown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 632


WWW
« Reply #22 on: August 15, 2008, 03:35:30 PM »
ReplyReply

The new Canon 14mm II is not crap--it is an excellent lens and well corrected.  I use on my 1ds3 and I get stunning results.  i don't shoot test charts, but mainly outdoor. Eleanor

Quote
The new 14mm from canon is crap. Sorry but have you seen the tests from that lens ? It is getting out performed by a Nikon zoom .... 14-24

And yes it is wider than my Leica, but the qulity sorry the Canon is just crap... would never want to use it on my 1DsMk3 for some important work.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=171953\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

Conner999
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 463


« Reply #23 on: August 15, 2008, 05:22:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Some of the best primes out there - have owned/used all but the CZ 21 and they were nothing short of stellar. The Leica 28/2.8mm Ver II is one hell of a lens.

On the 35L - it is very sharp WO in center, but for landscaping shooting I'd be more concerned with performance at smaller apertures and consistency between center and edges - as well as field curvature (something that afflicts the 25-35mm ZFs).

Landscape work with the 1Ds3, will require a steady diet of premium corner-performance glass

Check out www.16-9.net as mentioned earlier as well as the 35mm -shoot off test results at www.slrlensreview.com


Quote
Four choices I use on my 1DsMk3

- Leica R 19mm
- zeiss T 21mm
- Leica R 28mm
- zeiss 35mm

Up to 35 Canon has really nothing to offer at all. The 35/1.4 is getting really close to the zeiss, but the other three lenses are really playing in their own world.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=171892\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Chris_Brown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 805



WWW
« Reply #24 on: August 16, 2008, 01:12:48 PM »
ReplyReply

I use Canon 14mm v2 and really enjoy the coverage, but for the best results I stop down to f8 or f11. Images shot @ f2.8 - f4 have disappointing results in the corners.
Logged

~ CB
sean mills
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 22


« Reply #25 on: August 16, 2008, 02:25:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I use Canon 14mm v2 and really enjoy the coverage, but for the best results I stop down to f8 or f11. Images shot @ f2.8 - f4 have disappointing results in the corners.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=215509\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Wait, you mean images at 2.8 when focused on a distant object will be soft in the corners.... that's because your focal plane is far away.... for sure.

Focus ON something in the foreground, in a corner (you must MF for this as there are no focus points in what we consider the corners), and even at 2.8 the resolving quality of this lens is insane on a 1ds3. Incredibly sharp.

I ordered Marks adapter for the nikon, as I was sold by the review... but tired of waiting and got a 14mmII. This lens is just plain nuts! By no means discrediting his review... but the images Ive taken the last couple days with the 14mmII lay to waste the results he shows on his site. The CA is much better controlled in the files Ive gotten, and sharpness runs to the corners easily. I suspect that Marks copy is, sadly, well out of spec. Either than or I got incredibly lucky.

When I do get the adapter, I'll do some side by sides as well, for the sake of science and such (lol), but I assure anyone the 14mmII, while as expensive as all get out, IS indeed a high resolving, sharp rendering UWA prime.
Logged
Chris_Brown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 805



WWW
« Reply #26 on: August 16, 2008, 02:35:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Wait, you mean images at 2.8 when focused on a distant object will be soft in the corners.... that's because your focal plane is far away.... for sure.

Focus ON something in the foreground, in a corner (you must MF for this as there are no focus points in what we consider the corners), and even at 2.8 the resolving quality of this lens is insane on a 1ds3. Incredibly sharp.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=215528\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Close subjects, distant subjects. It doesn't matter. The corners are soft compared to the point of focus @ f2.8. However, I've not calibrated the lens to the camera yet.

Edit:
I tried the Tamron 14mm, Sigma 20mm and the Canon 14mm v1 lens. Everyone felt the Canon was too expensive, but the results at f2.8 were plain: All lenses except the Canon exhibited heavy vignetting. Even at f8 the Tamron had dark corners. The cost of this lens is reflected in its usability at f2.8. Sure there's softness, but if you're using this lens at f2.8 there's high probability that you're doing PJ work and capturing the moment/event is more important that crispy corners.

At f8 - f11 the Canon 14mm v2 is excellent, but at those apertures, and at ISO 100, a tripod is required.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2008, 09:08:50 PM by Chris_Brown » Logged

~ CB
eleanorbrown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 632


WWW
« Reply #27 on: August 16, 2008, 02:37:14 PM »
ReplyReply

This was my point...this lens is just plain excellent.  I have wonderfully sharp and contrasty images with superior color taken with this lens.  And in addition I've been blown away by the "micro contrast" I'm getting....not as great as my P45+ back, but very good.  No reason to go with the heavy and bulky Nikon zoom for a Canon camera in my opinion!!! eleanor



Quote
Wait, you mean images at 2.8 when focused on a distant object will be soft in the corners.... that's because your focal plane is far away.... for sure.

Focus ON something in the foreground, in a corner (you must MF for this as there are no focus points in what we consider the corners), and even at 2.8 the resolving quality of this lens is insane on a 1ds3. Incredibly sharp.

I ordered Marks adapter for the nikon, as I was sold by the review... but tired of waiting and got a 14mmII. This lens is just plain nuts! By no means discrediting his review... but the images Ive taken the last couple days with the 14mmII lay to waste the results he shows on his site. The CA is much better controlled in the files Ive gotten, and sharpness runs to the corners easily. I suspect that Marks copy is, sadly, well out of spec. Either than or I got incredibly lucky.

When I do get the adapter, I'll do some side by sides as well, for the sake of science and such (lol), but I assure anyone the 14mmII, while as expensive as all get out, IS indeed a high resolving, sharp rendering UWA prime.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=215528\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

wildlightphoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 656


« Reply #28 on: August 16, 2008, 04:21:26 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I guess it depends on what reviews you read...
Canon 14mm MKII Review
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=172102\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

According to this review it appears to be better than its predecessors, but this review doesn't compare it with the Nikon 14-24, or the Leica/Schneider 15mm Elmarit-R.
Logged
CJL
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 95



WWW
« Reply #29 on: August 16, 2008, 07:55:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I guess it depends on what reviews you read...
Canon 14mm MKII Review
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=172102\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Not exactly an objective review site... I don't think he's ever said anything bad about any Canon product.
Logged
sean mills
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 22


« Reply #30 on: August 17, 2008, 11:14:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Not exactly an objective review site... I don't think he's ever said anything bad about any Canon product.

Read his 50L review...
Logged
eleanorbrown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 632


WWW
« Reply #31 on: August 18, 2008, 09:51:53 AM »
ReplyReply

My 14 2.8 II was very good to begin with however sharpness was helped, especially wide open at 2.8, by doing a focus calibration of +5 on my 1dsIII.  This is an excellent option on the new canon III series of cameras. eleanor
Logged

Henry Goh
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 574


« Reply #32 on: August 18, 2008, 10:32:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
My 14 2.8 II was very good to begin with however sharpness was helped, especially wide open at 2.8, by doing a focus calibration of +5 on my 1dsIII.  This is an excellent option on the new canon III series of cameras. eleanor
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=215801\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Fully agree with Eleanor, micro-adjustment has allowed all my lenses to be pin sharp, including the 45mm TS-E using just the AF confirmation rather than Live View.

I will never buy another DSLR without the micro-adjustment feature.
Logged
Chris_Brown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 805



WWW
« Reply #33 on: August 18, 2008, 10:57:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
...micro-adjustment has allowed all my lenses to be pin sharp, including the 45mm TS-E using just the AF confirmation rather than Live View.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=215807\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Huh? I thought the micro-adjustment was for auto-focus lenses and the feedback loop between camera and lens. How is a manual focus lens affected by the micro-adjustment feature?
Logged

~ CB
eleanorbrown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 632


WWW
« Reply #34 on: August 18, 2008, 11:04:06 AM »
ReplyReply

I adjusted my 90TS lens also using the autofocus confirmation beep. eleanor

Quote
Huh? I thought the micro-adjustment was for auto-focus lenses and the feedback loop between camera and lens. How is a manual focus lens affected by the micro-adjustment feature?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=215812\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged

Huib
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 99


WWW
« Reply #35 on: August 18, 2008, 11:40:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Try this site

http://www.16-9.net/

in addition to testing lenses, he's involved with adaptors so all lenses can fit the EOS mount, not just Canon lenses.

Bob
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=171210\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Forget him and his site. There are a lot of people who sent him money like me (ordered January 4) but never got the adaptor. He don't answer any mail and the lost update on his site was june 12.
But I would love to use the Nikon 14-25mm on mine 1Ds3
Logged

Henry Goh
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 574


« Reply #36 on: August 18, 2008, 11:59:16 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Huh? I thought the micro-adjustment was for auto-focus lenses and the feedback loop between camera and lens. How is a manual focus lens affected by the micro-adjustment feature?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=215812\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Chris,
The Canon AF confirmation in the body communicates with the chip in the lens.  Since the TS-E lenses have this connection, you can micro-adjust the AF confirmation although you focus manually instead of auto.  Nice huh?
Logged
Wolfman
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 176


« Reply #37 on: August 18, 2008, 12:21:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Forget him and his site. There are a lot of people who sent him money like me (ordered January 4) but never got the adaptor. He don't answer any mail and the lost update on his site was june 12.
But I would love to use the Nikon 14-25mm on mine 1Ds3
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=215818\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I also ordered the adapter a while ago and yes, he doesn't respond much to emails except if you want a refund, which he does right away.
Logged
Chris_Brown
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 805



WWW
« Reply #38 on: August 18, 2008, 12:43:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Chris,
The Canon AF confirmation in the body communicates with the chip in the lens.  Since the TS-E lenses have this connection, you can micro-adjust the AF confirmation although you focus manually instead of auto.  Nice huh?[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=215820\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Very nice. Thanks for the info.  
Logged

~ CB
Gary Yeowell
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 188


« Reply #39 on: August 18, 2008, 04:47:57 PM »
ReplyReply

I use the Contax Zeiss  21f2.8, 28f2.8 and Canon 35f1.4L for wideangle duty on my 1DS3 and every one is spectacular. The 21mm is sharp from wide open to f16 centre to edge with no fringing at all, however it does suffer from minor distortion, almost a perfect lens. The 28mm is amazing centre to edge from f5.6 on with a tiny amount of fringing, and the 35L is spectacular from F1.4 to f8 in the centre and from f4 all the way out to the edges.

I have thrown out all my Canon glass except the 35L which is exceptional, and use Zeiss and some Nikkor glass now. My personal findings are such that unless you use the very best glass (and i'm not talking Canon zooms) you are wasting your hard earned cash on a 1DS3 over and above a 5D/1DS2 because you are already at the resolution limit with these previous generation bodies. Of course there are other very good reasons to own the 1DS3, but if extra detail is your aim and your not using the best glass be prepared to be dissapointed.

Gary.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2008, 04:49:55 PM by Gary Yeowell » Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad