Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Opnions on the Canon 50mm 1.4 and Canon 10-22mm 3.5  (Read 2094 times)
sid51
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« on: August 19, 2013, 12:25:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Hey guys,

I've been photographing for some time now, and i feel that i am limited by my equip. I have a T3i with a 18-135mm lens, and what i photograph more are skateboarders.

What i mostly need right now: A wide angle lens (the 18mm on a aps-c is not enough for me), a prime aperture lens to do some details shot (mine is 3.5, and i dont like it's bokeh very much) and maybe a zoom lens for when i can't get too close from the rider.
But the most important thing that all those lens need to have is a FAST and ACCURATE AUTOFOCUS. This is something that bothers me a lot in my kit lens, it is slow as hell, and some times i get back-focus in my pictures.

I've done some search and i've chose (for now), those 3 lens:

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Autofocus Lens
Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Autofocus Lens
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III USM Autofocus Lens - (not so sure about that one, iam probably saving for a better zoom lens in the future)

I will move on to a full-frame body in the future, but i dont have the money to buy the body+lens to it right now, so i think iam going to stick with the aps-c for now, and sell the 10-22 when i buy a full frame.

My questions are:
- Does the body of the camera have any effects on the speed and accuracy of the focus? Will the problem of slow/back-focus be solved by a lens with USM system?
- Does any of you guys have/had any of those lens, and would recommend them for what i need?
- I heard that the 50mm 1.4 has some focus motor issues, like it breaks too fast (in 1 or 2 years of use).
- Does any one have another sugestion for me? Any good matches for this lenses from other brands?

Thanks in advance.
Logged
Tony Jay
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2049


« Reply #1 on: August 19, 2013, 03:27:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Ultrasonic motors allow for rapid change in focus but do not guarantee accurate focus.
The focusing system in Canon cameras is model specific - some are definately better than others - one gets what one pays for.
USM does nothing to address back or front focusing issues.
Some high-end Canon bodies allow one to adjust focus to correct for either front or back focusing.
However this adjustment is done in the body itself (the sensor is moved either backwards or forwards to achieve optimal focusing), nothing is changed in the lens.
I have no idea if the USM in the 50mm 1.4 is a problem or not but can only say that I own a second-hand model that performs flawlessly.

Hope that this info adresses some of your issues.

Tony Jay
Logged
NancyP
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 800


« Reply #2 on: August 19, 2013, 05:00:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Canon 10-22 is an excellent choice. for UWA, consider also: Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8, Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6, both of which have autofocus. Are you using the lens wide open, or stopped down? You have a lot of depth of field there, could possibly get away with zone focusing a manual lens such as the Samyang 8mm f/3.5 diagonal fisheye, 14mm f/2.8 (full frame!), or 16mm f/2.0. Note that the Samyang/Bower/Rokinon/ProOptic lenses have manual aperture as well as manual focus - some people mind, some don't. Do you need to use filters? Tokina and Canon 10-22 are the only reasonable choices.

I have the Sigma 8-16mm. It is a really sharp lens for its type.
Logged
Ellis Vener
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1732



WWW
« Reply #3 on: August 19, 2013, 07:37:54 PM »
ReplyReply

"Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Autofocus Lens"

Mine has been excellent but as with all lenses and cameras  I use a LensAlign Mark II target and FocusTune analysis software to determine the optimum auto-focus micro-adjust setting for my lens on my camera bodies.  There are other af target / analysis packages out there. The better ones likely work just as well as the LensAlign /FocusTune combination.
Logged

Ellis Vener
http://www.ellisvener.com
Creating photographs for advertising, corporate and industrial clients since 1984.
sid51
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« Reply #4 on: August 19, 2013, 07:45:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Ultrasonic motors allow for rapid change in focus but do not guarantee accurate focus.
The focusing system in Canon cameras is model specific - some are definately better than others - one gets what one pays for.
USM does nothing to address back or front focusing issues.
Some high-end Canon bodies allow one to adjust focus to correct for either front or back focusing.
However this adjustment is done in the body itself (the sensor is moved either backwards or forwards to achieve optimal focusing), nothing is changed in the lens.
I have no idea if the USM in the 50mm 1.4 is a problem or not but can only say that I own a second-hand model that performs flawlessly.

Hope that this info adresses some of your issues.

Tony Jay

Thanks, it certainly helped a lot! I will search a little more for back focusing on these lenses.

Canon 10-22 is an excellent choice. for UWA, consider also: Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8, Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6, both of which have autofocus. Are you using the lens wide open, or stopped down? You have a lot of depth of field there, could possibly get away with zone focusing a manual lens such as the Samyang 8mm f/3.5 diagonal fisheye, 14mm f/2.8 (full frame!), or 16mm f/2.0. Note that the Samyang/Bower/Rokinon/ProOptic lenses have manual aperture as well as manual focus - some people mind, some don't. Do you need to use filters? Tokina and Canon 10-22 are the only reasonable choices.

I have the Sigma 8-16mm. It is a really sharp lens for its type.

Thanks for all the other suggestions. Most times i shoot open wide.
I've heard so many good things about the canon 10-22mm that i'am almost convicted of buying it.
My major doubt is about the 50mm, because of the poor engineering/quality of the motor system.

"Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Autofocus Lens"

Mine has been excellent but as with all lenses and cameras  I use a LensAlign Mark II target and FocusTune analysis software to determine the optimum auto-focus micro-adjust setting for my lens on my camera bodies.  There are other af target / analysis packages out there. The better ones likely work just as well as the LensAlign /FocusTune combination.

I didn't even know about those kind of softwares! Good to know, will try on my kit lens here later.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2013, 09:47:11 PM by sid51 » Logged
stever
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1063


« Reply #5 on: August 20, 2013, 09:04:14 AM »
ReplyReply

the 1.4 is an older design about due (overdue?) for replacement.  it's very soft wide open but from 2.8 on very sharp.  autofocus is fast but not terribly reliable/repeatable.  on a crop frame camera you could consider the new 35 f2 IS - a very good lens with the latest focus technology but expensive.

you are somewhat limited by your camera which doesn't have focus microadjust or the latest Canon autofocus technology (so it may not benefit from newer lenses like the 35 IS)

Roger did some autofocus accuracy testing (lensrentals.com) a few months ago

if you're not happy with the 18-135 you probably won't be happy with the 75-300
Logged
sid51
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« Reply #6 on: August 20, 2013, 09:32:32 AM »
ReplyReply

the 1.4 is an older design about due (overdue?) for replacement.  it's very soft wide open but from 2.8 on very sharp.  autofocus is fast but not terribly reliable/repeatable.  on a crop frame camera you could consider the new 35 f2 IS - a very good lens with the latest focus technology but expensive.

you are somewhat limited by your camera which doesn't have focus microadjust or the latest Canon autofocus technology (so it may not benefit from newer lenses like the 35 IS)

Roger did some autofocus accuracy testing (lensrentals.com) a few months ago

if you're not happy with the 18-135 you probably won't be happy with the 75-300

Thanks for the reply, mate!
Unfortunately, the 35 f2 IS is too expensive right now (almost twice the price of the 50mm), so its not a viable option for me right now Sad
I've already decided not to buy the 75-300mm and save for a good zoom lens later.
I'am gonna search for this autofocus article, thanks for the tip!
Logged
NancyP
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 800


« Reply #7 on: August 20, 2013, 10:56:54 AM »
ReplyReply

Buy used if you can, there are lots of 10-22s out there being sold by people who moved to full frame.
Logged
stever
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1063


« Reply #8 on: August 20, 2013, 11:15:32 AM »
ReplyReply

the 40 pancake is only 2.8, but has gotten some pretty good reviews
Logged
sid51
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« Reply #9 on: August 20, 2013, 11:43:48 AM »
ReplyReply

Buy used if you can, there are lots of 10-22s out there being sold by people who moved to full frame.

The problem is that i'am not from United States, i have a friend that will be there in september, and i will buy from B&H online and send to his hotel room there. I'am afraid of buying used lenses this way, since i can't see it in person.

the 40 pancake is only 2.8, but has gotten some pretty good reviews

I don't think i'am gonna need a 2.8, the 10-22m will do the job i guess. I think i really need a prime aperture lens, but thanks for the advice.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2013, 11:46:50 AM by sid51 » Logged
Sheldon N
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 797


« Reply #10 on: August 20, 2013, 12:36:42 PM »
ReplyReply


what i photograph more are skateboarders.


Honestly, if you photograph skateboarders I'd recommend a couple cheap vivitar flashes, a generic radio trigger, and a very wide/fisheye lens. You could get the Tokina 10-17 fisheye zoom, or even cheaper is the fully manual Peleng 8mm fisheye.

I'd say that most shots you see in skateboarding magazines are zone focused/prefocused, and don't rely on fast autofocus at all. Lots of ultrawide shots, and usually some supplemental lighting used to freeze the action.

Logged

sid51
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« Reply #11 on: August 20, 2013, 12:52:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Honestly, if you photograph skateboarders I'd recommend a couple cheap vivitar flashes, a generic radio trigger, and a very wide/fisheye lens. You could get the Tokina 10-17 fisheye zoom, or even cheaper is the fully manual Peleng 8mm fisheye.

I'd say that most shots you see in skateboarding magazines are zone focused/prefocused, and don't rely on fast autofocus at all. Lots of ultrawide shots, and usually some supplemental lighting used to freeze the action.



I agree with you, but most events i cover are championships, so i can't say to the athlete where they need to land, or what trick they need to make...
You think that the 10-22mm wouldn't fit my needs in terms of angle coverage?

Oh, i forgot to say, i have a Nikon SB-80dx that works with my T3i in Manual mode, do you know if its possible to buy a flash trigger to use it externaly? If yes, can you recomend me any?
Thanks in advance!
« Last Edit: August 20, 2013, 12:54:01 PM by sid51 » Logged
rgs
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 364



WWW
« Reply #12 on: August 20, 2013, 02:46:13 PM »
ReplyReply

This is a different approach but...do you need the 10mm? I know how limiting 18mm can feel, but 15mm is a big difference and the 15-85 could meet a lot of needs otherwise. It's certainly not the 10-22 but may be a better choice overall. Then get the 10-22 later.

I don't think the 75-300 will make you happy. The best of class in that range is the Tammron but it's slow to focus and a bit heavy. This class of lens (even the Canon L) just doesn't seem to fit with the work you've described. 

I have heard some very good things about the Sigma 30mm. I don't know if it will fit your budget but it might be another consideration.

All of these lenses are crop lenses. If you buy full frame, they will need to be replaced or used on a back up crop body.
Logged

scooby70
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 212


« Reply #13 on: August 20, 2013, 03:35:26 PM »
ReplyReply

I had a Canon 10-22mm but didn't like it and changed it for a Sigma 12-24mm which I think is a much better lens although it is 2mm less wide and every mm makes a difference at this end. Personally I find that the Sigma has less distortion and less vignetting and gives a "nicer" image. It also feels much better made to me than the Canon lens.

I've never tried the Canon 50mm f1.4 but many reviews place the Sigma 50mm f1.4 ahead of it and on the basis of those reviews I went for the Sigma lens and it performed well on my 20D and is lovely on my 5D.
Logged
Telecaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 769



« Reply #14 on: August 20, 2013, 05:36:49 PM »
ReplyReply

I never got on well at all with my sample of the Canon 50/1.4. Fiddly AF...it would usually confirm focus without actually doing anything if the desired point-of-focus was anywhere near the previous point-of-focus. So I got in the habit of making it go to minimum focus after every shot. When taking photos of my friend Vicki in late 2005 I neglected to do this due to the situation and so every friggin' shot ended up just OOF enough to spoil them all. Those were the last photos anyone took of her before she died just weeks later.   Sad

When I sold off my Canon gear about a year later I held onto the 50. Took it into my backyard and smashed the shit out of it with a sledgehammer.

-Dave-
Logged
kaelaria
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2225



WWW
« Reply #15 on: August 20, 2013, 09:21:00 PM »
ReplyReply

I went through two 50 1.4s and will never suggest them - not a reliable design, both developed focus problems, one af system stuck completely, the plastic bushings in them are very weak.  The 10-22 is great except for the distortion it's brutal.  I switched to the tokina 11-16 for my close video work and it's AWESOME.  The focus system sucks though, luckily I use it in manual focus at hyperfocal range all the time and it is flawless, VERY straight to the corners on a crop!  I get focus from just a couple feet to infinity barely stopped down.
Logged

Mike D. B.
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 81



WWW
« Reply #16 on: August 21, 2013, 06:05:28 AM »
ReplyReply

I've owned my Canon 50 / 1.4 for some six years now and am still very pleased.  Never had any focusing problems which could be traced to the lens or camera - only my mistakes.  The lens is robust enogh for my purposes which include many all-day city walks with about 2,000 shots per day.

A fast 50mm prime has always been one of my favorites, no matter which camera I owned.  And this Canon lens hasn't disappoint on my 350D, 20D or 5D.  But I try to use wide open apertures selectively and "properly", not expecting razor sharp images at 1.4.  Knowing "how to focus" has also helped.

I can wholeheartedly recommend the lens.
Logged

John Koerner
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 61



WWW
« Reply #17 on: August 21, 2013, 06:42:53 AM »
ReplyReply

I have had 2 Canon 50mm f/1.4s and 3 Canon 10-22mms as well.

I have bought and sold all of them, but I did enjoy them while I had them. I never had any of the trouble some of these others "claim" to have, which (in some cases sound contrived to me); all of my lenses worked very well for me and did what they were supposed to.

I sold my lenses, not because of quality issues, but because I am primarily a macro photographer and rarely used them. When I go out to get my shots, I like to document certain aspects of the terrain for my blog, and when I used these lenses it was a hassle swapping them out in the field. So I just started using my smart phone (Galaxy Note II) in their place. Trouble was, if I need a really good shot, I didn't like using the phone, so I would buy these two lenses again. I repeated this process a couple of times, until I decided to buy a Canon G15 that I can just carry on my hip if I need it.

While not providing quite the width or quality of a DSLR, the G15 shoots RAW, it is small and handy, it gets fairly wide shots, and the image quality is much better than that of a smartphone. So I am very happy I no longer have to swap lenses anymore, and can just whip out the G15 for a wide or tele-shot of reasonable quality, and place it back on my hip, without taking my tricked-out macro lenses off my main camera.

So it really depends on what you want to do. Me personally, to be able to have the ability to whip out a small camera and get a 28-140mm (f/1.8-2.80 shot, right off my hip, trumps any peripheral advantage of the 2 lenses you describe. Nor do I have to lug around these two lenses on my back, remove my backpack, and swap these things out. I can just carry my main camera as always, let it hang on my neck (or stay on my tripod) when I need a different kind of shot, and just grab the G15 off my hip when needed.

I will NOT be going back to those other 2 lenses anymore ... even though they served me well and gave me no technical problems ... because the convenience of the G15 outweighs everything for me.

Good luck,

Jack
« Last Edit: August 21, 2013, 06:46:52 AM by MacroPhotoPro » Logged
sid51
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« Reply #18 on: August 21, 2013, 09:22:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Thank you all for the answers.

Regarding the Sigma 50mm 1.4:
I know must people say that this is better than canon 50mm in terms of sharpness, bokeh and build quality, but I've read lots of reviews saying that buying this lens is like gamble, you can get a perfect version, or a version that comes with back/front focus issues. I can't risk doing that because i won't be able to return the lens if it comes broken, since i'am outside USA. Do you guys really think it worth the risk of getting a broken version of this? I mean, it is that much better than canon 50mm?

About the Canon 50mm 1.4:
I know there is a known issue about its AF motor system, and i know there is a big probability for it to break after a time of use. I also know it's not very sharp at 1.4 and the bokeh isn't great, but i couldn't find any lens that matches it in this category (except the sigma which i've already stated why i won't probably get one above).

About the Canon 10-22mm:
I don't care too much about the distortions on the edges (i saw some sample pics in 10mm and i think they are not that bad), and i saw so many good reviews of it that I am pretty sure that i will buy this one.

About the 75-300mm:
It's already out of the list, i won't buy it.
Logged
kaelaria
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2225



WWW
« Reply #19 on: August 21, 2013, 10:21:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Here's a direct 10-22 vs 11-16 comparison at the wide ends.  The first vid I did (just playing, first time using vid on the 7D back then) with the 10-22 at 10mm.  Notice the corners in some of the pans and the lines.  http://cigarobsession.com/2012/03/05/stogies-stout-2012-with-blancos-cigars-at-dunedin-brewery/

Compared to the 11-16 @11, again notice the corners and lines.  It's a night and day difference especially in stills let me tell you.  I even made money selling the 10-22 and buying the 11-16 new!  http://cigarobsession.com/2013/07/27/partagas-cigars-booth-tour-2013-ipcpr/
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad