Big fight @ office .. any advice?

This is on a slightly humorous note, however here's what ... I was recently

*discovered* by my office mates as the guy posting in Canon EOS forums and

immediately hands went up, whereby it was identified we happen to have 3 more

*great* photographers. As always (referring to Murphy's law) it HAS to be (i) A

Pentax K20+31mm+43mm (ii)Nikon D300+28mm manual+85mm (iii) and ME 5d+50+85+135.

(I am leaving the zooms aside)

<br> The question is do Canon make better primes than Pentax or vice-versa along

with Nikon comparison. I might be opening up a can of worms here, however this

thing has really gone out of hand since there's the Pentax *camp* saying their

31mm is the best prime ever made with Nikon camp shouting their 28mm is the

sharpest, etc. , etc.

<br> Really, for the sake of understanding- how does Canon rev up with some of

these great primes of Pentax and Nikon?

<br> Needless to say - cake and pizza pieces *almost* flew....

The absolutely BEST lenses in the entire universe are the ones you own and use.

don't have much experience with the pentax glass but the canon primes are far superior to nikons across the board if you factor in L glass...

nothing else really to say unless some troll comes by to set a fire under my bottom

All three of those companies have made some very fine primes.

During the 70's, Pentax primes ruled. Middle and late 80's, 90's, Nikon was King. I'd like to think that Canon system "L" lenses are now the best, cuz that's what I own.

I never compare equipment. I compare pictures. My travel mates all have different brand of equipment, believe it or not. Canon, Minolta, Nikon and Olympus. Sad thing is that we can never share/borrow equipment from each other.

I`ve always read till now that between niko and cano that nikon excelled with wide and canon with tele. But I have never seen a better lens than my spotmatics 50 f1.4 I had early `70`s.:)

You should all bring in your equipment and shoot a controlled test to determine which lens is the best. If none of you actually know how to do that or accurately interpret the results, then I guess it doesn't really matter which lens is best since your lenses aren't what's limiting your results.

I always thought my Pentax 50/2 was a superb lens and now I think my current Ls are superb too. I know prefessional sports photographers who produce some stunning shots with their Nikons.

 

There's really only one thing for people to do when they start an office "discussion" like this. That is to get on with some work.

 

And get a life!

 

;-)

 

P

look at it this way. Compare large format photo's and ask anybody if they can tell you with what kind of camera brand or lenses they're made. That should give you an answer (outside controlled lab conditions that is)

You have the advantage that with suitable adaptors all lenses can be tested on Canon bodies.

 

At the top of the drawer, lenses perform best with particular things in mind: one may offer slightly better performance in different attributes than another.

Thank you!

I own PENTAX & CANON EOS "L" and FD primes.

PENTAX has their SMC "ghostless" coating which renders Gamma neutral images.

 

Pentax also has their "limited" SMC ghostless coated series of lenses which make many of us break out our film SLRs more often than not just to enjoy the tactile, "visceral" feel of limited "pancake" lenses.

Canon FD lenses are Gamma "Warm", while Canon EOS "L"s and regular lenses are also Gamma "Warm".

*Gamma colors are used to inform us of the major characteristics of prints. Many of us prefer "warm" prints, while others choose "cool" prints.

 

The choice of lenses and manufacturers is usually based on your individual "color" preferences in that all major lens and camera manufacturers make really fine equipment.

 

As for film: Fuji emulsions are "cool" while Kodak prints are "warm".

Fuji films are gorgeous with Caucasians while Kodak films are equally efficacious with people of color. Fuji does great justice to greens in landscapes while with Kodak, renders red-yellows and oranges in a usual smashing manner.

Fuji renders architecture more favorably than does Kodak, while Kodak renders scenery in a favorable light.

 

With digital, your choices are based in large part on how a sensor or family of sensors render colors to YOUR* eye and individual tastes.

*Which make Photoshop and other digital editing programs deliriously happy.

 

Since lens and "color" choices are usually 100% subjective, which lens or system is "best" is all over the map: as it should be.

 

Me?

Canon EOS "L"s for my film SLRs and Pentax SMC lenses, which I can gleefully mount on my Olympus E-bodied DSLRs.

Are some lenses optically "better" than others? Yes. Is it worth worrying about? Probably not.

The differences in the lenses are minute compared to the differences in how photographers use them.

If all camera manufacturer's used the same mount type then the world would be lovely and everyone could use everyone's lens.

 

Until that happens the best lens is the one that fits the camera that you own and use. Olympus made some stellar primes in the 70's and 80's for their OMs. So did Pentax. Cannon and Nikon both made some excellent primes in the 80's and 90's (and today). Pentax still makes a couple of impressive primes.