Robin Smith Posted January 15, 2010 Share Posted January 15, 2010 <blockquote> <p>In my mind, the real champ in terms of price, optics, and build quality is then Voigtlander 58mm 1.4 lens. You can judge for yourself if the Nikon-mount review on photozone (<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/360-voigtlander-nokton-58mm-f14-sl-ii" target="_blank">http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/360-voigtlander-nokton-58mm-f14-sl-ii</a>) makes this the top contender.</p> </blockquote> <p>I am not sure you can really say this. The test at Photozone was on a D200 APS-C camera (D200), so not all that helpful for FF users, also with a lot fewer MP than on the current FF Canons. Even then it said:</p> <blockquote> <p>The Nokton was able to produce good to superb resolution figures under lab conditions. Unsurprisingly the lens shows the weakest performance at f/1.4 - the center resolution is already very good here but the borders are soft.</p> </blockquote> <p>So OP may not be happy. Someone did say though that this lens will be available in EOS mount soon. I like Voigtlander, but have to reserve judgment as of now.</p> Robin Smith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carbon_dragon Posted January 15, 2010 Share Posted January 15, 2010 <p>I'd say it's the Leica Noctilux 50/0.95. Of course at 10 grand it's pretty unaffordable, but on sheer performance, I don't think there is any other lens to touch it, especially wide open where Leica lenses shine. Focus carefully ;-)</p> <p>You could make a pretty good case that the 1 stop you gain from the Canon 50/1.4 is meaningless, and you would normally be right. It's a specialist lens. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Gammill Posted January 15, 2010 Share Posted January 15, 2010 <p>Besides considering the correction of optical aberrations (chromatic, spherical, etc.) also look at the degree of field curvature the lens has as this can affect edge sharpness as well. Test carefully as many fast 50's as you can or at least make sure you have return priveleges for any lens you buy. Also consider used lenses too. On more that one occasion Popular Photography (and likely other photo magazines) have done comparison tests of 50mm lenses, but at wide apertures variantion among samples could affect the outcome of the tests so don't put too much faith in tests. Rather read tests for a starting point if evaluating lenses.<br> My pick(s)- If sharpness is of utmost importance then avoid any lens that requires an optical element type converter to reach infinety focus. For economy, the EOS 50mm f1.8. Or maybe go with the 50mm f1.4 but limit it to f2. Every f1.4 lens I've ever owned or borrowed always performed better when stopped down to f2. You would have to make your own tests.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mel_unruh Posted January 15, 2010 Share Posted January 15, 2010 <p>Carlos,<br> I'm not a Canon shooter, so I can't comment directly on these lenses specifically. I would like to point out something that many people overlook including the lens testers themselves. In order for any lens to be a "fast" lens, it must be able to gather alot of light. In a really low light situation, this may not be a problem. However in most situations, this translates into flare which is why the lens seems soft at the low aperture. Light is getting scattered everywhere inside the lens causing the image to be slightly diffused. The CURE for this is a good lens shade. I don't mean the petal shade that came with the lens. I mean a good one such as lindahl (an accordian or compendium shade). This will transform the lens to a completely different breed. Contrast is vastly improved as is color accuracy.<br> So, the real problem with these lenses isn't poor optical formula, it is really inadequate shading of the lens. Are you listening lens testers!<br> By the way, there are many Canon shooters who have Pentax primes on the front of their cameras via an adapter.<br> Mel</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christian_odell1 Posted January 15, 2010 Share Posted January 15, 2010 <p>I have the same body and I regularly use a Zuiko 50/1.4 made for the OM system as well as a 55/1.2. I use them mounted on a converter and they work flawlessly. I love the images I get from my 1.4</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamie_robertson2 Posted January 15, 2010 Share Posted January 15, 2010 <p>Like others have said, the search for such a lens is futile.</p> <p>Why not stand further back from your subject and use the 135mm f2.0L wide open? That is one razor sharp lens.</p> <p>Alternatively, use the 50mm f1.4 at f2 to get the desired sharpness and then Photoshop the bokeh a little further using the lens blur filter.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbs Posted January 15, 2010 Share Posted January 15, 2010 <p>I hope this is not redundant ...Leitz 50 mm 1.4 wetzlar Germany<br> I put it on my 21 mgpix canon ...like a tack</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r.t. dowling Posted January 15, 2010 Share Posted January 15, 2010 <p>I would suggest getting a Holga, and shooting with it exclusively for a few months. Then go back to your Canon. All of your existing Canon lenses will suddenly be much, much sharper!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtlwdwgn Posted January 16, 2010 Share Posted January 16, 2010 <p>I agree with Mr. Atkins on this one. I believe the original intent by the lens manufacturer designing an f/1, f/1.2, f/1.4, etc., was to provide a brighter viewfinder for use in low light conditions. I don't think they meant for the maximum aperture to be used except perhaps creatively. The old rule of thumb for most any lens' best performance is 2 stops from the maximum or minimum aperture. Just my ¢¢.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph_wisniewski Posted January 16, 2010 Share Posted January 16, 2010 <blockquote> <p>I believe the original intent by the lens manufacturer designing an f/1, f/1.2, f/1.4, etc., was to provide a brighter viewfinder for use in low light conditions.</p> </blockquote> <p>Sorry Steve, but that is not technically possible. Viewfinder brightness is limited by the "scattering angle" of the ground glass. Typical modern ground glass has a 10 degree scattering angle. That's why when you have an f1.4 lens, stop down to f2.8, and hith the DOF preview button, the DOF and brightness don't noticealby change. Older cameras were closer to 20 degrees, which is fine for an f2.8 or even f2.0 lens, but an f1.0 and f1.4 lens look exactly the same on the viewfinder, no difference in brightness or DOF.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_clark Posted January 17, 2010 Share Posted January 17, 2010 <p>The most effective way to have a sharp, fast 50 wide open is to change platform to the Leica M9 and use the superb 50/1.4 ASPH.<br> Not only do you get the best 50 wide open, but you also get inherently sharper images because there is no AA filter.<br> Of course, above ISO 1250, the Canon FF sensor will cope with noise more effectively.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clgriffin Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 <p>Sharp and wide open always lead to problems with what you perceive as sharp. I recently put a Canon 50mm 1.4 up for sale at a local shop and bought a Sigma 1.4 from the classifieds at another site. I could do that because in the great scheme of things, the 50mm lens is not as important to me as longer or wider lenses in my little arsenal of glass.<br> I believe I lucked out, however. I'll include one of my first tests. Shooting my reluctant wife under fluorescent light and having to do an unsatisfactory color correction, still the ISO 500 image is sharp on the crease of the upper eyelid--that's how limited the depth of field can be at portrait and closer.<br> This Sigma lens will perform at 1.4, but you have to take care. Live view focusing will probably be required for essential work--I'm just saying. I will not complain about this one at any aperture, it surprises me with its quality every time I use it.</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clgriffin Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 <p>I'm getting forgetful--The Camera was a 5DM2.</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luis_colon Posted January 19, 2010 Share Posted January 19, 2010 <p>leica is the king even know am canon shooter a got to admit. leica sweep all those lenses above</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonersam Posted February 24, 2010 Share Posted February 24, 2010 <p>My pref for Canon mount lens for subject would be 85 1.2L. The color it captures is REALLY vibrant especially when you use it in a 1V with good films like Provia 400. It is only the weight that minus a lot of my rating points to it, not to mention that the focusing is rather slow. Leica's Noctilux is by far the best fast lens I have ever used. I am not judging it from a collector's point of view but a portrait photographer's - only that we are talking about Canon lens that I will choose to cease commenting that's all.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now