klfi Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 Anyone out there compared the various lenses that cover 24-28mm on full frame. I am looking for the best one for that focal range stopped down to f/8+ for a 5D or 1DsII. Contrast, colour, sharpness, flare, CA are important, corner performance is important. Distortion doesn't bother me as much and I am happy to remove with PT lens. I have Tamron 17-35Di and 28/1.8USM in that range but haven't tested them of FF. (I have 10D currently and can't be bothered testing on film). Others to consider are... EF 24/2.8, Sigma 24 and 28, 24L, 16-35L, 17-40L, 24-70L, 24-105L. Exotic zeiss etc lenses. Any thoughts? I know they are all quite similar at f/8. I wonder if any one shines above the rest. Can the 24/2.8 compete with the L's when stopped down. Cheers, Kev. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klfi Posted September 30, 2005 Author Share Posted September 30, 2005 I forgot the 24L-TSE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klfi Posted September 30, 2005 Author Share Posted September 30, 2005 How much is the Leica? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexdi Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 <b><a href=http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/24-vs-24.shtml>Start here</a></b>. Michael Reichmann covers the 16-35/2.8, 24/TSE, 24-70/2.8, and 24/1.4L. <p>The 17-40/L is equivalent or slightly better than the 16-35/2.8 at wide angles, and slightly worse at the telephoto end. Vignetting and flare characteristics differ, but if you don't need the speed, they're equivalents. <p>The Sigma 24/2.8 and the Canon 24/2.8 are similar. Both become quite sharp stopped down, and both flare and distort. Sigma has historically emphasized center sharpness; I suspect the Canon version may be a bit better corner to corner. I wasn't overly impressed with my Sigma, but then, I also did a lot of shooting at f/2.8. You can pull the MTF charts at Photodo, but I doubt they're any better than the L zooms.<p>But of course, the Sigma will NOT stop down on any digital body. Negates that one.. <p><b><a href=http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/>William Castleman's resolution charts for most 24mm lenses</a></b> <P>Canon's new 24-105/4L is very close to the 24-70/2.8L. I'd be surprised if you could tell them apart at any aperture past f/5.6.<p><a href=http://www.dphotojournal.com/canon-ef-24-105mm-f4l-is-usm/><B>24-70/2.8L vs. 24-105/4L vs. 17-40/4L Samples</a></b><p>DI Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klfi Posted September 30, 2005 Author Share Posted September 30, 2005 Thanks for the link to the castleman site... The 17-40 won in his test. Anyone else with similar observations? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terry_smith2 Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 Sigma has a newer 24/1.8 that should work with digital bodies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gareth_harper Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 Yoy say you have an EF28,f1.8, try that to start with. I've not tried one, so can't comment on it. I have both the EF24mmf2.8 and the EF24mmf1.4L. The EF24mmf2.8 is not a desperately sharp lens, and it's dostortion can be quite noticeable at times. The EF24mmf1.4L, is much better, it's much sharper and distortion is considerably reduced, even at f8. I still have the EF24mmf2.8 as I like compact lenses for travel. As for Lecia, remember that a good part of the advantage is that the lens sits closer to the film or sensor plane on a rangefinder body, you will loose this advantge and all your electronic functions when using such a lens on a Canon DSLR. If you want to use a Lecia rangefinder lens, buy the rangefinder to go with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oceanphysics Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 Nobody is suggesting using Leica rangefinder lenses on a Canon camera. It isn't possible. It's not a matter of losing performance as you suggest -- it's a matter of completely losing the ability to focus, except at very close range. The R lens suggested above is an SLR lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roger krueger Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 You'll have better luck at 28mm than 24mm. Both Contax and Leica have really nice recent 28's, but the Leica 24 and Contax 25 are much older designs that aren't anything special. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gareth_harper Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 "Nobody is suggesting using Leica rangefinder lenses on a Canon camera. It isn't possible. It's not a matter of losing performance as you suggest -- it's a matter of completely losing the ability to focus, except at very close range. " No idea if it's possible or not, what I do know is that using Lecia SLR or other lenses on a Canon body does not make sense. If you want to use Lecia lenses, make life easy for yourself, buy a Lecia body. Or if you are really serious about landscape photography and quality, then go medium format or bigger. Meanwhile if you are using Canon bodies, for what ever reason, buy EF lenses or 3rd party EF compatible lenses. It makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oceanphysics Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 Well we're certainly all glad you're here, Gareth, since you are obviously the only one who "knows" what "makes sense." Using a Leica SLR lens on a Canon body is perfectly reasonable for landscape photography. There is no need for autofocus and the lack of stop-down metering is not a hinderance. Buying a Leica SLR with digital back is not a great idea from a cost/performance perspective, and it's not full-frame anyway, so actually it's a fairly stupid suggestion. But of course we all have our instructions from Gareth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oceanphysics Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 Also, it's L-E-I-C-A. If you really want to spout off about something you know nothing about, you'll look marginally less foolish if you can spell it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oceanphysics Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 <i>the lack of stop-down metering is not a hinderance.</i><p>Sorry, editing problem. Should be "using stop-down metering is not a hinderance." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roger krueger Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 How sad--my Leica 19/2.8 had become my favorite lens on my 1dsII. Now I guess I'll have to stop using it because it doesn't make sense to Gareth... One of the reasons I much prefer a manual focus lens to AF lenses in some situations is that they have much, much better DOF and distance scales, making it easier to see how far you need to stop down and what you can realistically expect to get in focus. Of course, like many manufacturer's scales, there a bit optimistic for my tastes, but it's trivial to stop down one or two past what the scale says you need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gareth_harper Posted October 1, 2005 Share Posted October 1, 2005 Gosh, no need to get your knickers in a twist folks. Well I hear what you say about auto-focus. A lot of the time with a 24 you just don't need the auto-focus whatever you are shooting. I do a lot of street, documentary and demo photography, a lot of the time the auto-focus is switched off. But having said that Canon bodies have the excellant DOF function, and it's much more acurate and reasuring than any lens markings. So when I do land or townscapes, that's when I find the auto-focus really useful. Use the DOF fuction to set the focus and tell you what f-stop you need, then switch it off to compose and shoot. Lets face it, the 24l is a pretty good lens, you get 100% of the functions your Canon body offers including that excellant DOF function, and f1.4 with full autofocus can be fun when your not doing landscape. Each to your own, but I'll skip the Lecia, opps sorry Leica and stick to my 24L thanks. Makes sense to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roger krueger Posted October 1, 2005 Share Posted October 1, 2005 <i>But having said that Canon bodies have the excellant DOF function, and it's much more acurate and reasuring than any lens markings</i> <br><br> Two points of disagreement <br><br> It's NOT excellent, because you're forced to accept their definition of CoC. My favorite "focus for 5.6, shoot at f8 or f11" is nearly impossible. You're also forced to bring the camera to eye level for every shot, not always convenient. <br><br> And not all Canon bodies have the DOF function. I don't think ANY of the single-digit bodies do. The act of removing a feature from only the pro bodies seems an acknowledgement that's it's not quite ready for prime-time. <br><br> Don't get me wrong, I have and love a 24/1.4. When I'm shooting punk bands in dark clubs it accounts for 70-80% of my shots. It's still my main justification for shooting FF (I'd need a 16/1.4 on a 1.5x). But for stopped-down landscape use it's certainly good, but not really anything special. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gareth_harper Posted October 1, 2005 Share Posted October 1, 2005 Well I use two 30's, and I'm surprised that function isn't on the other bodies. This is how I do it, I do the two point focusing allowing the DOF function to centre the focus and note the f stop. I switch off the auto-focus, and turn the control dial to AP or M as desired, and if it says f5.6, I'll often go for f8 to be sure. So I don't see any of the limitations. It really works well for me. As for digial, I don't use it, I much prefer film. Though I'll probably purchase a 5D soon just to speed up some of my work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted October 2, 2005 Share Posted October 2, 2005 My 24/2.8 was extremely flare resistant. It was very good in all other aspects as well. HTH. Happy shooting, Yakim. 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