model mayhem gallery Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 When I got to my prime lenses is because I have something really speacialized and important to shoot. I have been investing in lenses and have the 50 1.2 L and 85 1.2 L, So if it were my choice i Would go with the 24 1.4L. When I grab my primes and shoot stuff like diamond ear rings for magazines, I have no doubt in my mind that those lenses are not going to bring me the best images possible with a Canon Camera. If I am shooting with a Sigma, Tamron, or lower end lens I don't have that confidence and find it hard to ask for $1000 plus dollars for the shoot. Now when I compare my Tamron 28-75 F2.8 DI which is an excellent lens to the Canon 50 1.2L there is simply NO comparrison. There is nothing like shooting with an L- series lens at 1.2 crystal clear with such shallow dof. I also have a 50 1.8 which is also pretty good, but again I just don't have the same confidence when I am shooting with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lake_0571 Posted August 8, 2008 Author Share Posted August 8, 2008 --"My 28/1.8 had very soft corners wide open (when I buy a fast lens it is mainly in order to use it wide open) and flared awfully. I'd be interested to see the same test performed a little differently: Shoot both wide open and show us the corner crops, not the center ones. "-- As Yakim had said,the corner is not so satisfied.Now I put the calender at the corner and compared:<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lake_0571 Posted August 8, 2008 Author Share Posted August 8, 2008 stopped down one step,it's improved:<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lake_0571 Posted August 8, 2008 Author Share Posted August 8, 2008 I feel at F5.6 it becomes acceptable,though still cannot match the L glass.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lake_0571 Posted August 8, 2008 Author Share Posted August 8, 2008 what about at F8?<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lester_wareham Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 I like the 28/1.8 as a fast prime, think of it as a small, light, cheap 35/1.4L. Fast AF, excellent flair resistance (sorry Yakim) and very sharp in the centre. OK corners could be sharper but plenty good enough for 10X8 prints. Yes high contrast subjects show CA, but this is so easy to fix, just one click if you set-up correctly http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/LensTests/EF_28mm_f1.8_USM/index.htm. Use it as a fast prime and it is an excellent performer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted August 10, 2008 Share Posted August 10, 2008 You don't have to apologize. It may be a copy issue. Happy shooting, Yakim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alan_myers Posted August 10, 2008 Share Posted August 10, 2008 Yeah, I like my 28/1.8 a lot for pretty much all the same reasons Lester does, and haven't really seen some of the problems others noted. I don't hesitate to use it wide open. But... 1. I always use it with a lens hood. And... 2. I am using it on 1.6X crop cameras, so only the sharpest part of the lens.. the "sweet spot". I didn't use it much on full frame (film), simply because it's not my favorite focal length there. I do enjoy it and use it a lot as a "slightly wide" normal lens on the 1.6X crop cameras. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lake_0571 Posted August 10, 2008 Author Share Posted August 10, 2008 Yakim,don't put hopes on "may be".If you take landscape's,the corner will be important and the lens is not fit,but I only take street's and regard aperture as importance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
model mayhem gallery Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 Damn, those shots with the 17-40 f4L on 5D are sick. I have the 17-40 and plan on getting what ever the upgrade to the current 5D is. Those shots are Excellent.... Good Work Stephen. PS - You make the 28 1.8 shots look pretty damn good as well. I don't see any problems with that lens from your shots... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 Lake, Since selling it I have moved to the 35/1.4 in the prime category and the 10-22 in the landscape category. Both are much sharper in the edges and flare significantly less. Actually, the 10-22 has no flare at all. Very impressive. Happy shooting, Yakim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lake_0571 Posted August 12, 2008 Author Share Posted August 12, 2008 Yakim,you'v made a good choice,35L is really worth owning. Now after showing sharpness,I'll show bokeh of 28 lens.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lester_wareham Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 There is no doubt the 35/1.4 is the sharper lens, at a cost; but to us poorer photographers the 28/1.8 gives good results and is unfairly bashed IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 Unfairly bashed? Please look at the link in my first post and tell me if you could live with such (nonexistent) flare resistance. I never expected it to be as sharp as an L at 3 times the cost. I sold it just because of the flare issue. Happy shooting, Yakim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lester_wareham Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 Yakim, I was not referring to you in that remark; I am sorry if it came over that way. More about posters that bash the lens because the corner performance might not be the best, when they just pixel peep without understanding what is needed for a sharp print. However, as I acknowledged in my first message, we have a disagreement about the lenses flare performance, which I have found to be comparable with most of the best lenses out there. If this is due to a bad copy or unrealistic expectation I don’t know, but any lens will flare that way under excessive lighting contrast. Unfortunately my understanding is you don’t have a good case from another lens taken at the same time and place to resolve this. This example where I attempt to reproduce you conditions with the 28/1.8 and 17-40/4 show similar levels of flare http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/LensTests/Flare/RealWorld/index.htm Controlled tests with the 28/1.8, 17-40/4 and 10-22 all show similar levels of flare, but of course with different geometries. http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/LensTests/Flare/EF%2028mm%20f1_8.htm http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/LensTests/Flare/EF%2017-40mm%20f4L%20at%2028mm.htm http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/LensTests/Flare/EF-S%2010-22mm%20at%2022mm.htm The 24-105/4 is a lens much more prone to flare as can be seen under the same test conditions. However this has never shown in normal real world shooting. http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/LensTests/Flare/EF%2024-105mm%20f4L%20at%2024mm.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_turner Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 Yakim- I wonder if you have any better direct comparisons than the one you linked to. Had those been identical compositions, I think your position that elements/groups etc is secondary to design/coating would be irrefutable. However, the "forest" shot has much different characteristics/dynamic range/ etc than the beach shot. I own the 28/1.8 for my 5d and enjoy it. I haven't had a situation where corner sharpness was critical, so I haven't noticed the softness at larger apertures some have, but neither have I had any flare issues even approaching the shot you linked. Cheers, Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lake_0571 Posted August 12, 2008 Author Share Posted August 12, 2008 I DIY a lens hood which is a little longer than original one(I use 40D) and found it helps to reduse flare.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yakim_peled1 Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 I rarely test lenses (the 70-200/4 IS vs. 70-200/2.8 IS case was the exception), I just shoot them and by that I learn to evaluate their strengths and weaknesses. I accept the fact that maybe I got a lemon but at that time it was so horrible that I immediately sold it. To be completely honest, I didn't expected that. I expected the borders to be soft (and they were, up to f/2.8) but that didn't bother me so much as (a) I expected that and (b) The borders were mostly OOF anyway. What I didn't expect was the flare issue. It just popped out while shooting. What a bummer.... :-( 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