Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

Archive 2015 · DXOMark posted EF 11-24mm f/4L results: Ultra-wide champ

  
 
Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · DXOMark posted EF 11-24mm f/4L results: Ultra-wide champ


DXOMark posted EF 11-24mm f/4L results
DXOMark.com posted their results for Canon's ultra wide EF 11-24mm f/4L lens.

Here is an excerpt:

"Canon has proved it can compete with its long-term rival Nikon as well as with new challengers, such as Sigma, who offer some very specialized models at accessible prices. Sure, the EF 11-24mm f4L USM lacks the fast f2.8 aperture of the Nikon, but Canon traded that for wider coverage and didn’t make any concessions with image quality."

Read full review
________

Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L USM lens $2,999
B&H Photo | Adorama




Jul 22, 2015 at 12:29 AM
sirimiri
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · DXOMark posted EF 11-24mm f/4L results: Ultra-wide champ


I have to say, had I some interiors lined up, I would probably use this lens.




(use=buy, don't tell the wife)


((and what the hell is "P-Mpix (Perceptual Mpix)"?))



Jul 22, 2015 at 01:09 AM
Stoffer
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · DXOMark posted EF 11-24mm f/4L results: Ultra-wide champ


uuuh, nice!

You can get directly to the measurements here, which shows that it is sharper at 11mm than 24mm.

http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Canon/Canon-EF-11-24mm-F4L-USM-mounted-on-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III---Measurements__795

Choose the tab Sharpness and then the tab Field map.



Jul 22, 2015 at 03:59 AM
molson
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · DXOMark posted EF 11-24mm f/4L results: Ultra-wide champ


They're still testing lenses on a 5D Mark III? What a joke...


Jul 22, 2015 at 09:29 AM
johnctharp
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · DXOMark posted EF 11-24mm f/4L results: Ultra-wide champ


molson wrote:
They're still testing lenses on a 5D Mark III? What a joke...


Not really, for the sake of consistency.



Jul 22, 2015 at 09:35 AM
molson
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · DXOMark posted EF 11-24mm f/4L results: Ultra-wide champ


johnctharp wrote:
Not really, for the sake of consistency.


If that's true, then why aren't they testing everything with a 20D?

Not that it matters much - now that they're in business with Sony, their tests are no longer objective or relevant.



Jul 22, 2015 at 09:38 AM
Sunny Sra
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · DXOMark posted EF 11-24mm f/4L results: Ultra-wide champ


so do Dxo Mark and Photozone compete against each other? For 1 the lens is champ..for the other its "meh"


Jul 22, 2015 at 10:29 AM
Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · DXOMark posted EF 11-24mm f/4L results: Ultra-wide champ


molson wrote:
If that's true, then why aren't they testing everything with a 20D?

Not that it matters much - now that they're in business with Sony, their tests are no longer objective or relevant.


They'll probably re-test all lenses with the Canon 5DSR soon since they need the data for their software profiles anyway. When that happens, Canon lenses will get a big bump in perceptual megapixel.
Since they can't make profiles for Canon TS-E lenses, they never bothered to test them.



Jul 22, 2015 at 10:58 AM
Scott Stoness
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · DXOMark posted EF 11-24mm f/4L results: Ultra-wide champ


Sunny Sra wrote:
so do Dxo Mark and Photozone compete against each other? For 1 the lens is champ..for the other its "meh"


I think photozone.de is more objective and rarely says "great". Photozone is consistently tough in its ratings of all brands,

Dxomark who have measurements that seem to tilt to sony sensor by ignoring ignoring usability, fps, burst recovery.... What is the point of testing a lens on 20mpx camera and comparing it to a 36mpx camera. This is a test of the body not the camera.However if you ignore the weighted conclusions, there is usable data in dxomark - which I appreciate.




Jul 22, 2015 at 11:59 AM
Sunny Sra
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · DXOMark posted EF 11-24mm f/4L results: Ultra-wide champ


Scott Stoness wrote:
I think photozone.de is more objective and rarely says "great". Photozone is consistently tough in its ratings of all brands,

Dxomark who have measurements that seem to tilt to sony sensor by ignoring ignoring usability, fps, burst recovery.... What is the point of testing a lens on 20mpx camera and comparing it to a 36mpx camera. This is a test of the body not the camera.However if you ignore the weighted conclusions, there is usable data in dxomark - which I appreciate.



I don't care for either of their scores/opinions etc...i'd rather depend on my experience and other photogs around me and by looking at prints
it's just annoying how much weigh these type of tests get from newbies



Jul 22, 2015 at 12:21 PM
Charlie N
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · DXOMark posted EF 11-24mm f/4L results: Ultra-wide champ


Scott Stoness wrote:
I think photozone.de is more objective and rarely says "great". Photozone is consistently tough in its ratings of all brands,

Dxomark who have measurements that seem to tilt to sony sensor by ignoring ignoring usability, fps, burst recovery.... What is the point of testing a lens on 20mpx camera and comparing it to a 36mpx camera. This is a test of the body not the camera.However if you ignore the weighted conclusions, there is usable data in dxomark - which I appreciate.



more objective, however, dxomark is more comprehensive by far, noone even comes close.



Jul 22, 2015 at 12:50 PM
johnctharp
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · DXOMark posted EF 11-24mm f/4L results: Ultra-wide champ


Sunny Sra wrote:
I don't care for either of their scores/opinions etc...i'd rather depend on my experience and other photogs around me and by looking at prints
it's just annoying how much weigh these type of tests get from newbies


I find the data useful- as a newbie in many areas- for providing an orientation on relative lens performance and/or relative sensor performance, within the limitations of their testing (which is to say, still quite limited). And generally speaking, I've found their test results to track with reality in my own observations.



Jul 22, 2015 at 12:52 PM
Schlotkins
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · DXOMark posted EF 11-24mm f/4L results: Ultra-wide champ


I look at TDP, Photozone, and dxomark. I think most of the time they give the same story. I do agree the dxomark scores are worthless, especially because the sharpness score depends on the MP of the camera, but the underlying data are good.

This is one of the cases where there is a HUGE disagreement between the two sources. The TDP crops seem more consistent with Dxomark.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=977&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=3&LensComp=949&CameraComp=979&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=3

With that said, there is no way the frame is this consistent:

http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Canon/Canon-EF-11-24mm-F4L-USM-mounted-on-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III---Measurements__795

Chris



Jul 22, 2015 at 12:56 PM
darbo
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · DXOMark posted EF 11-24mm f/4L results: Ultra-wide champ


Sunny Sra wrote:
I don't care for either of their scores/opinions etc...i'd rather depend on my experience and other photogs around me and by looking at prints
it's just annoying how much weigh these type of tests get from newbies


It's way worse than that I'm afraid. I've seen plenty of stupid comments by experienced photographers who should know better. They'll compare the DXO mpix score of the EF 16-35mm f/4L IS on a 5D III to the Sony FE 16-35mm f/4 OSS ZA on an a7R and claim the Sony lens is garbage and vastly inferior because the mpix score is about the same. In real world usage, the Sony is quite sharp (up to about 28mm), so I feel those claims based on extrapolating a DXO mpix score from one lens/body to another is ridiculous.

All I know for sure is my copy (my second copy) of the 11-24mm impresses me from a sharpness standpoint. I've owned the 14-24mm (shot both on my a7R) and the sharpness seems comparable to me. I was surprised that DXO documents a little worse CA on the 11-24mm than 14-24mm. I guess my CA cleanup workflow has become so efficient that I don't think about it. I love that the 11-24 has such good distortion and flare control.




Jul 22, 2015 at 01:58 PM
Charlie N
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · DXOMark posted EF 11-24mm f/4L results: Ultra-wide champ


Schlotkins wrote:
I look at TDP, Photozone, and dxomark. I think most of the time they give the same story. I do agree the dxomark scores are worthless, especially because the sharpness score depends on the MP of the camera, but the underlying data are good.

This is one of the cases where there is a HUGE disagreement between the two sources. The TDP crops seem more consistent with Dxomark.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=977&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=3&LensComp=949&CameraComp=979&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=3

With that said, there is no way the frame is this consistent:

http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Canon/Canon-EF-11-24mm-F4L-USM-mounted-on-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III---Measurements__795

Chris


I think it is. My interpretation is that the lens is sharper throughout the entire range, at F8 rather than F11, and tdp concurs: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=977&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=6&API=3&LensComp=977&CameraComp=979&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=6&APIComp=4

looks pretty consistent if you check out TDP



Jul 22, 2015 at 02:41 PM
molson
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · DXOMark posted EF 11-24mm f/4L results: Ultra-wide champ


Charlie N wrote:
more objective, however, dxomark is more comprehensive by far, noone even comes close.


I guess no one even comes close to their lack of objectivity...

DxO's rating for the new Sony 16-35mm f2.8 lens is a hilarious example. They praise the new lens, even though it scores lower than the original version, and they admit that the only noticeable difference is a much higher price tag - but then then they chide Nikon and Canon for not implementing the same "upgrades" in their lenses (both of which happen score higher than the Sony to begin with...).





Jul 23, 2015 at 10:25 AM
johnctharp
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · DXOMark posted EF 11-24mm f/4L results: Ultra-wide champ


molson wrote:
I guess no one even comes close to their lack of objectivity...

DxO's rating for the new Sony 16-35mm f2.8 lens is a hilarious example. They praise the new lens, even though it scores lower than the original version, and they admit that the only noticeable difference is a much higher price tag - but then then they chide Nikon and Canon for not implementing the same "upgrades" in their lenses (both of which happen score higher than the Sony to begin with...).



Their 'reviews' are (or appear to be) written by grade-schoolers who don't understand the data being presented. That hasn't changed in years, and reading them is not recommended. Look at the data yourself, that's what we're talking about.



Jul 23, 2015 at 10:28 AM
Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · DXOMark posted EF 11-24mm f/4L results: Ultra-wide champ


molson wrote:
I guess no one even comes close to their lack of objectivity...

DxO's rating for the new Sony 16-35mm f2.8 lens is a hilarious example. They praise the new lens, even though it scores lower than the original version, and they admit that the only noticeable difference is a much higher price tag - but then then they chide Nikon and Canon for not implementing the same "upgrades" in their lenses (both of which happen score higher than the Sony to begin with...).


I'd skip their opinion and overall scores and just look at the measurement data. From my experience testing some lenses, it's usually spot on and therefore a great resource. Their software bases corrections on this data and therefore must be unbiased.

It's troubling that they don't average out their results with multiple lenses, skipping the important lens variation variable. For wide angles, I really like Roger's latest tests at infinity and dozen of samples tested and averaged.



Jul 23, 2015 at 12:19 PM
molson
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · DXOMark posted EF 11-24mm f/4L results: Ultra-wide champ




Their 'reviews' are (or appear to be) written by grade-schoolers who don't understand the data being presented.


I'm curious why you would trust data compiled by grade-schoolers, if you don't believe they understand what they're doing?



Jul 23, 2015 at 12:42 PM
hotdog12
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · DXOMark posted EF 11-24mm f/4L results: Ultra-wide champ


I own both the new 11-24 f/4L and the 16-35 f/4L IS. In all honesty, I suspect the 16-35 f/4L IS might just be a hair sharper in the 16-24 range, but I've yet to sit down and do an objective test on a tripod. I think that this is more a testimony to the superb optics on the 16-35 than anything else.

That said, the 11-24 f/4L is just freaking astonishing when you venture to the ultra-wide end of the zoom range. I've used this lens handheld at f/4 and f/5.6 on several editorial assignments and it opens up whole new visual possibilities.



Jul 23, 2015 at 01:05 PM
1
       2       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.