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

  

Archive 2016 · Sharpness Test (non-Scientific) Canon Lenses vs. Carl Zeiss Lenses

  
 
billsamuels
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Sharpness Test (non-Scientific) Canon Lenses vs. Carl Zeiss Lenses


I received my "film" Carl Zeiss lens from KEH. It's an older-vintage Zeiss 50mm F/1.7 lens and based upon the aperture scale (all white), my guess is that it's an AE lens. Someone asked me last week here on FM if I was going to compare it to a Canon 50mm lens so here is what I did.

I took a letter I got recently that was framed and I took photos using the two 50mm lenses I have, plus a couple of other lenses, one being a Zeiss and another being a Mamiya 80mm F/2.8 "C" lens, to compare how sharp the letter was at the same distance. I set the Canon Camera (SL1) onto an ISO of 3200 for all lenses and I tried to take each photo using an aperture of F4.0. In a couple of instances, where the lens was known to be sharper at another aperture, I took photos at both F4.0 and the sharper aperture.

YOU TELL ME what you think is the sharpest lens Remember, many of you thought the Zeiss 50mm F1.4 was the sharpest lens in the world and the 50mm F/1.7 is a baby cousin of that great lens, and many of you felt that it's just as sharp.

The lenses used are as follows (photos in this order):

1. Canon EF-S 18-55mm F/4
2. Zeiss 50mm F/1.7
3. Mamiya 80mm F/2.8 "C"
4. Canon EF 50mm F/1.4
5. Zeiss 28mm F/2

Check out the photos - Photos have lenses and exposure information. Please let me know what you think!!!





Canon Rebel SL1 (used in all photos), EF-S 18-55mm F/3.5-5.6 lens, ISO 3200, 1/160, F/4.0







Zeiss 50mm F/1.7 Lens (Used) ISO 3200, 1/160, F4.0







Mamiya 80mm F/2.4







Canon EF 50mm F/1.4, ISO 3200, 1/200, F/4.0







Canon EF 50mm F/1.4, ISO 3200, 1/100, F8.0 (NOTE: LENS KNOWN TO BE SHARPER @ F8)




May 25, 2016 at 09:46 PM
billsamuels
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Sharpness Test (non-Scientific) Canon Lenses vs. Carl Zeiss Lenses


Here are the final two photos, both from a Zeiss 25mm F/2 Distagon T* ZE, different aperture.





Zeiss Distagon T* 28mm F/2.0 ZE, ISO 3200, 1/200, F4.0







Zeiss Distagon T* 28mm F/2.0 ZE, ISO 3200, 1/60, F5.6




May 25, 2016 at 09:52 PM
RustyBug
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Sharpness Test (non-Scientific) Canon Lenses vs. Carl Zeiss Lenses


Interesting, but imo there's a fatal flaw in play with the results.

Since the amount of contrast is a component of the perception, the amount of EV illumination should be the same for all. Recording more / less EV from the reflectance values of the ink vs. paper will yield a different return based on the different absorption / reflectance rate per a different time / aperture if they are not equitable.

Or, think of it this way ... turn the lights down low or off and they will all have the same amount of light being reflected (i.e. none) and the perceived contrast will be the same for all. Conversely, blast them all with a 1,000,000 EV's and they will all return so bright that they will look the same regarding contrast perception.

Granted, these are somewhere between 0 -1,000,000 but with different EV's of illumination / return (time based) there will be inherently different contrast levels recorded ... not necessarily because of the lens, but because of the exposure variance. Granted, different lenses have diff transmission rates may generate different outcomes, but since sharpness is perceived contrast, imo all pieces are to be factored in for the outcome ... without a compensation to offset the contrast of the light transmission.

Admittedly, no matter how one tests, someone will always find flaws in the approach, but I might just run them at the same lighting, same aperture, same shutter for a standardized EV exposure ... and let the chips fall where they may.

Your choice of f/4 or maybe 5.6 seems reasonable (if using the slow zoom kit in the test group). Imo, by the time you get to f/8, the dof impact could be providing false "sharpness"



May 25, 2016 at 10:36 PM
billsamuels
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Sharpness Test (non-Scientific) Canon Lenses vs. Carl Zeiss Lenses


I did run each test with the same ISO, fstop (4.0), shutter 1/160, and I tried to get the same amount of the letter into each photo given each lenses focal area. Some tests I repeated with a second aperture of f5.6 or f8, but all had the original aperture used of f4.0.

The light didn't change during the tests either! Each photo was taken with the same amount of ambient light.

I'm not sure what you're saying I did wrong?



May 26, 2016 at 11:55 AM
dhphoto
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Sharpness Test (non-Scientific) Canon Lenses vs. Carl Zeiss Lenses


Just checking, why would you choose an ISO of 3200 to do a lens test?

IMHO a page of type is a very poor subject (and as all these pictures look basically the same they haven't told you much)

I think you need to rethink this



May 26, 2016 at 12:08 PM
Imagemaster
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Sharpness Test (non-Scientific) Canon Lenses vs. Carl Zeiss Lenses


Who really cares what the sharpest lens is? There are many other factors that influence what the sharpest image is. Since most people would not see or notice the difference, I don't know why anyone would waste their time and money using adapters and putting Zeiss lenses on Canon bodies.

Just use the sharpest Canon lens on a Canon body.



May 26, 2016 at 12:25 PM
takowasa
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Sharpness Test (non-Scientific) Canon Lenses vs. Carl Zeiss Lenses


Imagemaster wrote:
Who really cares what the sharpest lens is?


People for whom resolution is important.


There are many other factors that influence what the sharpest image is.

Is there a reason those other factors will be different if using a sharp lens?


Since most people would not see or notice the difference, I don't know why anyone would waste their time and money using adapters and putting Zeiss lenses on Canon bodies.

Would you make the same argument for APS-C over FF?


Just use the sharpest Canon lens on a Canon body.

Why bother if "there are many other factors that influence what the sharpest image is"? And why use the sharpest Canon lens if a lens from another brand is sharper, and resolution is important?




May 26, 2016 at 12:53 PM
jharter
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Sharpness Test (non-Scientific) Canon Lenses vs. Carl Zeiss Lenses


You don't say, but were you using a tripod? I ask because the framing is relatively askew for some of the shots. The contax 50 shot for example looks out of level on the right side.

In the end, a user will do whatever tests he is able to do and decide which lens looks best/sharpest to him. Even professional lens tests get shot down for methodology and lack of real world applicability. So go with the lens in hand that looks best to you.



May 26, 2016 at 01:15 PM
Robin Smith
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Sharpness Test (non-Scientific) Canon Lenses vs. Carl Zeiss Lenses


Distortion seems to be the main obvious differences between the lenses, but sharpness wise, in this test, they seem much of a muchness. That's because you picked no apertures wider than f4. All these lenses (with the possible exception of the 18-55 - and it looks good except for distortion) will perform well at f4. What aperture was the Mamiya? Second, we can't see the enlargements - these are not at pixel level. Third, 3200 is a noisy ISO - you should pick 200 or so to discern fine differences. Fourth: the field of view of the lenses is not the same, so the text is not always the same size, so we are not comparing like with like. Fifth: the text is not small enough to push the resolution - you have to discern slight differences in the edge sharpness which is difficult (particularly given the previous comments) you need finer details to better assess the resolution differences. This is why people use landscape/city scape shots where there are lots of fine details visible at different scales.


Having said this, the 18-55, 25 and 28mm all suffer from barrel distortion, as does the Zeiss 50mm to a lesser degree. Canon 50 looks to be as good if not better than all the others. Not a surprise as we know it is excellent at f4.



May 26, 2016 at 01:59 PM
Imagemaster
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Sharpness Test (non-Scientific) Canon Lenses vs. Carl Zeiss Lenses


takowasa wrote:
People for whom resolution is important.


Then maybe those people should be using it on a body that has the best sensor for handling that resolution, and not an SL1 such as the OP used.


Is there a reason those other factors will be different if using a sharp lens?

No, and who said there was?


Would you make the same argument for APS-C over FF?

No idea what you are talking about. Hardly a similar analogy.


Why bother if "there are many other factors that influence what the sharpest image is"? And why use the sharpest Canon lens if a lens from another brand is sharper, and resolution is important?

I already said why. Try reading again. Just because a Zeiss lens is sharper than a Canon lens does not necessarily mean it will be sharper when you put an adapter between it and a Canon body.

As pointed out, the tests shots by the OP are flawed, so what is the point of which lens is sharper?




May 26, 2016 at 03:05 PM
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Sharpness Test (non-Scientific) Canon Lenses vs. Carl Zeiss Lenses


Imagemaster wrote:
... Just because a Zeiss lens is sharper than a Canon lens does not necessarily mean it will be sharper when you put an adapter between it and a Canon body.


If the adapter is precise (like a Leitax mount), the Zeiss will be sharper on a Canon body.




May 26, 2016 at 04:01 PM
Monito
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Sharpness Test (non-Scientific) Canon Lenses vs. Carl Zeiss Lenses


For under-exposed, high ISO, high contrast, non-challenging subject matter at web resolution (1000 px long side) ...

... they are all plenty sharp.

For other usage, this series does not address. But for many and most purposes those lenses are likely to be plenty sharp too, even if ultimately there is a range of sharpness.

Presumably (but I did not see it stated), those are full-frame images reduced by some unknown software to web size.



May 26, 2016 at 04:53 PM
Monito
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Sharpness Test (non-Scientific) Canon Lenses vs. Carl Zeiss Lenses


In the final analysis, sharpness is far from the only factor deciding lens choice, not always the most important factor, and even when it is the most important factor it is not often nearly as important as many think.



May 26, 2016 at 04:56 PM
rw11
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Sharpness Test (non-Scientific) Canon Lenses vs. Carl Zeiss Lenses


I'd use a test chart and blow up the pics to get an idea which will look better if a large wall hanging print is made.

yes, use a lower ISO

the lens may not have the same T-stops even if the f-stops are set the same


sharpness is a virtue, but is not the only virtue



May 26, 2016 at 05:10 PM
takowasa
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Sharpness Test (non-Scientific) Canon Lenses vs. Carl Zeiss Lenses


takowasa wrote:
People for whom resolution is important.


Imagemaster wrote:
Then maybe those people should be using it on a body that has the best sensor for handling that resolution, and not an SL1 such as the OP used.


Indeed, unless, of course, they want the most resolution they can get with a particular body because they like that body for other reasons.


takowasa wrote:
Is there a reason those other factors will be different if using a sharp lens?


Imagemaster wrote:
No, and who said there was?


I misinterpreted that you were trying to say that the adapted would nullify any sharpness advantage of the lens. Do adapters really do this?


takowasa wrote:
Why bother if "there are many other factors that influence what the sharpest image is"? And why use the sharpest Canon lens if a lens from another brand is sharper, and resolution is important?


Imagemaster wrote:
I already said why. Try reading again. Just because a Zeiss lens is sharper than a Canon lens does not necessarily mean it will be sharper when you put an adapter between it and a Canon body.

As pointed out, the tests shots by the OP are flawed, so what is the point of which lens is sharper?



So adapters eat up, and then some, any resolution advantage a sharper lens might have? For example, back in the day when all those landscape photographers were using the Zeiss 21 / 2.8, they were kidding themselves?




May 26, 2016 at 06:31 PM
scalesusa
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Sharpness Test (non-Scientific) Canon Lenses vs. Carl Zeiss Lenses


takowasa wrote:
[
So adapters eat up, and then some, any resolution advantage a sharper lens might have? For example, back in the day when all those landscape photographers were using the Zeiss 21 / 2.8, they were kidding themselves?



This assumes air in a adapter is sharper for some lenses, or that it has glass in it. A precisely machined adapter is not critical for the shots shown, as long as its manual focus. It may not focus on infinity if its too thick, but that's not a issue here. If a adapter mount thickness is inconsistent, (off from side to side), then the opposite edges would have focus issues. Since most adapters (probably all) are turned on a lathe, they are extremely accurate from side to side.




May 29, 2016 at 06:42 PM
RustyBug
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Sharpness Test (non-Scientific) Canon Lenses vs. Carl Zeiss Lenses


billsamuels wrote:
I did run each test with the same ISO, fstop (4.0), shutter 1/160, and I tried to get the same amount of the letter into each photo given each lenses focal area. Some tests I repeated with a second aperture of f5.6 or f8, but all had the original aperture used of f4.0.

The light didn't change during the tests either! Each photo was taken with the same amount of ambient light.

I'm not sure what you're saying I did wrong?


Sorry, I took so long to get back to you.

The EV values for the different exposure settings are not equalized, by the SS / Aperture variations you used. So, while the light may have been consistent, the exposures weren't.

billsamuels wrote:
Here are the final two photos, both from a Zeiss 25mm F/2 Distagon T* ZE, different aperture.


And different exposures.









May 29, 2016 at 10:16 PM
leftcoastlefty
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Sharpness Test (non-Scientific) Canon Lenses vs. Carl Zeiss Lenses


Wow, I gotta say this might be the worst lens test ever published around these parts. I'm glad it was billed as "non-Scientific".

billsamuels wrote:
I'm not sure what you're saying I did wrong?


I'm sorry, but you did everything wrong. Try this:

- Use consistent lenses (all 50mm)
- Use a tripod, align the camera to level and square to the subject
- Use a consistent distance, and a bit farther away (5-15 feet)
- Don't use a subject covered with glass
- Use a lower ISO
- Show 100% crops
- Use a consistent aperture, preferably closer to wide open. Few people buy an f/1.4 lens to shoot at f/8.
- Use a full frame camera
- And for aesthetics at least, correct the white balance

There's a reason people shoot brick walls. It's a good simple test.







May 30, 2016 at 11:29 AM





FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

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.