Hello! This is my first post on forum after following it and Canon forum couple years.
I purchased within last couple weeks Contax Distagon T* 28mm f/2.8 and Leica Summicron-R 50 mm f/2.0. I tested lenses at last weekend on Kettle Moraine (WI, USA). Manual focusing wasn't any problem with 2.5x magnifier, and will be easier when my CatzEye focusing screen arrives. Then I studied the photos for couple nights. Only thing I'm missing that aperture is not recorded to EXIF, so going back to take notes while photographing...minor drawback. Now I'm convinced that the picture quality is far better from what I have ever seen from my Canon lenses, well maybe Canon 135L is about same quality.
My favourite focal lengths on full frame are 85mm and 135mm. Due to image quality preferences I have ended up shooting way too much with with 135mm which is quite narrow on 20D. The difference I'm experiencing between typical Canon lenses and Contax/Leica is the contrast and smallest details/textures, which really make the difference to me.
Leica Summicron-R 50 fixes my "missing 85mm [email protected] crop" problem but now I would like to achieve similar performance as Canon 135L, Contax 28 & Leica 50 in focal length range 80-90mm. Even mentioning the 1.6 crop I'm going to upgrade to full frame during next year, either by purchasing 5D successor or 2nd hand 5D when new model arrives.
I searched this forum, other forums, webpages and but it seems that there isn't too much information available on these lenses, mostly people are usign just Contax/Leica wide-angle lenses.
I would like to get your recommendations on following lenses - what would be most suitable for landscape photography: Canon TS-E 90mm f/2.8
- does this have the microcontrast which for example Canon EF 85 f/1.8 USM or Canon EF 50 f/1.4 USM don't have (which I found out while testing my new lenses)?
- due to it's excellent macro performance, is this lens optimized for short distances? How is the quality at infinity/far distances?
+ tilt/shift is nice additional feature for easy panoramas or adding DOF on "product photos" Contax Sonnar T* 85mm f/2.8
+ cheap
- this lens seems difficult to purchase, there was only one on eBay (bid closed) Leica Elmarit-R 90mm f/2.8
- also quite rare in eBay
He had a fairly long list of the type of lenses you might be interested in. Don't know about prices though some of these are definitely not for those with short arms.
The 90 TS-E is a pretty sharp lens but I don't know about the micro contrast. I could probably post a full size architectural/landscape shot from it on pbase if you wanted a look. Too big to email.
Thanks for the link, though I have read that thread already. Leica 100/2.0 would definetly be good but it's quite expensive and almost "too close" to 135mm. I also "don't need" speed from this lens - the small details is what I'm "hunting". If I would like to spend $2000 for this lens I think I would be happy with 85L - but I would like to find a lens which has same quality closed down to F5.6-F8 as 85L. I can do my portraits with 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8, 135L or 200L2.8 with nicely blurred backgrounds.
Also forgot to mention that small weight/size is benefit since I usually travel for my work over 200 days/year and carry two laptops regularly (own and company) ==> cannot carry 35L, 85L, 135L lens set all the time with me... Only in Finland/holiday trips (if I really want to fly out from Finland when I have change to be at home) I can use the heavier lenses, that's why the 200L2.8 gets very little use.
I would preciate 100% crop sample/full image of 90 TS-E of some landscape/architecture shot, containing some texture/small detail. I try to find this information since my feeling of Canon lenses is that they are optimized for edge contrast and to me it seems that they do not deliver the micro contrast or whatever is that what makes large prints / pixel peeping with Contax 28/2.8 look so much better due to the small details in pictures.
I broke it up into 4 pieces and included an overall down sized view.
The lens was shifted 11mm, fully left and is the left half of a panorama. It's converted from RAW with C1 LE, sharpness was at Normal 20,3 (mild) and nothing was done for contrast.
I added a last frame that has been sharpened with USM 300 .3 0. Signing off for the evening.....
As much as it pains me to say it, I'd suspect that the Contax would be the worst of the group you listed. Not a bad lens, but not as good as the others.
I'd almost suggest looking into the Canon 100/2.8 macro. It has performed well for me in telephoto landscape situations.
Thanks for the example photo. Even shifted 11mm to left the right side of photo is quite good (where the center of image circle is projected), but left side gets a little softer - the non-shifted image should be very good according to this sample.
Tilt/Shift would be nice additional bonus, at least I assume so - my PC-Nikkors are still at the post office and I haven't never actually used T/S lens. The price of 90 TS-E is quite close to the maximum what I'm willing to pay for tele landscape lens (I don't see to many used ones on eBay).
Andrew,
Thanks for your reply! Regarding Contax 85mm f/2.8 I received private message with samples and they were quite good but maybe not what I'm looking for.
Yes I have Canon 100 f/2.8 USM macro - it's quite good for landscapes, but somehow it lacks something, maybe the micro contrast at long distances - however I have been quite happy to it as a macro/close-up/near distance lens (I rarely do any 1:1 macro photography, quite often 135L at minimum focusing distance is enough for my close-ups). Also 100mm focal length is very close to 135mm and when travelling I tend to leave this lens home and bring 50mm f/2.5 compact macro instead with me - since it also used to be my best 50mm lens before I had Leica 50. The gap between 50 and 100 is quite long, for landscapes the "zooming by foot" usually doesn't work that well as it does for smaller subjects.
I think I also need to sign off for this evening (night...) as well and check tomorrow the samples again and see if anybody has any comments on cheaper 90mm Leica options or proposed any other brands (Olympus Zuiko? Maybe medium format "normal" 80mm lens would be one option as well - if there are such lenses which are sharp at the level which 35mm small sensor requires). Thanks everybody for replies & PMs.
From the lenses I know, I would say that the Leica 90mm Elmarit-R would fit the bill. The 85L is still meant to be a great lens, and the Leica 80mm Summilux-R, although it has a soft kinda glow wide-open which is gorgeous for portraits, it is really damn sharp from f/2.8 and on. Then there is the Leica 100mm Apo-Macro-R which is in its own league. This is my next lens.
Samuli: Yes, the TS-E isn't good at the very edge when fully shifted. If you either crop afterwards or limit yourself to about 9mm of shift it is very good. Stopped down (as shown) the edges (below 9mm shift) are probably as good as your 85 1.8. This is also with a full frame camera so I would expect that you'd have no problem fully shifted with the 20D. On full frame it's fairly easy to focus at f2.8. Lens hood works very well since the front lens element is deeply recessed kind of like the Canon 50mm 1.8.
If you are also intending to use it as a normal portrait lens you might want to look elsewhere. I don't find the bokeh very appealing and f2.8 doesn't give you a lot of freedom for shallow DOF effects. On the other hand it tilts so you have those sort of effects possible.
Doug
andrew_rs, there must be something wrong with the image you posted, are you sure the lens is in good shape and you picked the right adapter, what is the f number, image shake? I never had this lens, but my HB 2.8/80 would be far better on my 5D than this.
The 85L is in the same quality category as the 135L. But for landscape the 90TSE is the place to start. Tilting and keeping the lens at optimal aperture is invaluable. I haven't compared it to my 85L II, but the 90 is high quality. I find the 85 L too heavy to pack as a landscape lens.
Andrews shot above would be equally sharp near to far with the TSE. Focusing 1/4 to 1/3 back and stopping down is a compromise that does not produce great large prints.
Above 50mm I find the Canon lineup great. The 70-200/f4 is a terrific landscape lens. Instead of more expensive glass, an upgrade to FF may be a better choice. A 90TSE on a 5D shifted to double the image size is going to produce a substantially superior large image compared to one shot options. The only non-Canon lenses I'm tempted with above 50 are the new Zeiss.
I frequently shoot in the driftless area of wisconsin. Generally a zoom like the 70-200 will beat a prime due to minimal cropping.
As you can tell, in the range around 90, I find few temptations to move beyond Canon.
If you can stretch it, Guy's 100mm would be a great landscape lens in that range. The main advantage is the low distortion if you do any panoramas. The 90mm would be good the 100mm would be excellent.
Thanks for all the responses. After reading all the replies and private messages - I'm a little disappointed. It seems that there are just a very expensive options which are really good on this focal range, like Leica APO-90 and 85L. Well I have find (usually the hard way - buy the cheapest, upgrade to middle class, upgrade to high quality...) that actually quite rare that you will get quality at cheap price - so this wasn't big suprice. I just was hoping that there would be something cheap and good, like Contax f/2.8 28mm.
Doug, did you really mean Stopped down (as shown) the edges (below 9mm shift) are probably as good as your 85 1.8. and not 85L? I'm trying to find replacement landscape lens for 85 f1.8 due to lack of microcontrast/small details. It's fine lens for portraits etc. where small DOF is needed but I don't concider it very good lens for landscape photography.
dcmiller, I used to have 70-200L4 but I went from zooms to primes e.g. 85f1.8, 100f2.8 macro, 135L, 200L. And now I try to find better quality replacement for 85f1.8 which is most of the time better than 70-200L4 zoom was, specially when using autofocus on medium distance subjects 20D aufofocus really sucks with lenses slower than f/2.8. So 70-200L4 (or 2.8) is definetly out of the question for me. Also I like more photographing with primes.
Victor, Leica 90 f/2.8 (2nd version) seems quite nice, on your example photo the detail on overexposed leafs seems quite nice for 1:1 crop. If I see these sold for good price I definetly concider purhcasing.
Couple of images what I actually I'm looking for - very small detail / texture (sorry about boring test images - haven't yet had time to do any serious photography with my new Contax and Leica):
I don't have the Leica 90/2.8 R-version (2nd version) but by all accounts it is an excellent lens. Cost about $400-500.
I however do have the Leica 90/2.8 M version current version which is reputed to be optically similar to the 90/2.8 R-version (2nd version) and it is excellent. Make sure you get the 2nd version since the 1st version is apparently not as good.
I have the Contax 85/2.8 which is also an excellent lens. Sharp corner to corner (on 5D), very contrasty and nice color. If you can find one at a good price, get it. Cost about $300-400.
Another one I can recommend is the Voigtlander 90/3.5 which you can find in Nikon F mount. It is similar to the Leica 90/2.8 in performance but focussing may be a problem due to f3.5 max aperture. It should cost around $250-300.
Finally, the Olympus 100/2.8 is also a good performer but beware of bigger sample variation problem. Not as good as the above lenses but still excellent sharpness. Cost about $200.
Samuli, stopped down you will very little difference between all the lenses mentioned. Especially with a crop camera. Also, very good lens with movements will produce better results than an excellent lens without movements when used for landscapes.
The 5D with the 85 1.8 will beat any of the mentioed lenses on a 20D. The new XTi will likely produce an improvement over the 20D.
Not sure what the issue is with focus. First, you're looking at some manual lenses, and second, landscapes aren't moving and autofocus is generally unimportant.
Be sure to test the lens you buy against the 85 1.8. Stopped down you're going to need to look at the exif to tell which lens was used.
Made me think of Olympus 90mm f/2 macro. I have no experience with it but I have read good things about it. Not sure how well it would work for your purpose.
vahonen wrote:
Doug, did you really mean Stopped down (as shown) the edges (below 9mm shift) are probably as good as your 85 1.8. and not 85L? I'm trying to find replacement landscape lens for 85 f1.8 due to lack of microcontrast/small details. It's fine lens for portraits etc. where small DOF is needed but I don't concider it very good lens for landscape photography.
Actually my comparison with the 85 1.8 was just supposition. I think I said earlier that the only lens I've actually compared the TS-E to is the Hasselblad 100mm.
What my real point was is that the TS-E, shifted to near maximum (like 9mm) and stopped down a couple stops, would be as good or better on the outside edges of the frame as a typical Canon prime (like the 85 1.8). I was thinking full frame -- on the 20D you'll never see this edge. I've never actually used the 85L and the TS-E isn't really meant to be used wide open so a comparison at F2.8 is pretty meaningless though I'm sure any of the fast primes would be much sharper at F2.8.
If you look at the sharpened version of the samples I posted above I think you can see that picking out individual bricks at over 200m is not a problem. The lens certainly would not have trouble resolving leaves at 20m. But these are at F11.
Doug
Edited by Doug Morgan on Sep 20, 2006 at 09:12 AM GMT
