Hi all,
If I could I'd post this in the Landscape Forum I would, but I don't want to draw the ire of the moderators by asking a gear question there. So, here we are. I'm primarily a landscape photographer and have been pleased with using my 28-70 2.8L and 70-200L for the bulk of my work. Over time I've come to realize that for my style I am most pleased with images taken at about 60mm (full frame).
Now I want to milk the most that I can out of my sensor by using the best lens and want to try a prime lens in the 45-60 range. Obviously the crispness and resolution of the lens is paramount, but so too is Chromatic Abberation avoidance, color fidelity, and the 'pop' expected of an L quality lens. Shooting wide open isn't a factor for me, so lens speed, or even focussing speed, isn't important. I've toyed with the idea of a 45 TS-E, I've looked at the Zeiss 50 and I'm still not sure. The TS-E would be nice for greater sense of depth of field, but I'm not sure if perhaps the Zeiss 50 or a Canon prime would give me a similar edge by being that much sharper than my zooms. When I do pano's I do them in portrait orientation and take 5-6, so the shifting on the TS-E doesn't buy me much there.
For those of you who do landscape, cityscape and similar type full frame shots what are your druthers and thoughts on the 'best' 45-60 mm lens for me?

Thanks,

Ted

Well, if focus speed is NOT important, the Canon 50/2.5 macro is exceptionally sharp and very well corrected for aberations. It also has the virtue of being pretty inexpensive.

HTH,
Omar

There are actually 5 Zeiss 50's to consider and all are brilliant. There is the ZE 50mm f/1.4 that has been available for just about a year and comes in a Canon mount and has auto aperture, but manual focus. For landscapes if you have a camera with live view I would recommend focusing manually with live view any way so manual focus should not be an issue. This lens is fantastic at infinity. Look at some of the shots from philber and you will be mightily impressed. By the end of the year, however, the ZE 50mm f/2 macro should also be released. In Nikon mount this lens is generally regarded as even better than the f/1.4. It is bigger and costs more, however. You could also pick up a Contax N 50mm f/1.4 and get it converted to an autofocus EOS mount by conurus. This is a fantastic lens as well and has autofocus if that matters to you. If you can live with an adpated lens, however, you could save quite a bit of money. The Zeiss 50mm f1/4 and the 50mm f/1.7 in Contax/Yashica mount can be pretty easily adpated to EOS mount. The latter will run you about $250 and the former about $150 plus the cost of an adapter. These are terrific lenses as well and should work fine for landscape shooting. Finally given your preference for focal length you might consider the Zeiss 35-70mm f/3.4 in Contax/Yashica mount. This is a terrific zoom and even Zeiss suggests that it is as sharp as primes in its range and would give you more flexibility in focal length choice. If you go with an adapted lens (i.e., Contax/Yashica mount) you might want to ask about adapters in the alt forum. I hope this helps.

Depending on how much you want to spend, there is the Leica 60mm macro, the Sigma 50mm macro, the Nikon 55 (not sure on the exact length), Zeiss 50mm macro, and finally the canon 50mm macro. The canon and sigma have slow AF the other 3 are manual only. They all have different color, micro contrast, and resolution capabilities. Guy over in the alternate forum has probably tested all of them on a FF body (5D etc..). Outside of the Canon and Sigma all the others will set you back your first born child and half a years pay.

If it was my choice I would only opt for a macro IF your style is shoot faster than F8 since that is where the difference is. The other issues are micro contrast and color which is a personal preference.

Gerry

Zeiss 50 f/1.4 either ZE or older Contax version. Sensationally sharp from f/2.8 on and great contrast, superb landscape lens. A bit soft wide open, but not too bad and already very good @ f/1.7 IMO.

Thanks guys,
I appreciate the info,

Ted

If you are stuck on the 60mm focal length and want the best lens there is, you should be looking at the Coastal Optics 60mm f4 Apo Macro with a Nikon to Canon lens adapter.

http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/CoastalOpt-60mm-UV-VIS-IR-1:4-Apo-Macro-lens-17154.htm

I've had the 45 TS-E - it's pretty good for some landscape scenes but not as universal at that FL as the 24mm & it doesn't have the "pop" as you may be looking for & shows CA pretty easily in bright scenes.

50mm for landscape is kinda long but pano's well. A Zeiss 35-70/3.4 as Steve recommends above is a wonderful landscape and versatile lens. If your looking for rich color, landscape contrast & "pop" at that FL - that's a great lens. I have tested this lens vs. the 24-105 & 17-40 "L" - both good lenses. I've sold the "L"s & replaced them with Zeiss.

Yes, Zeiss 35-70/3.4. Sharper than the Canon 50 macro lens. See tests at 16-9.net

omarlyn wrote:
Well, if focus speed is NOT important, the Canon 50/2.5 macro is exceptionally sharp and very well corrected for aberations. It also has the virtue of being pretty inexpensive.

HTH,
Omar
+1

50/2.5 is probably canons sharpest lens.