p.2 #1 · 5DSR Mega Landscape Lens Test [Updated 7/27]
Thanks for the tests and teh effort that went into it. I think my two landscape lenses the 11-24 and 24-70 f2.8 mk2 are doing about the same on edges and corners. I am shooting mostly at f11 and and focusing near an edge, which really seems to help edge softness.
I also find that the auto lens correction in ACR CC does not apply enough CA for the 11-24. The 17TSE which has never needed any lens correction and which does not have a profile anyway. now needs a bit of CA where I don't recall needing any with the 5d3.
I think the 5DS-R is hard on edges. Probably not any moreso than older cameras, but it is easier to see now.
Maybe field curvature is the reason, but my theory is that when we focus somelace near the midline on an UWA stopped down, the dof covers the middle section with less than perfect focus. But the sharpness falls off towards the edges and requires more exact focus. When I focuse towards the edge, about 1/3 to 1/2 into the frame, I still get good near and infinity focus and better edge. Corners are almost always soft on every picture I see including the pros using LF gear.
p.2 #2 · 5DSR Mega Landscape Lens Test [Updated 7/27]
ggreene wrote:
Do you find the 100-400 f2 hand holdable?
Just arrived yesterday and I was buying a new car (torture). I have taken 4 pictures, have not evaluated them yet, Hey, I used to hand hold my 500f4 with a 1.4 x attached. I did some yesterday at
Here ya go, pretty much straight out of camera. This would need some NR at full size, but when downsized it covers it up. I did not sharpen it. It probably has some shake but hard to see. The DOF here is pretty shallow so only a few flowers are in focus.
p.2 #3 · 5DSR Mega Landscape Lens Test [Updated 7/27]
gdanmitchell wrote:
There are situations in which not having a 70-200 and having a 100-400 could be very viable. While the 70-200 lenses are among the best that Canon makes — true workhorse lenses — the new 100-400 seems so good in the 100-200 range that you don't give up much at all my using it instead in many situations, plus you get that added range.
A friend who made his first trip to Antarctic this past year to teach in a couple of workshops did something similar, though using the Nikon 80-400, and he used such a lens a lot with excellent results. When I photograph migratory birds, I combine this shooting with a sort of landscape photography... and I can do most of both with the 100-400.
My 70-200 has been used mostly for weddings and HS graduation. My next grand daughter is 8 years away for HS grad. The 70-200 was often short for plays and grads, and I figure the improved IS and noise performance over the years makes the 100-400 v2 a viable alternative. I recall doing my oldest grand daughters HS grad with a 400 f5.6 on a 10D and a vey dark auditorium.
I got the 100-400 so I could do birds again, I miss it since selling the 500f4.
p.2 #4 · 5DSR Mega Landscape Lens Test [Updated 7/27]
I originally got the f/2.8 70-200 for a three-year project photographing classical musicians! Having it, it turned out to useful for a lot of other stuff, too. I still have the f/4 IS version of the lens, and it is great for situations in which smaller size and lighter weight are important.
I got the 100-400 partly for wildlife, too, but I'm also a big fan of long focal lengths for landscapes.
Dan
ben egbert wrote:
My 70-200 has been used mostly for weddings and HS graduation. My next grand daughter is 8 years away for HS grad. The 70-200 was often short for plays and grads, and I figure the improved IS and noise performance over the years makes the 100-400 v2 a viable alternative. I recall doing my oldest grand daughters HS grad with a 400 f5.6 on a 10D and a vey dark auditorium.
I got the 100-400 so I could do birds again, I miss it since selling the 500f4.
p.2 #7 · 5DSR Mega Landscape Lens Test [Updated 7/27]
ben egbert wrote:
My 70-200 has been used mostly for weddings and HS graduation. My next grand daughter is 8 years away for HS grad. The 70-200 was often short for plays and grads, and I figure the improved IS and noise performance over the years makes the 100-400 v2 a viable alternative. I recall doing my oldest grand daughters HS grad with a 400 f5.6 on a 10D and a vey dark auditorium.
I got the 100-400 so I could do birds again, I miss it since selling the 500f4.
I had a 10D and 400/5.6 combo as well. Stretching its use to a dark auditorium is impressive. I eventually sold my 400/5.6 but missed it as well although not the lack of IS or zoom capability. I rented the 100-400 mkI a couple times but was always holding back buying one because of the incessant rumors for a mk2. Very happy it finally came out. So far I love it. The bokeh is sometimes a little wiggly but considering all that it gives me that's a minor nitpick.
Ben, the photo "Schwabacher Sunrise" in your top 15 is a very cool photo. It has a certain crispness to it that I like. Great capture.
p.2 #8 · 5DSR Mega Landscape Lens Test [Updated 7/27]
Snapsy,
Lot's of work, and a phenomenal job! Very useful; I spent quite a while fooling around with comparisons. As you say, seeing these shot under 'real world' landscape shooting conditions is very instructive, and in my mind, has a broader appeal that just as a comparison of performance on the 5DSr, but really is great for comparing the lenses performance differences in general as well.
Since I am planning on getting the 5DSr and own both the 16-35 f/4 IS, and the 24-105 f/4 IS, this was a treat. Thanks so much for the huge investment in time and effort it must have taken to put this together!
p.2 #9 · 5DSR Mega Landscape Lens Test [Updated 7/27]
ggreene wrote:
I had a 10D and 400/5.6 combo as well. Stretching its use to a dark auditorium is impressive. I eventually sold my 400/5.6 but missed it as well although not the lack of IS or zoom capability. I rented the 100-400 mkI a couple times but was always holding back buying one because of the incessant rumors for a mk2. Very happy it finally came out. So far I love it. The bokeh is sometimes a little wiggly but considering all that it gives me that's a minor nitpick.
Ben, the photo "Schwabacher Sunrise" in your top 15 is a very cool photo. It has a certain crispness to it that I like. Great capture. ...Show more →
Thanks, that Schabacker shot was with the lowly 17-40. One of my all time favorite personal shots.
p.2 #11 · 5DSR Mega Landscape Lens Test [Updated 7/27]
gdanmitchell wrote:
Goes to show ya'! ;-)
Dan
Ha, I had the 35f1.4 mounted when I saw the light develope and needed wider. I just got the lens changed before it was over. This taught me a lesson on primes. I only have one prime now, the 17TSE and the 11-24 is sort of pushing it aside.
p.2 #13 · 5DSR Mega Landscape Lens Test [Updated 7/27]
Sunny Sra wrote:
Snapsy,
Thanks for doing this test. Are you noticing any skewing with any of those lenses?
Never heard the term skewing for lenses but Sunny Sra sent me this article where Lloyd Chambers seems to use the term for a lens or mount that's tilted. Based on the even edge performance of my 16-35 f/4 I would say I don't see the issue Sunny.
p.2 #14 · 5DSR Mega Landscape Lens Test [Updated 7/27]
Skew could explain what I have been seeing, although when I purposely focus on an edge, I still have good near far and no problem on the other edge. I have seen this with the 11-24, the 24-70 f2.8 mk2 and the 17tse. In fact the 17TSE had this issue with the 5d3.
I mostly see this at f8 or f11, as I seldom shoot faster.
p.2 #15 · 5DSR Mega Landscape Lens Test [Updated 7/27]
snapsy wrote:
Never heard the term skewing for lenses but Sunny Sra sent me this article where Lloyd Chambers seems to use the term for a lens or mount that's tilted. Based on the even edge performance of my 16-35 f/4 I would say I don't see the issue Sunny.
I know that was an issue for some earlier users of MF cameras. They were looking forward to the very high system resolution and then discovered that the lens mount was not quite parallel to the sensor plane. Some of them went to far as to test each camera and then somehow shim the mounts to align them more perfectly.
Although I can image such an issue occurring with a DSLR, too, I haven't seen anything to suggest that it is happening with at least the three lenses that I have used on my 5Ds R.
p.2 #16 · 5DSR Mega Landscape Lens Test [Updated 7/27]
I spoke to a local guy show does astro conversions and he says that in addition to changing the filters, and adding sensor coolers, they fix lens to sensor alignment and add light absorbing material. He said the lens to sensor adjustment is always required.
p.2 #17 · 5DSR Mega Landscape Lens Test [Updated 7/27]
Only chiming in to express appreciation of this sort of testing. Thank you.
Perhaps we should establish a sub-forum in which threads of this nature can be referenced (if not actually moved, probably not necessary and might deprive them of normal traffic) next to each other, building up a easily-accessible database?
Also, a FAQ to establish some testing/post-processing guidelines so that results between contributing individuals can be easier compared?
p.2 #18 · 5DSR Mega Landscape Lens Test [Updated 7/27]
Just added the Canon 50mm f/1.8 STM and 100-400mm V1 f/4.5-5.6L.
Notes on the Canon 50mm f1/.8 STM
Spectacular across the frame starting at f/5.6. No significant field curvature noticed. Amazing performance for $125.
Notes on the Canon 100-400mm V1 f/4.5-5.6L
LV CDAF AF was quite inaccurate - had to use MF. There is a linear progression of sharpness starting wide-open and continuing all the way through f/11 at most focal lengths, for both the center and edges. Starting at 300mm I could see scene motion in LV @ max magnification even though I used a full gimbal and very strong legs with only a hint of breeze. To compensate I increased the shutter speeds, which necessitated increasing the ISO as well, so you'll have to contend with a little noise when reviewing the images. No significant field curvature noticed.
