At one point the Canon 300/2.8L IS lens was the best lens ever tested by CdI (French photo magazine). They had previously tested Leica glass as well...
moondigger wrote:
At one point the Canon 300/2.8L IS lens was the best lens ever tested by CdI (French photo magazine). They had previously tested Leica glass as well...
Just something to think about, Leica Man.
Is there any trace available on the net for the one point ?
Pondria wrote:
Is there any trace available on the net for the one point ?
I knew somebody would ask... but I can't find it now. I read it less than a year ago on either photo.net or one of the rec.photo... USENET groups. The test would have been more than a year ago, obviously... that's just when I read about it. It was an English translation of the French article. I'm fairly certain they said it was the best lens they had ever tested. If not the best lens, then the best 300mm lens.
I'll keep looking, but the reference I saw seems to be gone. Maybe there's another reference...
Larry Carter wrote:
I would truely like to see some of your work Lecia Man... just curious why you need such precision lenses... you must be God-like in your photos!
Thanks, Dan & Russ !
In spite of all the critques, Photodo is still the site that actually tested lenses quantitatively. According to them, EF 200/1.8 is the best lens that they have ever tested including Zeiss and Leica.
Leica Man why don't you save yourself the hassel and purchase a Digital Module R, then you get to keep using those awesome lenses and have a fantastic body that is capable of both analogue and digital. If I had a system like your existing one it would be a no brainer. Heck if a few more Leica R system owners bought the module R it might just save the company.
1. Hillarious thread for a Sat evening!
2. Pick whatever glasses that please you! Just forget the name! Almost anything can be attached to your 1DsII.
3. Don't listen to folks that complaint about the lack of autofocus etc... They might not have the same shooting style, or they might not even tried the manual focus lenses themself
4. Canon does make some fine lenses as other have stated.
I think its a bit much to show up here and tell many of us who have thousands of dollars invested in Canon glass that our lenses are junk...You may not have used that word but this was the message I got when I read your opening salvo.
(I guess I am just feeling contentious because my cha cha was off tonight )
Edited by John Power on Mar 20, 2005 at 01:25 AM GMT
Tuan,
You are correct they never tested the Apo Sonnar 200mm f/2 nor did they tested Lecia Apo-Summicron 180mm f/2.
It has been reported that in Germany they tested these lens and found the German lens has more resolving power. I personally tested all three of these lens and just look at my list and you see the Canon EF 200mm f/1.8L is gone and replaced by Leica.
However, the Canon L series lens are very sharp especially from 35mm to telephoto and the autofocus mechanism is wonderful to have. For me the Zeiss and Leica is what I am happy to use for my image. I love the color and the signature of these lens. They are different species than the Canon one.
Its so easy to compare lenses now a days with digital SLRs and lens adapters. You set everything manually including white balance on the digital body, mount the Leica and then the Canon lens and the results are all there to see.
Go to a used shop and try out the old bargain Leica R lenses for yourself. Shoot something furry in partial shadow with a colourful out of focus background. I found out its not all Leica snobbery. This is really a case of see it for yourself.
Having said that, the 135mm f/2L is still my most used lens because it is sharp and because of the automation. I wish I could combine the qualities of the Leica with the Canon.
Please don't say this or that until you try both for yourself. No point arguing blind.
If you want the ULTIMATE in quality, you have to understand the entire process of taking a picture and how digital photography works. There are many steps involved in making that RAW file in your 1DsMkII and even more bringing it into a computer and sending into a printer. IMHO, this is the steps involved
1) Light Enters Lens
2) Assuming exposure is perfect, light leaves the lens, past the shutter and hits the sensor
- for film, the type of film will determine the quality
- for digital, there is a whole lot of other steps involved
3) Okay, your sensor picks up the photons and converts it into electrical signals and "save" it
- a couple of thing happens there
1) With the except of the FOVEON sensor in the Sigma DSLR, all DSLR use a Bayer pattern . There are a cluster of 4 photo-sensitve pixel, 2 green, 1 blue and 1 red. Each will record a 16bit/8bit (i think so) NOT a 48/24BIT RGB pixel. This is a reason why digital images are soft and require sharpening. You are fool not to realise this and think that better lenses do not need digital sharpening. This is a fact of life for shooting Digital as the interpolating from your 16/8 bit R/G/B signal to a full 48/24 bit RGB signal regardless of what lens will result in a soft image that is intended to require sharpening. Shooting RAW Demands that you sharpen the image.
2) After the capture of the pixel, if you are shooting raw, it simply ends. For Jpeg, there is the 16/8bit to 48/24bit conversion, in camera sharpening and color correction and white balance and finally compression
What you realise is that instead of going to a traditional darkroom, you have to work very hard in the digital darkroom to make the best out of your images. There are other steps like optimising the image for print as certain printers benefit from certain kind of processing.
My impression is that you think that having the best lens will automatically give you the best images. Lens will help you get a better image out of camera but you have to work and understand other aspects of digital photography if you are looking for the holy grail of BEST image sharpness and etc. I am not saying that lens do not contribute to a much better image but i think you are overlooking the other aspects which are equally if not more important
An analogy is like trying to make the fastest car. Lens are like the engine. A fast engine has a very Big impact on the speed of the car but other aspects like transmission, tires, the driver himself or even exhuast pipe also affect it. Do fall into the trap thinking that having the best lens will give you the best image.
Looking at the amount of experience and gear you used, i think you are a fairly competent photographer who will no doubt take great pictures. But to PRODUCE great pictures, maybe you should translating your great knowledge of CZ/Leica/Exotic Lens to other aspects of the digital workflow. You know which lens are best in the range, Do you know which workflow/software/plugin/moniter/printer/moniter calibration device/color space are the best?
1) With the except of the FOVEON sensor in the Sigma DSLR, all DSLR use a Bayer pattern . There are a cluster of 4 photo-sensitve pixel, 2 green, 1 blue and 1 red. Each will record a 16bit/8bit (i think so) NOT a 48/24BIT RGB pixel. This is a reason why digital images are soft and require sharpening. You are fool not to realise this and think that better lenses do not need digital sharpening. This is a fact of life for shooting Digital as the interpolating from your 16/8 bit R/G/B signal to a full 48/24 bit RGB signal regardless of what lens will result in a soft image that is intended to require sharpening. Shooting RAW Demands that you sharpen the image....Show more →
This is not correct. The 16bit/8bit refers to the number of bits required for each color (R, G, B.) Thus when you add 8+8+8 you get 24bit color. This also applies to 16bits for each color yielding 48bit color. The reason for sharpening a digital file is to compensate for the loss of sharpness caused by the anti-alias filter in front of the CMOS chip.
Each pixel on your sensor does not record a true RGB value. Your camera or computer has to do some clever math to make it RGB. Each pixel either records a Red, green or Blue value.
As for the AA filter, I agree with you on that.... forgot about it.
Afraid I can't really add too much to help your lens choice LM, and I'm not going to 'defend' Canon because I've never had the opportunity to compare with anything better, but I do have a couple of observations;
First, you stated that the Canon 600 f4 and 400 2.8 were too soft for you.. Well, that's fair enough if you found that to be the case, but then you went on to say that this was based on some pictures you found on the net, I beleive ? I wouldn't take anything you see on the net as being representative of the best that can be made of ANY lens, certainly not a high end product such as these.
Your next point that struck me, was that you were thinking of purchasing a zoom.. Well assuming that the other prime lenses you already mentioned are too soft (200 1.8 'ok' etc) I doubt you'll be happy with any zoom. Seems a strange choice.
I think given that you are obviously very particular in your lens choice, you would probably be best off sticking with the lenses you already use, via adapters, rather than going with any of the Canons.
I must admit I'd also be interested in knowing which lens took the picture(s) that swayed you towards the 1DSII.. maybe this is one you should be looking for.
Welcome to the forum anyway - Judging by some reactions you got here, you certainly made an entrance!
Rob.
Edited by TiredRob on Mar 21, 2005 at 08:06 AM GMT (Reason: Unsubscribe emails.. this thread is never ending)
discreet wrote:
There are a cluster of 4 photo-sensitve pixel, 2 green, 1 blue and 1 red. Each will record a 16bit/8bit (i think so) NOT a 48/24BIT RGB pixel.
You are right - except that in Canon DSLRs it is 12 bits per pixel at the sensor level.
The demosaicking required in processing reconstructs 36 bit RGB pixel data, which is stored in a 48 bit TIFF file (3x16 bits - there is no 3x12 bit TIFF format, the next alternative is 3x8 bits).
Agree with Rob with sticking with the lenses you are using and getting adapters. If you hate chicken, the best chicken dish in the world will not be appreciated by you. So use whatever lens you desire and maybe check out the better canon prime mentioned.(135/2 85/1.2 200/18 etc)
They might not have the same shooting style, or they might not even tried the manual focus lenses themself 
)