They are a bunch of paranoids on the Canon forum - a while back I found reference to the 5D MK2 on a pull down menu in CaptureOne Beta 4 and was basicaly accused of being an employee of Canon planting a bit of viral marketing.
So, the Nikon "G" lenses don't have aperture rings, right? How do you change the aperture of the lens with the G adapter on a Canon body?
Mark has had an adapter prototype made that takes mechanical input from the user and converts that into an electrical signal to tell the lens what aperture to stop down to. Cool, eh?
cogitech wrote:
Mark has had an adapter prototype made that takes mechanical input from the user and converts that into an electrical signal to tell the lens what aperture to stop down to. Cool, eh?
not quite - on G lenses the aperture is still mechanically controlled and actuated. It's just that instead of having both an aperture ring and a lever that interfaces with an electronic aperture control in the body, the G lenses have only the lever. Hubsand's adaptor seems to just have a side-mounted apparatus that can move that lever from outside the body and lens, through the adaptor ring.
they're not like EOS or Contax-N lenses which have an electronic aperture mechanism in the lens, and no mechanical connection whatsoever to the body.
The adaptor used on Friday was the simpler of two prototypes. Mark mentioned that the other type would have a lever protruding from the mount. The leverless one simply allows you to twist the lens barrel to move the internal mechanical lens aperture controller. The range is quite small, but it was easy to do, and was stiff enough not to interfere at all with use of the zoom and focus rings. At first I didn't like the idea, but once I used it, I realised that it works well and is very convenient. I almost want the feature on my other lenses. I think I would probably choose this type over the lever type, on reflection, because it will be less fiddly. It might slightly annoy those hoping to use graduated filters, but since the lens is going to struggle to accept any filters over its bulbous front element and built-in shade, I don't see that as too relevant. I understand that Mark intends to put marks on the adaptor so you can line up the dot on the lens to set aperture more accurately, but I wouldn't have any trouble with it as it is. I found I could easily set aperture to open, closed, halfway, or a stop odd from either end. Both Andy and I wanted to take it away with us!
Focus confirm worked fine, just like other adaptors we have all used. LiveView at 10x magnification probably allows you to focus even more accurately than the AF system anyway, and it will help get stunning results out of this stunning lens at wide apertures regardless of whether a 35mm viewfinder is up to the job of making the best use of 21 megapixels. All I can say is, bring it on!
Couldn't rotating the lens cause vignetting from the built in shade? I would think that the extra rotating surface of the adaptor could cause more lens droop and misalignment. I think I would prefer to have the lever and keep the lens aligned properly with the body.
Dan
brainiac wrote:
The adaptor used on Friday was the simpler of two prototypes. Mark mentioned that the other type would have a lever protruding from the mount. The leverless one simply allows you to twist the lens barrel to move the internal mechanical lens aperture controller. The range is quite small, but it was easy to do, and was stiff enough not to interfere at all with use of the zoom and focus rings. At first I didn't like the idea, but once I used it, I realised that it works well and is very convenient. I almost want the feature on my other lenses. I think I would probably choose this type over the lever type, on reflection, because it will be less fiddly. It might slightly annoy those hoping to use graduated filters, but since the lens is going to struggle to accept any filters over its bulbous front element and built-in shade, I don't see that as too relevant. I understand that Mark intends to put marks on the adaptor so you can line up the dot on the lens to set aperture more accurately, but I wouldn't have any trouble with it as it is. I found I could easily set aperture to open, closed, halfway, or a stop odd from either end. Both Andy and I wanted to take it away with us!
Focus confirm worked fine, just like other adaptors we have all used. LiveView at 10x magnification probably allows you to focus even more accurately than the AF system anyway, and it will help get stunning results out of this stunning lens at wide apertures regardless of whether a 35mm viewfinder is up to the job of making the best use of 21 megapixels. All I can say is, bring it on! ...Show more →
brainiac wrote:
I don't see anything in Steffen's shot that contradicts results from the 14 in Mark's test. Mark deliberately puts high contrast detailed subject matter in the corners, i.e. trees against the sky, to stress test the limits. He was using a 1Ds3, not a 5D, so the camera is significantly less forgiving. In Mark's test the 14LII actually did pretty well compared to many of the ultrawide lenses we have seen him test in the past. It was still eclipsed by the superb Nikon though. Nobody should be unduly unhappy with the 14LII in itself. It may perform less well with high contrast subject matter, but it has much lower distortion, and gives you AF and auto-aperture. As Steffen has demonstrated, it is a very capable lens which is a privilege to use. It seems to come a creditable second if you want to eke every ounce of performance out of a 1Ds3 at 14mm. Isn't this exactly what we were expecting, as the MTF graphs predicted?...Show more →
The first set was not made with the 5D but with a 1DsMkII so the resolution is not so different. But You are right the pictures in dimmed artifical light are not compareable to high contrast outdoor shots.
So here is a shot from outside with twigs in front of a clear blue sky.
I would never use 2.8 at so much light but here I did.
I took the shot with 1DsMkII in RAW, and converted it with DPP: sharpening on 2, everything else on 0.
I made a second one using the CA-correction of DPP 3.2.
What you see is the complete corner of the shot at 100%.
p.8 #12 · Nikon 14-24mm tested on Canon 5D/1Ds III
Not sure I understand your question. Certainly the R 15 Elmarit (f 2.8) is usable on the 5D only with mirror shaving........a trait required by many Leica R lenses including the highly reputed 19 Elmarit. But these lenses certainly can be used with this one restriction and there are still many out there who can and will do the mirror shaving at a reasonable cost and with high quality results.
I personally use the 5D with these lenses all the time as i recently sold my Leica r9/DMR in anticipation of the new R10 at next years Photokina. No problems at all other than the usual associated with stop down metering.
p.8 #13 · Nikon 14-24mm tested on Canon 5D/1Ds III
woodyspedden wrote:
Not sure I understand your question. Certainly the R 15 Elmarit (f 2.8) is usable on the 5D only with mirror shaving........a trait required by many Leica R lenses including the highly reputed 19 Elmarit. But these lenses certainly can be used with this one restriction and there are still many out there who can and will do the mirror shaving at a reasonable cost and with high quality results.
I personally use the 5D with these lenses all the time as i recently sold my Leica r9/DMR in anticipation of the new R10 at next years Photokina. No problems at all other than the usual associated with stop down metering.
I guess this is my question: Out of the Zeiss 15mm lenses, which one is clearly the best in image quality such as sharpness ect...and will that lens work on a canon 1Ds/ 5D ?
p.8 #14 · Nikon 14-24mm tested on Canon 5D/1Ds III
I've never heard of the Zeiss 15mm rangefinder lens being used on a Canon body, it protrudes too far into the mirror box. 15mm f3.5 is your only Zeiss option I believe.
Dan
p.8 #15 · Nikon 14-24mm tested on Canon 5D/1Ds III
DanPBrown wrote:
I've never heard of the Zeiss 15mm rangefinder lens being used on a Canon body, it protrudes too far into the mirror box. 15mm f3.5 is your only Zeiss option I believe.
Dan
Although the Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 15 mm f/2.8 ZM is a rangefinder lens, there exists also a 15 2.8 for the R system which can be mounted on a 5D with mirror shaving. It's the successor of the 15 3.5.
p.8 #16 · Nikon 14-24mm tested on Canon 5D/1Ds III
The only Zeiss SLR lens mountable in Canon EF is the f3.5. Reviewing my CZ15 captures in the light of the 14-24 shots, the Zeiss appears to be equally sharp centre frame at most apertures, but the Nikon is clearly superior across the frame.
However, the newer Leica f2.8 design, which requires modification of the mirror to use, is a step up from the shared Zeiss/Leica f3.5 version and may even be fractionally better than the Nikon 14-24mm at that FL – LiveView should make testing it a possibility without the mirror shave, I think . . . having said that, the Nikon gives a very fair impression of resolving the sensor fully from about f5.6, so any improvement the Leica offers may be moot.
p.8 #18 · Nikon 14-24mm tested on Canon 5D/1Ds III
Mark - When do you think we will be able to see more of the tests ... comparison against the CZ21 and 16-35II ? I am not trying to rush you, just understand how often I need to check your website? Is this any day now or a few weeks ?
Dec 20, 2007 at 04:17 PM
jjlphoto Offline • • • • • [X]
p.8 #19 · Nikon 14-24mm tested on Canon 5D/1Ds III
Thomas McConville wrote:
Im interested to see how the 14-24G compares to the Zeiss 15mm 2.8
Ulff wrote:
Although the Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 15 mm f/2.8 ZM is a rangefinder lens, there exists also a 15 2.8 for the R system which can be mounted on a 5D with mirror shaving. It's the successor of the 15 3.5.
To clarify-
The Contax Zeiss 15/3.5 was designed in 1975. Originally designed in the CY mount, they also manufactured it and re-badged it for the Leica-R system. (Some cosmetic differences also, Leica 1/2 stop aperture detents, Leica spec'd filter coatings for the filter turret, etc.) Zeiss kept the Contax version in their line until the Contax RTS system was terminated a few years ago. It was never upgraded.
Leica currently has the 15/2.8-R, which is a Schneider designed lens. Not really a successor to the 15/3.5 as that one was a Zeiss design, and Leica just stopped ordering them and then went to Schneider for a better 15mm lens.
p.8 #20 · Nikon 14-24mm tested on Canon 5D/1Ds III
@ hubsand
Would You please be so kind give me some comment on my 14LII samples
In the german Canon forum, You have been accused of "adapter selling interests", what I´ve called there absolutely ridiculous!
I enjoy and recommend Your tests for a long time now, but the small samples You show in Your short competition between 14IIL and 14-24 are so contrary to my experiences with the 14IIL...
Here is another sample, still f2,8 with 1DsMkII, overview and 4 100%Crops anything else as above...
