 |
brainiac
Offline
[X]
|
 p.2 #9 · Considering moving from Leica M8 to Canon 5D mkII - questions on lenses | |
I hate carrying big lenses. Unfortunately, most of Canon's little light lenses are 2nd tier, and old, and not very good in the corners. The 35 f2 is a great little lens over 90% of the frame, even to the edges, but the corners suck so badly that it's a deal breaker. Here's my solution to that problem:
http://cyberphotographer.com/5D/5doly40.jpg
There are lots of great Leica R, Contax and Olympus pancake or very small lenses, and some of them really can compete with an M lens on an M8, in terms of size/weight, quality, and of course, price. A 5D/5D2 and such a lens opens up a whole world of photography that isn't accessible to the M8 because it lacks the high iso performance, and an f1.0 lens is frankly, a pain:
http://cyberphotographer.com/5D/honeymoon/lowrez/stall.jpg
http://cyberphotographer.com/5D/honeymoon/lowrez/vendor.jpg
Since you liked working with an M8, I would recommend installing Canon's manual focus screen in whichever camera you get. The standard screen is very hard to focus accurately, and doesn't show depth of field correctly. Once you have a manual focus screen, manual focus is very usable and with practice you should be as accurate as with a rangefinder.
The disappointment in the L lenses will mostly be due to the fact that there is visible colour separation in out of focus highlights and bokeh compared to many Leica lenses. In monochrome it doesn't matter. The upside is that most of the Canon L's are punchy and 3D, unlike some Leicas.
The 85L rocks, but AF is slow and manual focus is less than ideal since it is electronically controlled. It is amazingly sharp on the very narrow focus plane when wide open.
The 35L is nearly as good, and if you like Leica bokeh then you will probably be happy with its bokeh.
The 16-35 mk2 is great but don't expect it to resolve fully into the corners, even at small apertures. It's a zoom, so it distorts, but if you use Canon's Digital Photo Professional you can fix the distortion at the cost of a small crop around the edges. The 17-40 f4 L is also very good, though a bit less reliable at wider apertures.
The 70-200 f2.8 L IS isn't that great wide open, in my experience, but the f4 version is wonderful. The 85 f1.8 is worth a look, and the 135L is great.
As has been said, a Leica M fan isn't going to like the 50 f1.4. The 50 f1.2 is stunning, but focus is a bit unreliable at some apertures because it moves slightly. A good copy should be fine once you learn to focus it carefully. The Minolta Rokkor 58 f1.2 has been causing a stir over on the alt forum. It's exceptional if you're prepared to use manual focus. Sigma also makes a 50 f1.4 which a Leica lens fan would appreciate, although it looks like manual focus is essential since there are many reports of unreliable AF.
Other alt lenses to look out for are:
Leica 28 f2.8 R
Contax 28 f2.8
Contax 85 f2.8
Contax 35-70
Contax N 24-85
Olympus 18, 21 (f2, f3.5), 24 (f2, f2.8), 28 (f2, f3.5)
Zeiss ZE 18, 21, 25, 28, 35, 50, 100 f2 macro
Pentax wide aperture standard lenses
There are too many to list, but coming from Leica M you may well enjoy using manual focus and stop-down metering. For long lenses stick to the Canons, as there is no advantage in alternatives.
Some EOS mount lenses are really awful, so it will be much more necessary to be discerning than it would be with Leica lenses, which are universally pretty good.
http://cyberphotographer.com/5D/nutella.jpg
|
| Oct 07, 2008 at 12:23 PM |
| |
|
 |
