p.1 #1 · advice for plan for MF primes for 5d MkII
Hello,
This is my first post here. I've asked this question on another forum but it didn't received much attention because it was canon guear forum. But I think this question fits this forum better.
I'm thinking on buying the new 5d MarkII soon.
I work mostly on landscapes and I feel often that my 40d lacks the resolution needed to do serious landscape work. Another vantage of full-frame is the better selection on wide lenses.
Since I don't have budget for L lenses and sincerely I don't want to carry around enormous zooms I'm thinking on buying only one all-purpose zoom for commercial work (maybe the new Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 EX when it arrives) and for my personal work (like I said landscape and night shots) only manual focus adapted primes. I'm making a selection of lenses based on their resolution to better serve the 5d mkII sensor. Since I shoot a lot at night, fast lenses appeal to me also.
My plan is to have a selection of 5 primes:
ULTRA WIDE:
I'm thinking on the Leica R 19mm (maybe 1st version because of the price) or maybe the Zeiss 18mm if I can get a good deal. I would like a wider focal lenght like 14mm but it seems there's no really good prime at that focal lenght. There is the Tokina 17mm Pro too, but I don't think it has a good resolution for 21mp.
WIDE:
I've bought recently the OM Zuiko 24mm and I'm impressed with it's sharpness on my 40d. It has the same quality at f/2.8 as my canon 10-22mm at f/8. With both at f/8 the zuiko blows the canon away, and I'm not only talking about the corners, in the center is really noticeable too. So in this department I think I'm good.
MODERATE WIDE:
I'm very undecided in this area, for what I've seen what caught my attention was the zeiss 35mm f/2 (nikon or contax versions), Leica Summicron-R 35mm f/2.0 or voigtlander 40mm f/2 (this one almost isn't wide at all but it's a pankake
NORMAL:
I have a Contax Zeiss Plannar T* 50mm f/1.4. I'm still pondering if it's the best choice since I'm a little disapointed with it's performance full open and it flares a lot at night on my 40d, but maybe it's because of the cheap adapter.
SHORT TELE:
I already have a canon 85mm f/1.8 and I think I will keep it.
So what do you guys think on my equipment plan? And please do some suggestions regarding the UWA and moderate wide areas.
p.1 #2 · advice for plan for MF primes for 5d MkII
Moderate Wide: The best fixed 35mm's I have used(good into the corners on FF) are the Zeiss Flektogon 35mm 2.5 and an older Zeiss Rollei mount 35mm 2.8. This was on my 5D. I'm now using the Flektogon on my Sony a900 and it performs extremely well. I have heard of sample variation with that lens but the one and only one I have ever used is phenomenal. If your wiling to give up half a stop or so, you may wish to give the Flek a try.
Nov 13, 2008 at 12:48 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · advice for plan for MF primes for 5d MkII
Hi,
I am in the same planning stage so I will share my thoughts.
Ultrawide: have you considered the new ZE 21mm? The old C/Y version was spectacular and the new one will come in a Canon mount with auto aperture. It is what I am planning on getting. The newest Leica 19mm will likely need major surgery to work on a 5D MKII. If you can't afford the ZE 21mm, then you might consider on Olympus 21mm f/3.5.
Wide: I think an Oly 24mm f/2.8 is a good choice and I will probably pick one up for now. Look to get a multi-coated one as they are often reported as better. You might also consider a Zeiss 25mm f/2.8. I will probably wait on that until they come out with a ZE version, but it also is a nice lens and is available in a Nikon or Pentax mount.
Moderate Wide: I think the Zeiss 35mm f/2 is also a good choice (The f/2 is the new Nikon version. The Contax versions came in f/1.4 or f/2.8 and there was also a shift f/2.8 all are decent performers), but here again I will probably wait for a ZE version. My more immediate plans are to get a Canon 35 f/1.4L for wide aperture and autofocus shooting and a Leica 35mm f/2.8 for landscapes. I also will probably pick up a Oly 28mm f/3.5, which is a great little lens and costs next to nothing (i.e., less than $50).
Normal: The C/Y 50mm f/1.4 is a very decent 50mm, but is not my choice. I have picked up a Minolta Rokkor 58mm f/1.2 which I will use for low light and generally for portraits. I also plan to pick up a Leica 50mm f/2 for general use given its size and for landscapes (I'm not sure I will be able to get infinity focus with my Rokkor).
Short Tele: I think the 85mm f/1.8 is a nice lens and it would be very nice when autofocus is a benefit (I will probably get one as an option for shooting some of my son's volleyball and basketball games). IMO, it is a decent but not outstanding portrait lens. My plan is to get a ZE 85mm f/1.4 for low light and for some portraits and even some landscapes. I am hoping this lens excels at a number of tasks. I also plan to pick up a Leica 90mm f/2.8 as well, however, which will be my primary landscape lens at this focal length and I will use it for near macro shooting with a close-up lens.
I hope this helps. Using alternative gears gives one lots and lots of choice. Good luck.
p.1 #6 · advice for plan for MF primes for 5d MkII
Sr.....I do not know about Canon lenses...
Ultra wide: Nikkor 14-24mm a lot of canon shooters have purchased this lens and use it with an adapter with manual focus...and before anyone yells it's not a prime...I know...but for landscape work I bet it would be one hell of a lens...it always preforms well for me....
For everything else...I would probably have to agree with Overdal....I would go Zeiss....but probably 1.4/85 and 2.5/100...however this is only been in reading....saving up for mine...
p.1 #7 · advice for plan for MF primes for 5d MkII
Steve Spencer wrote:
Moderate Wide: I think the Zeiss 35mm f/2 is also a good choice (The f/2 is the new Nikon version. The Contax versions came in f/1.4 or f/2.8 and there was also a shift f/2.8 all are decent performers), but here again I will probably wait for a ZE version. My more immediate plans are to get a Canon 35 f/1.4L for wide aperture and autofocus shooting and a Leica 35mm f/2.8 for landscapes. I also will probably pick up a Oly 28mm f/3.5, which is a great little lens and costs next to nothing (i.e., less than $50).
Steve
Steve is right about this, with only one remark : the shift Distagon is the best you can get here, so if shift something you would like, the Distagon is the way to go ( but also expensive ). The Summicron is a little soft in the corners even when stopped down, but a very nice lens otherwise, and I liked the half stops and integrated lens hood on the Leicas anyway. If the half stop is to spare, here come the 2.8 versions of Leica and Zeiss that will be super sharp and weight less than faster versions ( mainly 1.4 ) - or stick with the new 2.0 from Zeiss. Plenty of great lenses to choose from and you will not make a bad move with any of them.
Regards, Stefan
p.1 #9 · advice for plan for MF primes for 5d MkII
I just bought the 50d, which has live view (similar to 5dII). It is amazing how easy it is to focus with live view. Even lenses with shallow DOF are easy to focus. Here is a pic with rokkor 58 at 1.2 using live view to focus.
p.1 #13 · advice for plan for MF primes for 5d MkII
My soon to be line up;
Super wide: OM 21/3.5
Wide: Skip... actually I'm going to Contax N17-35/2.8
Normal: Rokkor 58/1.2
Short tele: One of these ... FD85/1.2L, Leica 85/1.4,
On short tele, I'm kind of torned because I can get LN condition EF85L for $1200.
Then again, FD85L can be had for $500..... Buy both?
p.1 #14 · advice for plan for MF primes for 5d MkII
Thanks for all the replies!
Regarding the 35mm, I would like it to be at least f/2, so the nikon version Zeiss 35mm seems good. A bit expensive but nothing shocking and worth the money.
But the price of the Zeiss flektogon is really tempting, if it was only a stop faster.
The zuiko 18mm is interesting but the few I've seen had a prohibitive price.
Almost all recommend the Zeiss 21mm... Yes it's a dream lens but for now out of my reach.The 21mm focal leght is also very close to the 24mm, I would like the FL to be more separated. But all the opinions on the 21 made me think if I need more than 21mm for WA.
Another option is to sell my zuiko 24mm and Zeiss 50mm and buy a Zuiko 21mm (f/2 or 3.5), Zuiko 28mm f/2, Voigtlander 40mm f/2 and Rokkor 58mm f/1.8. This way all lenses would be ultra-fast and with a good separation on FL. What do you think?
PS: ovredal73 - what do you mean by "paint your adapter" ?
p.1 #15 · advice for plan for MF primes for 5d MkII
I like the 21-28-58 combo and do not miss 24 or 35-40. I have an EF 35/2 for when I must have AF, but otherwise I don't feel the "need" for a 35-40 (despite the fact that the 35/1.8 Rokkor is tempting me).
Also, while I listed the CZ21 (and would love to own one again some day), I must say I am pretty happy with my Zuiko 21/3.5.
p.1 #16 · advice for plan for MF primes for 5d MkII
If you are going to give up the Zuiko 24 for a 21, I would get the 21 before giving up the 24 just to make sure your as happy with its performance as you are with the 24, not to mention the focal length difference. That 3mm or 4mm can make a big difference on the wide end as you know.
p.1 #17 · advice for plan for MF primes for 5d MkII
Tariq Gibran wrote:
If you are going to give up the Zuiko 24 for a 21, I would get the 21 before giving up the 24 just to make sure your as happy with its performance as you are with the 24, not to mention the focal length difference. That 3mm or 4mm can make a big difference on the wide end as you know.
This is very good advice. No sense regretting anything, and I'm pretty sure the Zuiko 24/2.8 is stronger in the corners (with respect to resolution and CA) than the 21/3.5. That said, my choice is still the 21/3.5. I think they are very different lenses in so many ways that the idea of "replacing" one with the other is hard to imagine.
p.1 #18 · advice for plan for MF primes for 5d MkII
cogitech wrote:
This is very good advice. No sense regretting anything, and I'm pretty sure the Zuiko 24/2.8 is stronger in the corners (with respect to resolution and CA) than the 21/3.5. That said, my choice is still the 21/3.5. I think they are very different lenses in so many ways that the idea of "replacing" one with the other is hard to imagine.
That's what I was thinking. So, he might just need both!
