While the Leica lens is almost assuredly better than those Canon lenses, I seriously doubt you'd be able to match the quality of a 5D working with some of Canon's best lenses with a 5MP, tiny sensor E-1. Certainly not at any ISO over 400.
Canon's at its best with long teles, which are world class, and the 5D has huge IQ advantages at any ISO over base compared to the E-1.
Can't speak for the 300, but the 400 5.6 is a pretty good lens, holds up just fine on my 1Ds2. Good and sharp at 5.6, 8, and 11 (the apertures I use it at), and not much purple fringing or other artifacts.
mawz wrote:
While the Leica lens is almost assuredly better than those Canon lenses, I seriously doubt...
I seriously doubt that the Leica lens is better. I have a Canon 200 f1.8 and Leica 180 f2. In my opinion the Canon is optically a better lens. Canon's big teles are very very very good. Do not underestimate them. This is not about brand assumptions.
The Oly/Leica combo will get creamed by a Canon 5D and almost any Canon tele.
This is well documented. Canon superteles (> 299mm) are amazing enough to consider buying.
(Un?)fortunately for us landscapes-and-portrait shooters, Zuikos and Rokkors and Zeisses lenses kick Canon buttocks (can't use dirty words here I think ) ones.
That's because I don't invest much on a lens better than Canon 100 Macro FWIW, although I know Voightlander 125/2.5 fame, but it's double the price and not double the performance AFAIK.
brainiac wrote:
I seriously doubt that the Leica lens is better. I have a Canon 200 f1.8 and Leica 180 f2. In my opinion the Canon is optically a better lens. Canon's big teles are very very very good. Do not underestimate them. This is not about brand assumptions.
The Oly/Leica combo will get creamed by a Canon 5D and almost any Canon tele.
From what I understand, the 180/3.4 APO is the best of the Leica 180's and while the 300 f4L and 400 f5.6L are very good, they're not Canon's best at these lengths. I'd expect the Leica to be better than either of those two specific lenses.
The Oly/Leica combo is still gonna get creamed due to the 5D having significantly better per-pixel IQ and more pixels and the two L's being damned good lenses even if they aren't the best in their ranges.
Well I may be able to help a bit on this. I have both lenses and question and cannot find anything bad to say about either lens. Mine are shot on a 5D though. Like the other's are stating. I don't see any reason to think that the Canon 400/5.6L is not a good lense. Check out my webpage for plenty of samples from both.
carstenw wrote:
The 180/3.4 is the best of the *old* Leicas. The 180/2.8 APO and the 180/2 APO are both better.
I have both the 180 f/3.4 and 180 f/2.8 APO and I agree with Carsten. My guess is that the much larger sensor area of the 5D will be a huge advantage over the E-1 with ANY lens.
) ones.