Posted by Derek Sedillo on September 28, 2008 at 5:37 PM
Hello All,
After waiting quite a while to upgrade my old Canon 10D I am finally ready to with the 5DII. So I am about to pull the trigger on a pre-order.
My only reservation thus far is the WA lenses currently available for Canon. I think I will probably pick up a 17-40L. And I know many of you use this and other Canon FF WA lenses with mixed results.
I also read a recent thread on FM by Marc Adamus who is considering using the Nikon 14-24 in replacement of his new 16-35L II because of sub par performance. http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/688093
Anyway I was just wondering if you FF Canon shooters have found this something you can live with in your prints? Or does it drive you nuts?
Thanks,
Posted by Paul Wegemann on September 28, 2008 at 6:18 PM
Posted by Derek Sedillo on September 28, 2008 at 7:17 PM
Thanks Paul. I guess this has been on the minds of quite a few WA shooters lately. Thanks for the additional links.
It definately gives a Canon shooter pause for thought. I even considered a switch to Nikon or Sony. But changes one's lenses out gets very expensive.
Posted by John Mumaw on September 28, 2008 at 7:18 PM
One of the advantages of using a 1.6x 'cropped' sensor is that they use the sweetest spot of many lenses.
I upgraded from the 10D to the 40D and the images I get using a Sigma 10-20 wide angle lens (field of view equiv. to 16-32 mm) are sharp from corner to corner.
Just thought I'd point out an alternative.....
Posted by Derek Sedillo on September 28, 2008 at 7:28 PM
Thanks John.
I have also considered that as I currently shoot with a cropped sensor and a Tokina 12-24 which I find to be a relatively decent lens. Though I do see room for improvement in the corners. I also had a Sigma 10-20. But it suffered from extreme right side softness. Hence the switch to Tokina.
I have been planning to go Full Frame for quite some time. And the new 5D II looks like a real big step forward. I guess I am just hoping that the lenses will be able to handle all that resolution.
Posted by Paul Martin on September 29, 2008 at 4:57 PM
Derek,
If you don't mind MF, Zeiss has a 21mm coming out in an EF mount -- should be better than anything Canon has to offer. Zeiss also makes an 18mm in Nikon mount, which can be adapted or you could wait for the Canon version which should be along at some point. Canon really needs to put some thought into their next sub-24mm lens, they're being outclassed by Nikon handily (14-24). I get by with the 17-40 on my 5D, but mine only sharpens up in the corners at f/16 -- I would'ny want to see what happens on a 20+ megapixel body. John also makes a good point, the 50D is pretty nice and has 15 megapixels -- but after using a FF camera for over a year I don't think I could go back -- but the offerings are certainly better than when I had a 30D.
Posted by Derek Sedillo on September 30, 2008 at 1:14 AM
Paul,
I don't mind MF at all! So the new Zeiss EOS line does present a glimmer of hope for Canon at the wide end.
Like Mark A. mentioned in his post on FM I also prefer a zoom at the wide end. I guess it is just my shooting style. It affords me more creative options compositionally. And I really like shooting in wet, harsher conditions where swaping out lenses is less desirable. When I took my trip to the PNW this Spring I fell in love with the waterfalls of the Gorge, shooting the windy coast in the rain, etc... I realized then more than ever that I am a zoom sort of guy.
I don't mind using my Zeiss 35-70/3.4 in full manual mode however. And it holds up very well to primes in terms of performance. So if Zeiss came out with a WA 16-35 ZE I would be extremely happy as I know many Canon shooters be. The 21 Zeiss is a cult classic and king of the hill for resolving power, although the Nikon 14-24 is not far behind and it zooms! So I guess am interested to see if they can at least match the old 21 champ in their new ZE line.
Discussion
6 repliesAfter waiting quite a while to upgrade my old Canon 10D I am finally ready to with the 5DII. So I am about to pull the trigger on a pre-order.
My only reservation thus far is the WA lenses currently available for Canon. I think I will probably pick up a 17-40L. And I know many of you use this and other Canon FF WA lenses with mixed results.
I just read an interesting article on the subject by Darwin Wiggett here:
http://www.naturephotographers.net/articles0508/dw0508-1.html
I also read a recent thread on FM by Marc Adamus who is considering using the Nikon 14-24 in replacement of his new 16-35L II because of sub par performance.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/688093
Anyway I was just wondering if you FF Canon shooters have found this something you can live with in your prints? Or does it drive you nuts?
Thanks,
Check out these two recent threads here on RMNP-
http://www.naturephotographers.net/imagecritique/bbs.cgi?a=vm&mr=34152&CGISESSID=44bc44dfd1a9b9730c4ea68c556f45f0&u=4498
and
http://www.naturephotographers.net/imagecritique/bbs.cgi?a=vm&mr=33853&CGISESSID=44bc44dfd1a9b9730c4ea68c556f45f0&u=4096
It definately gives a Canon shooter pause for thought. I even considered a switch to Nikon or Sony. But changes one's lenses out gets very expensive.
I upgraded from the 10D to the 40D and the images I get using a Sigma 10-20 wide angle lens (field of view equiv. to 16-32 mm) are sharp from corner to corner.
Just thought I'd point out an alternative.....
I have also considered that as I currently shoot with a cropped sensor and a Tokina 12-24 which I find to be a relatively decent lens. Though I do see room for improvement in the corners. I also had a Sigma 10-20. But it suffered from extreme right side softness. Hence the switch to Tokina.
I have been planning to go Full Frame for quite some time. And the new 5D II looks like a real big step forward. I guess I am just hoping that the lenses will be able to handle all that resolution.
If you don't mind MF, Zeiss has a 21mm coming out in an EF mount -- should be better than anything Canon has to offer. Zeiss also makes an 18mm in Nikon mount, which can be adapted or you could wait for the Canon version which should be along at some point. Canon really needs to put some thought into their next sub-24mm lens, they're being outclassed by Nikon handily (14-24). I get by with the 17-40 on my 5D, but mine only sharpens up in the corners at f/16 -- I would'ny want to see what happens on a 20+ megapixel body. John also makes a good point, the 50D is pretty nice and has 15 megapixels -- but after using a FF camera for over a year I don't think I could go back -- but the offerings are certainly better than when I had a 30D.
I don't mind MF at all! So the new Zeiss EOS line does present a glimmer of hope for Canon at the wide end.
Like Mark A. mentioned in his post on FM I also prefer a zoom at the wide end. I guess it is just my shooting style. It affords me more creative options compositionally. And I really like shooting in wet, harsher conditions where swaping out lenses is less desirable. When I took my trip to the PNW this Spring I fell in love with the waterfalls of the Gorge, shooting the windy coast in the rain, etc... I realized then more than ever that I am a zoom sort of guy.
I don't mind using my Zeiss 35-70/3.4 in full manual mode however. And it holds up very well to primes in terms of performance. So if Zeiss came out with a WA 16-35 ZE I would be extremely happy as I know many Canon shooters be. The 21 Zeiss is a cult classic and king of the hill for resolving power, although the Nikon 14-24 is not far behind and it zooms! So I guess am interested to see if they can at least match the old 21 champ in their new ZE line.