Posted by Bob Falcone on December 9, 2012 at 10:03 PM
I've moved up to a 5Dii and my Tokina 12-24mm zoom will work on it, but with limitations. Instead of carrying it around, I'd like to swap it out for the Canon 20mm 2.8. I've done some research, and opinions are all over the place, and it's tough to come to a consensus as to whether it's worth buying or not.
Anyone here have an opinion on it?
Thanks!
Posted by John Mumaw on December 9, 2012 at 11:21 PM
The lens review at PhotoZone and the user reviews at Fred Miranda and Amazon seems to sum things up pretty well. It's OK when the aperture is stopped down a bit. One of the interesting things about owning a camera with the high quality of the 5DII is the fact that you need to put the best glass that you can afford on it in order to maximize it's full potential for high resolution and image quality.
Best thing you could do is to order from a place with a good return policy and test it thoroughly, including taking 'starscapes', at which the f2.8 aperture and a high ISO should produce good results for you.
Posted by Bob Falcone on December 9, 2012 at 11:56 PM
Thanks for the links John. The Photozone review gives some hard numbers, but the Miranda and Amazon reviews are indeed all over the place (it stinks, it's great, it's ok). Looks like it will be a "buy and try" experiment.
Posted by John Mumaw on December 10, 2012 at 6:22 AM
Funny thing, Bob. I just bought that lens a few days ago for 'starscapes' (and landscapes) while it was on sale for $299 at B&H.
Months of research seems to conclude that it rivals the Canon 14mm lens in image quality for a fraction of the price. It goes under the brand name Rokinon and Samyang, as well.
Posted by Paul DeCesare on December 10, 2012 at 1:00 PM
(Image is test result of 20mm... next post has 16-35mm comparison)
Bob, having been a 5D2 owner since its inception, I can affirm that John is absolutely right. There are some lenses that run out of breath when feeding that billboard sensor in the 5D2. As an example, my 17-40mm was the first lens I noticed it on, huge disappointment, that lens had worked so well on the first 5D. When I went to the 16-35mm on the 5D2, it all came alive again. The 20mm/2.8 is probably going to disappoint, and definitely will if shooting night skies. There will be a lack of needed contrast that will be quite a chore to restore in post.
Canon has a lens comparison tool that is absolute gold, it has helped me decide on lens purchases more than once. Careful, you'll spend way too much time looking at all the scenarios, lol! You can even see what a 70-200mm looks like with a 2.0x TC and compare that to the 400mm/5.6, pretty helpful.
So, I took a screen grab of the 20mm at 2.8 and the center contrast and sharpness are pretty bad as you can see. The next post below will have the 16-35mm/2.8 at 20mm and you'll see how much better the image quality is. I'm not saying to buy the 16-35mm, I'm just using that as something to compare the 20mm lens to. Based on this result, I'd steer clear of that lens, it's one instance where a prime falls flat. It's probably fine in daytime with tons o' light, not very helpful for your needs though.
Posted by Paul DeCesare on December 10, 2012 at 1:01 PM
Here's the 16-35mm at 20mm, 2.8. Center area is way sharper and more contrast, a definite must for starscapes.
Posted by Bob Falcone on December 10, 2012 at 8:55 PM
Discussion
6 repliesAnyone here have an opinion on it?
Thanks!
Best thing you could do is to order from a place with a good return policy and test it thoroughly, including taking 'starscapes', at which the f2.8 aperture and a high ISO should produce good results for you.
Or maybe this is what I need: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/698923-REG/Bower_SLY14MMF28C_14mm_f_2_8_Ultra_Wide.html
Months of research seems to conclude that it rivals the Canon 14mm lens in image quality for a fraction of the price. It goes under the brand name Rokinon and Samyang, as well.
Bob, having been a 5D2 owner since its inception, I can affirm that John is absolutely right. There are some lenses that run out of breath when feeding that billboard sensor in the 5D2. As an example, my 17-40mm was the first lens I noticed it on, huge disappointment, that lens had worked so well on the first 5D. When I went to the 16-35mm on the 5D2, it all came alive again. The 20mm/2.8 is probably going to disappoint, and definitely will if shooting night skies. There will be a lack of needed contrast that will be quite a chore to restore in post.
Canon has a lens comparison tool that is absolute gold, it has helped me decide on lens purchases more than once. Careful, you'll spend way too much time looking at all the scenarios, lol! You can even see what a 70-200mm looks like with a 2.0x TC and compare that to the 400mm/5.6, pretty helpful.
So, I took a screen grab of the 20mm at 2.8 and the center contrast and sharpness are pretty bad as you can see. The next post below will have the 16-35mm/2.8 at 20mm and you'll see how much better the image quality is. I'm not saying to buy the 16-35mm, I'm just using that as something to compare the 20mm lens to. Based on this result, I'd steer clear of that lens, it's one instance where a prime falls flat. It's probably fine in daytime with tons o' light, not very helpful for your needs though.