Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: jeffok on June 04, 2007, 05:50:12 pm
-
I'm looking for some feedback on what lenses I should consider as I look toward a coming release of the 1Ds MkIII.
I had been shooting with a Canon 20D until recently when I sold it and the EF-S lenses with it in anticipation of the 1Ds MkIII coming out this spring. Of course, it didn't appear and left me digital camera deprived (I am still using my trusty Pentax 67 for landscape work and scanning- still a great option! and my Panasonic LX-2 for hiking and snaps). I have pretty much decided that I can't go on any longer without a decent DSLR so I am strongly leaning toward buying a Rebel XTi that I can use until the big Canon appears, and then use it as a backup camera after that.
The question is, what do do about lenses. I already have a EF 70-200 f4L (non IS). The difficulty is that I am making the assumption that when Canon releases the 1Ds MkIII, they will also release a few upgraded or new lenses that can resolve the 22MP(?) that this camera will pack. Right now, I am looking at the EF 24-105 and the EF 16-35 II as possible lenses to aquire now, but am wondering if even these lenses will be up to the task when the big Canon appears. The question is, should I go for them now, or do without and wait. Help me decide!
-
I would get the xti and an appropriate lens for it. (A Tamron 17-50 would seem to be an inexpensive stop gap.) Then punt all the 1dsmkiii lens questions until the 1dsmkiii shows itself.
-
I would get the xti and an appropriate lens for it. (A Tamron 17-50 would seem to be an inexpensive stop gap.) Then punt all the 1dsmkiii lens questions until the 1dsmkiii shows itself.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=121104\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I've got an xti and I bought a pair of Sigmas (18x50 & 55X200). As hindsite I wish I would have gone longer than 200mm. From what I've read a stabelizing lens is a lot of hype. LOL
-
Well, the XTi comes in a kit with the 18-55mm lens I think, for peanuts so I can go with that.
But I guess the big question I have is, will the 16-35 II and the 24-105 be up to the task? For those with 1Ds Mk II's, how do these lenses perform in terms of resolving what the sensor can capture? If you then add another say 6 MP to the sensor, will these lenses still be adequate? Or is it likely that Canon will have to come out with a whole new lineup of lenses? For example, the DF 100-400 is probably due for an upgrade as well.
-
Well, the XTi comes in a kit with the 18-55mm lens I think, for peanuts so I can go with that.
But I guess the big question I have is, will the 16-35 II and the 24-105 be up to the task? For those with 1Ds Mk II's, how do these lenses perform in terms of resolving what the sensor can capture? If you then add another say 6 MP to the sensor, will these lenses still be adequate? Or is it likely that Canon will have to come out with a whole new lineup of lenses? For example, the DF 100-400 is probably due for an upgrade as well.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=121125\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It's going to depend on what you're shooting (long or wide, landscapes or portraits etc). From my experience shooting hyperfocal landscapes, canon's wide L zooms (17-40, 24-70 wide end) don't cut it on the 1ds2 let alone on a 22mp chip.
From the reviews the new 16-35II seems comparable to the 17-40 which is dissapointing given the expected arrival of the mark 3 this year. I haven't tested a 16-35II mysef though so all third hand info.
But YMMV.
-
I think a Lens Baby will help here.
-
It's going to depend on what you're shooting (long or wide, landscapes or portraits etc). From my experience shooting hyperfocal landscapes, canon's wide L zooms (17-40, 24-70 wide end) don't cut it on the 1ds2 let alone on a 22mp chip.
From the reviews the new 16-35II seems comparable to the 17-40 which is dissapointing given the expected arrival of the mark 3 this year. I haven't tested a 16-35II mysef though so all third hand info.
But YMMV.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=121206\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I shoot landscapes and nature photography. So I need an oustanding wide angle, sharp and contrasty. I could consider a prime but not sure if any are that much better optically than the 16-35 II zoom. I was going to purchase the TSE-24 but it is not sharp enough, perhaps neither is the 45 esp for 16MP and up. The 24-105 seems to get rave reviews and it is a versatile range. At the long end, there is not much in the zooms that would make the grade- the 100-400 is very mediocre from what I read. Maybe I should consider a zeiss with a converter but I would rather have autofocus and so I hope Canon will come out with some new glass soon....
-
check out the 16-9 reviews of the 16-35 II and primes with adapters
the 24-105 is an excellent lens overall, but the wide end is not it's strong point
before dropping big bucks on a lens to use with a high resolution camera, i'd want to test the lens on the camera
i use my 100-400 a lot with the 20D and make very good 13x19 prints - but find that the long end is not worth the trouble on my 5D - from my experience, the 300 2.8 is the least expensive long lens that uses the resolution of a full-frame sensor to good advantage
-
I would wait.
Your Pentax will do just fine another 6 months.
There might be another options but the 1ds3 by then. Nikon and Pentax come to my mind.
Regards,
Bernard
-
From what I've read a stabelizing lens is a lot of hype. LOL
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=121106\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
IS is crazy helpful.
-
.... From what I've read a stabelizing lens is a lot of hype. LOL
Non-sense, you must be kidding.
-
so I am strongly leaning toward buying a Rebel XTi that I can use until the big Canon appears, and then use it as a backup camera after that.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=121103\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Pick up a used XT or 20D as you can find them very cheap.
-
check out the 16-9 reviews of the 16-35 II and primes with adapters
the 24-105 is an excellent lens overall, but the wide end is not it's strong point
before dropping big bucks on a lens to use with a high resolution camera, i'd want to test the lens on the camera
i use my 100-400 a lot with the 20D and make very good 13x19 prints - but find that the long end is not worth the trouble on my 5D - from my experience, the 300 2.8 is the least expensive long lens that uses the resolution of a full-frame sensor to good advantage
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=121427\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks for the info... but what is "16-9 reviews"?? Is this a website?
-
I would wait.
Your Pentax will do just fine another 6 months.
There might be another options but the 1ds3 by then. Nikon and Pentax come to my mind.
Regards,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=121503\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks Bernard. I still like the "old lady' Pentax 67.
I ordered a XTi/400D and a 24-105 to tide me over till a camera and lens combination appear that meet my digital needs. The Pentax MF camera that never was would have been ideal as I could have got a 67-645 adapter and used my fine 67 lenses on it. Oh well. maybe Hoya will revive the project but I'm not holding my breath. As for Nikon, can you really see them coming out with something to compete with a 22MP Canon?
I see you are in Japan. I lived there until two years ago. Some of my work from my time there is on my site at www.insightscapes.com
Jeff
-
yes, search for 16:9, sorry about the mistake
-
Thanks Bernard. I still like the "old lady' Pentax 67.
I ordered a XTi/400D and a 24-105 to tide me over till a camera and lens combination appear that meet my digital needs. The Pentax MF camera that never was would have been ideal as I could have got a 67-645 adapter and used my fine 67 lenses on it. Oh well. maybe Hoya will revive the project but I'm not holding my breath. As for Nikon, can you really see them coming out with something to compete with a 22MP Canon?
I see you are in Japan. I lived there until two years ago. Some of my work from my time there is on my site at www.insightscapes.com
Jeff
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=121719\")
Hello Jeff,
Congratulation on your new camera. I am sure that it will serve you well.
I personnally find the D2x to be already a superior tool compared to a 1ds2/5D for landscape applications and have no doubt whatsoever that Nikon's next flag ship camera will be best in class. I know that few people around here will ever acknowledge this, but more power for me if the competition decides to settle for inferior equipment.
Thanks for the link to your site, some very nice images there. Here are some of mines:
[a href=\"http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/collections/72157600276125630/]http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlangui...57600276125630/[/url]
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Get a Contax N 17-35mm 2.8 and have the mount modified to fit EOS: $2100 + $700. You'll be happy, and broke . I have been very happy with the Leica 21-35 + adapter, but it's the ol' the stop-down metering routine.
-
I have the 400d as a back up for my 1Ds mkII and I think the best lens for that camera is the 17-40L/f4. It will come handy after also when the new canon will come. If it will ever come??????????
-
I have the 400d as a back up for my 1Ds mkII and I think the best lens for that camera is the 17-40L/f4. It will come handy after also when the new canon will come. If it will ever come??????????
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=122369\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks. I checked 16:9 and other lens sites- the 17-40 certainly performs extremely well for a very reasonable price. However, there seems to be some question as to whether it could resolve a 22 MP sensor. Even the 16-35 II has an improvement in corner sharpness but is it up to a 22 MP sensor??
I'm torn between these two lenses at the moment. So I think I am going to take Bernard's advice and wait for the camera. Maybe Canon will come out with a few new or revised lenses to coincide with the MkIII debut. Will we see a 17-40 Mark II???
-
I would shy away from the 17-40 for a FF sensor, butr maybe I just had a really bad sample ...
DJ
-
If you really need/want 22Mp and a lens to match it, you should be looking to medium format digital. The bigger sensors have several advantages and the price difference is not THAT great if you shop around. You could keep your little Canon for when you need to travel light.
-
If you really need/want 22Mp and a lens to match it, you should be looking to medium format digital. The bigger sensors have several advantages and the price difference is not THAT great if you shop around. You could keep your little Canon for when you need to travel light.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=123073\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I hear the older and cheaper backs cant compare to the newer ones in dynamic range, noise etc
so the price difference is actually very large
the new imacon 22mp is about $18 large
also Ive heard the fuji (for H series) and Zeiss lenses really arent much better than top of the line 35mm prime lenses
-
This is just nonsense. Absolute nonsense.
Put a Mamiya 645 lens which everyone bags on an old Valeo 17 or 22 and a Canon 1Ds II with an 85mm/1.2 II and you can see it in the shadows and transition from sharp to blurry.
I hear the older and cheaper backs cant compare to the newer ones in dynamic range, noise etc
so the price difference is actually very large
the new imacon 22mp is about $18 large
also Ive heard the fuji (for H series) and Zeiss lenses really arent much better than top of the line 35mm prime lenses
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=123075\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Any of the Canon lenses will provide adequate resolution for up to a 24MB sensor. The problem, and especially apparent with a FF digital sensor, is that the lenses were designed for film. The photosites on the digital sensor are recessed so light that would have come through the lens and struck the film emulsion may be at too great an angle to register on the sensor. This is why there is so much vignetting with the 5D and lenses that are 24mm and wider.
Issues with lens distortion and chromatic aberration are more apparent with FF cameras which shows with the 5D where people forget how much better digital images with the crop sensors looked than with film. Some of this apparent gain in image quality was that the digital sensors only captured light from the center of the lenses where there was less distortion.
I would love to see images shot with the 1Ds and the 5D and the Mark III all using the Canon 24mm f1.4 and Sigma 20mm f1.8 lenses and compare edge to edge sharpness, (which is after all why someone would want a FF camera to shoot landscapes). I expect that the Mark III images would be noticeably sharper edge to edge and certainly it would not suffer from vignetting.