Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8]   Go Down

Author Topic: What next for Canon?  (Read 731945 times)

lightskyland

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16
Re: What next for Canon?
« Reply #140 on: October 05, 2017, 10:09:25 PM »

The lenses you listed are not sharper than the ones I listed, and in many cases aren't even the right focal length.

They also typically have lousy to non-existent sunstars, particularly important when photographing landscapes at wide angles.

However, you are quite correct that they are all huge and mostly enormously expensive.

So, you can pay a lot of money for enormous dSLR lenses and more or less match the IQ of less expensive, reasonably sized Sony glass.
« Last Edit: October 05, 2017, 10:17:13 PM by lightskyland »
Logged

shadowblade

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2537
Re: What next for Canon?
« Reply #141 on: October 07, 2017, 03:54:43 AM »

The lenses you listed are not sharper than the ones I listed, and in many cases aren't even the right focal length.

They also typically have lousy to non-existent sunstars, particularly important when photographing landscapes at wide angles.

However, you are quite correct that they are all huge and mostly enormously expensive.

So, you can pay a lot of money for enormous dSLR lenses and more or less match the IQ of less expensive, reasonably sized Sony glass.

The Laowa 15 has soft corners/edges even when stopped down. Any of the other 14-15mm options mentioned beats it optically, and the zooms are more versatile as well.

Regarding sunstars, the Loxia 21mm isn't exactly great for that. It gives 10-pointed stars whose rays appear spread too far apart (for landscape, and especially cityscape photography, that's the major failing of most lenses with an even number of aperture blades). The 14- and 18-pointed stars generated by the Canon and Sony zooms with 7 or 9 blades are much better.

I don't think anything quite touches the Otus lenses for sharpness in their comparable focal length ranges (the only ones that come close being some of the Sigma Art lenses).

I don't see the point of the Batis 135 f/2.8 at all. It doesn't cost much less than the 70-200 f/2.8 zooms and is no faster, and is much more expensive than the much faster and equally sharp (if not a bit sharper) Sigma 135mm f/1.8. Essentially, you're paying a huge premium for small size, without any real performance benefit.

And what you're getting in most of these cases isn't just size - it's versatility. The Canon 16-35 f/2.8 and the Sony 12-24 f/4 and 16-35 f/2.8 can each cover for a number of primes. What's easier to carry - a single 12-24 or 16-35, or both the 15mm Laowa and the 21mm Loxia?
Logged

hogloff

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 586
Re: What next for Canon?
« Reply #142 on: October 07, 2017, 08:55:46 AM »

The Laowa 15 has soft corners/edges even when stopped down. Any of the other 14-15mm options mentioned beats it optically, and the zooms are more versatile as well.

Regarding sunstars, the Loxia 21mm isn't exactly great for that. It gives 10-pointed stars whose rays appear spread too far apart (for landscape, and especially cityscape photography, that's the major failing of most lenses with an even number of aperture blades). The 14- and 18-pointed stars generated by the Canon and Sony zooms with 7 or 9 blades are much better.

I don't think anything quite touches the Otus lenses for sharpness in their comparable focal length ranges (the only ones that come close being some of the Sigma Art lenses).

I don't see the point of the Batis 135 f/2.8 at all. It doesn't cost much less than the 70-200 f/2.8 zooms and is no faster, and is much more expensive than the much faster and equally sharp (if not a bit sharper) Sigma 135mm f/1.8. Essentially, you're paying a huge premium for small size, without any real performance benefit.

And what you're getting in most of these cases isn't just size - it's versatility. The Canon 16-35 f/2.8 and the Sony 12-24 f/4 and 16-35 f/2.8 can each cover for a number of primes. What's easier to carry - a single 12-24 or 16-35, or both the 15mm Laowa and the 21mm Loxia?

Depends on what you mean by carry. When I travel I carry my camera around my wrist for weeks on end. I can tell you the 16-35 zoom hanging off my wrist is much more noticable than a Batis 25. I really can handle much more weight in my pack...but hanging off my wrist, the big zooms become a pain.
Logged

lightskyland

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16
Re: What next for Canon?
« Reply #143 on: October 09, 2017, 11:09:03 PM »

Quote
The Laowa 15 has soft corners/edges even when stopped down.

I own the Laowa, and it's extremely sharp in the corners at landscape apertures. Simply blows away the Zeiss ZE 15/2.8 I used to own, at any aperture.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8]   Go Up