October 23, 2014, 12:21:30 PM

Author Topic: Sleeper Lenses?  (Read 14097 times)

tron

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1862
    • View Profile
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #60 on: July 20, 2013, 10:39:28 AM »
There was a time when I used to shoot with the 400L f/5.6 ... The most comments I used to get were ... Can you still buy these new? and the old faithful ... why this lens, this dodo doesn't even ZOOM!
Hmmm, they must be dodo themselves!  ;D

However, an interesting answer to them could be that the 400mm f/4L DO is the real DODO lens= Diffractive Optics for Digital Ornithologists  ;D  ;D  ;D

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #60 on: July 20, 2013, 10:39:28 AM »

archiea

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 89
    • View Profile
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #61 on: July 20, 2013, 01:01:43 PM »
I don't think its been mentioned, but the non-L 70-300mm. Lesser build quality than the L, noisey IS, but its way cheaper, often deeply discounted, excellent image quality, its black, and smaller & lighter to carry.

Another is the 100mm L macro.  F2.8 makes it a great portrait lens, hybrid IS handles even rotation motion, hand holdable macro and night portrait photography. Great for events because u can hand hold portrait photography AND do macro shots.

(Drops microphone, walks away....)

lholmes549

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 54
    • View Profile
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #62 on: July 20, 2013, 02:38:53 PM »
Out of all my lenses my favourite is, without a doubt, my Pentacon 135 f/2.8. It is quite unbelievably sharp, has beautiful bokeh and while some may list this as a disadvantage in certain situations, it has a long focus throw for precise focussing! The build quality is excellent and ever since I re-greased it, the focussing ring is smoother than ever!
Fairly light too, and the 15 aperture blades are just a nice addition when using it stopped down.
6D, FTb, EOS 500  | 14mm f/2.8,  24-105 f/4L, 70-200 f/4L, 50mm f/1.8, 135mm f/2.8
_____________________________________
500px

AJ

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 410
    • View Profile
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #63 on: July 20, 2013, 03:04:25 PM »
Canon 17-40/L, when used as an UWA on FF gear, not as a standard lens on crop.
Why do you say this? I use the 17-40 as a standard lens on crop and it performs very well for the most part IMO, as I understand it it's biggest weakness is used at the wide end without stopping down on FF. Using it on crop negates most of this issue.
The 17-40 is Canon's best full frame WA zoom.

I'm using a 17-40L on crop as a standard zoom because I plan (for CR regulars yes, really :-p) to upgrade to ff sometime and most of all the L is sturdy and sealed which makes a great difference because I regularly shoot in snow and dusty/dirty outdoor conditions. Just be sure to replace the lens hood with a 83J...

... however @f4 the 17-40L is clearly lacking in sharpness and except for the above reasons I really wouldn't recommend it on crop, even though it has a very good price nowadays esp. with Canon cashback rebates.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=100&Camera=453&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=100&Sample=0&CameraComp=736&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0
Sure, it works as a standard zoom on crop.  But used this way I wouldn't call it a "sleeper lens".

jd7

  • Canon AE-1
  • ***
  • Posts: 77
    • View Profile
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #64 on: July 20, 2013, 05:14:49 PM »
+1 for 28 1.8 at least on APS-C cameras. Light, small, relatively cheap, USM, and with 45mm FOV on APS-C I think it makes an excellent walk around lens when you want to travel light. I'm yet to play with it on a 35mm sensor camera though.

I've also been pretty happy with my sigma 10-20 3.5 EX DC HSM. I rarely see it mentioned anywhere though.
6D | 24-70 4L IS | 70-200 4L IS | 70-200 2.8L IS II | 35 2 IS | 40 2.8 | 85 1.8 | 1.4x mk II | 430EX II

Act444

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 325
    • View Profile
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #65 on: July 20, 2013, 05:51:35 PM »

Only reason I gave up the 85 was to help fund an upgrade from the 70-200 f4 to the 70-200 2.8 (don't regret at all...would do again)...still though, that was a tough lens to part with. There has been many a time where I either wished I had it or contemplated re-purchasing it...probably would go for the 100 f2 if I did it all over again.

Hi Act444,
Just curious - what would make you go for the 100 f2 over the 85 1.8? I haven't used either, but am contemplating getting one of them (or possibly sigma 85 1.4) for use on a 6D, and I'm intrigued that even though you liked the 85 you'd choose the 100 now.
Cheers

The main reason is that both the 85 1.8 and the 100 f2 are the same size. The 100 gives sightly more reach and f2 is still plenty of light to stop action in all but the darkest of venues. It would, IMO, be a solid choice for a relatively compact lens that would offer good reach on a 1.6x camera (e.g. venues disallowing "professional" equipment, inconspicuous "street" shooting, still manageable with the EOS M + adapter). The 85 would work very well for these uses, too, but 100 would give me just that little bit extra cropping power...


jd7

  • Canon AE-1
  • ***
  • Posts: 77
    • View Profile
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #66 on: July 20, 2013, 06:58:14 PM »

Only reason I gave up the 85 was to help fund an upgrade from the 70-200 f4 to the 70-200 2.8 (don't regret at all...would do again)...still though, that was a tough lens to part with. There has been many a time where I either wished I had it or contemplated re-purchasing it...probably would go for the 100 f2 if I did it all over again.

Hi Act444,
Just curious - what would make you go for the 100 f2 over the 85 1.8? I haven't used either, but am contemplating getting one of them (or possibly sigma 85 1.4) for use on a 6D, and I'm intrigued that even though you liked the 85 you'd choose the 100 now.
Cheers

The main reason is that both the 85 1.8 and the 100 f2 are the same size. The 100 gives sightly more reach and f2 is still plenty of light to stop action in all but the darkest of venues. It would, IMO, be a solid choice for a relatively compact lens that would offer good reach on a 1.6x camera (e.g. venues disallowing "professional" equipment, inconspicuous "street" shooting, still manageable with the EOS M + adapter). The 85 would work very well for these uses, too, but 100 would give me just that little bit extra cropping power...

Thanks Act444. I do quite like the idea of the 100mm focal length. If the IQ is pretty much the same as the 85 1.8 though, I guess I'll have to decide if the extra 15mm is worth the extra A$130 or so.
6D | 24-70 4L IS | 70-200 4L IS | 70-200 2.8L IS II | 35 2 IS | 40 2.8 | 85 1.8 | 1.4x mk II | 430EX II

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #66 on: July 20, 2013, 06:58:14 PM »

alek35

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 21
    • View Profile
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #67 on: July 22, 2013, 01:55:24 AM »
Samyang 14mm: One of the most arty lenses I own. The 'moustache' distortion is no dealbreaker for my use of this lens. Excellent sharpness and colors and the (self added) addition of an AF confirmation chip makes it sweet to use (MF is otherwise almost impossible due to the large DOF in the viewfinder, even with an EF-S screen).

This got me curious - how did you add the AF confirmation chip ? It works on your Canon, right ?

Br,
Thomas
eos 5dII / 7d / 400mm f/2.8 isII / 70-200 f/2-8 is II / 24mm F/1.4 II / 100mm iS Macro

insanitybeard

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 289
    • View Profile
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #68 on: July 22, 2013, 04:50:31 AM »
I'm using a 17-40L on crop as a standard zoom because I plan (for CR regulars yes, really :-p) to upgrade to ff sometime and most of all the L is sturdy and sealed which makes a great difference because I regularly shoot in snow and dusty/dirty outdoor conditions. Just be sure to replace the lens hood with a 83J...

... however @f4 the 17-40L is clearly lacking in sharpness and except for the above reasons I really wouldn't recommend it on crop, even though it has a very good price nowadays esp. with Canon cashback rebates.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=100&Camera=453&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=100&Sample=0&CameraComp=736&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

The softness I can see in TDP's sample crops with the 60D compared against the full frame 1Ds III isn't exclusive to the 17-40 though, do the same thing with the 16-35 II, the 24-70 II and even the legendary 70-200 2.8 IS II and the lens looks much softer used on the crop body at the same aperture (I started a thread on this a while back trying to understand the apparent softness of the same lens used on the crop body compared to full frame), which makes me think it is more to do with the the performance/ rendering of the crop sensor than the lens sharpness itself:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=687&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=0&LensComp=687&CameraComp=736&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0
7D / EF-S 10-22 / 17-40L / 70-200 f4L IS / EF-S 60 macro

SithTracy

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 41
    • View Profile
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #69 on: July 22, 2013, 05:08:07 AM »
This got me curious - how did you add the AF confirmation chip ? It works on your Canon, right ?

Br,
Thomas

Don't do it myself, but was thinking about it when someone sent me this video.  I found it is not needed with practice.

http://youtu.be/kQHHW2tUle0

mrsfotografie

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1425
  • www.mrsfotografie.nl
    • View Profile
    • MRS fotografie
Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #70 on: July 22, 2013, 05:25:10 AM »
Samyang 14mm: One of the most arty lenses I own. The 'moustache' distortion is no dealbreaker for my use of this lens. Excellent sharpness and colors and the (self added) addition of an AF confirmation chip makes it sweet to use (MF is otherwise almost impossible due to the large DOF in the viewfinder, even with an EF-S screen).

This got me curious - how did you add the AF confirmation chip ? It works on your Canon, right ?

Br,
Thomas
It works on any Canon EOS camera :)

I bought an AF confirmation chip and glued it onto the rear of the lens as shown in the pictures below. I positioned it in the right place using the supplied alignment tool and checked it with a Canon lens. Note that I had to make a spacer to raise the chip to the correct level: flush with the edge of the metal mount. If you glue it inside the recess it won't contact the pins in the camera!

The chip is programmable so that it will report the correct focal length and maximum aperture but will work without programming.

More importantly, it has internal 'focus micro adjustment' which I programmed at f/4 to nail focus every time and give sharp results at f/4 and above which is the aperture range I use mostly. I found there is some focus shift in this lens depending on aperture so at f/2.8 and f/3.2 the focal plane is not the same as at f/4 and above. Programming the AF chip at f/2.8 therefore results in a false calibration for the stopped down apertures.

Now, for stuff at infinity focus,  the focus confirmation is still OK even at f/2.8-3.2 but for stuff critically close to the lens at wide apertures I resort to the precision matte focus screen in my 5DII to check focus is in the correct place.

The chip is programmable as follows:

Quote
Samyang 14 mm: 14mm F/2.8, AFMA 26

Preparation:

1 Turn camera on and attach adapter with chip,aperture shows F1.4 on camera.
2 set Manual mode.
3 shutter speed to 1/60 second
4 aperture increment step to 1/3 EV. (it is the most Canon digital camera default setting).

set the aperture value to F/64 and press shutter button once.
set the aperture value to F/57 and press shutter button once.
set the aperture value to F/64 and press shutter button once.
Turn the aperture dial, set the Max aperture to F1.0.

For example: 14mm f2.8 micro adjustment 24

Enter  programing mode: F64 shutter, F57 shutter, F64 shutter


Setting focal length
====================

Setting focal length mode: F2.2 shutter

Enter focal length value:  F2.0 shutter F2.0 shutter F2.0 shutter F2.2 shutter F3.2 shutter (00014)

Store parameter to chip: F57 shutter F64 shutter F57 shutter

Focal length setting done to 14mm.


Setting Max aperture
====================

Setting Max aperture mode: F2.0 shutter

Enter Max aperture value: F2.8 shutter

Store parameter to emf chip: F57 shutter F64 shutter F57 shutter

Max aperture setting done to F2.8.


focus micro adjustment
======================

Enter programing mode: F64 shutter, F57 shutter, F64 shutter

focus micro adjustment mode: F2.5 shutter.

Enter focus micro adjustment value: F2.5 shutter F4.0 shutter.

Store parameter to emf chip: F57 shutter F64 shutter F57 shutter

Micro adjustment setting up done as 26.

Note that it is possible to have the Exif report the actual aperture selected, but I use the lens with the camera set to aperture priority and maximum aperture ( f/2.8 ), then I stop down the lens manually and let the camera sort out the metering. This works the easiest but it does mean that if I actually take a photo at f/5.6, it is still reported as f/2.8. Focal length and exposure time are however always reported correctly.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2013, 05:28:46 AM by mrsfotografie »
5D3, 5D2, Sony α6000, G16 | SY14 f/2.8, Ʃ20 f/1.8, 24 f/2.8, 35 f/2, Ʃ35 f/1.4A, 50 f/1.8 I, Ʃ50 f/1.4 EX, 100L Macro, 17-40L, 24-105L, 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, 1.4x II, 70-300L, 100-400L | E-mount: SY12 f/2, Ʃ19 & 30 f/2.8 EX DN, 16-70 ZA OSS, 55-210 OSS, Metabones SB | FT-QL, AE-1P | FD(n) & FL lenses

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Sleeper Lenses?
« Reply #70 on: July 22, 2013, 05:25:10 AM »