July 25, 2014, 08:13:38 AM

Author Topic: If Nikon made Canon mount lenses  (Read 2829 times)

CanineCandidsByL

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 208
    • View Profile
If Nikon made Canon mount lenses
« on: April 02, 2012, 10:46:33 AM »
I'd rather ask Nikon people what Canon lenses they would want, but since I'm here, if Canon made Nikon mount lenses what Nikon lenses would you buy?  (if any) Assume that everything else would be the same (price, weight, optical performance, autofocus performance, etc.

I'll start...the only lens that I want from Nikon is the 200-400mm f4, since their's doesn't contain the built in extender and the extra price. I wouldn't mind the extender, but at $11k, I couldn't even consider it.

canon rumors FORUM

If Nikon made Canon mount lenses
« on: April 02, 2012, 10:46:33 AM »

marekjoz

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 945
    • View Profile
    • marekjoz @flickr
Re: If Nikon made Canon mount lenses
« Reply #1 on: April 02, 2012, 11:07:41 AM »
Nikkor AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8G ED. It's the missing quality gap in Canon's product line.
flickr | youtube | 5D2, 50 F/1.4, 24-105 F/4 L IS, 300 F/4 L IS, x1.4 II

EYEONE

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 623
    • View Profile
Re: If Nikon made Canon mount lenses
« Reply #2 on: April 02, 2012, 11:09:10 AM »
Nikkor AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8G ED. It's the missing quality gap in Canon's product line.

This. It's the only Nikon lens I'm jealous of.
Canon 5D Mark III w/BG-E11, Canon 7D w/BG-E7: EF 24-70mm f.2.8L, EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS II, EF 40mm f2.8 Pancake STM, Speedlite 430EXII + 430EXI, Canon EOS 3

7enderbender

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 635
    • View Profile
Re: If Nikon made Canon mount lenses
« Reply #3 on: April 02, 2012, 11:16:09 AM »
I'd rather ask Nikon people what Canon lenses they would want, but since I'm here, if Canon made Nikon mount lenses what Nikon lenses would you buy?  (if any) Assume that everything else would be the same (price, weight, optical performance, autofocus performance, etc.

I'll start...the only lens that I want from Nikon is the 200-400mm f4, since their's doesn't contain the built in extender and the extra price. I wouldn't mind the extender, but at $11k, I couldn't even consider it.

None really. The main reason I stayed with Canon when I went digital was the Canon lens line up. Neither are "ideal" and there is always something that people wish was different. I still like my Canon FD lenses better than my EF lenses, but in my estimation I get better bang for the buck in the Canon lineup. The cameras are really secondary to that. The 135L alone makes it a right decision in my book.
5DII - 50L - 135L - 200 2.8L - 24-105 - 580EXII - 430EXII - FD 500/8 - AE1-p - bag full of FD lenses

bvukich

  • Spam Assassin
  • Administrator
  • 5D Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 726
    • View Profile
    • My (sparse) ZenFolio Site
Re: If Nikon made Canon mount lenses
« Reply #4 on: April 02, 2012, 11:19:19 AM »
The first two I think of have already been mentioned (12-24 & 200-400).

The only other one I can think of is the 24-120/4.  But the thing is, I don't want theirs; it's mediocre (at best) in every regard.  I just wish our 24-105/4L was updated with a bit more range (preferably on the wide end, but I doubt that would happen).

Stephen Melvin

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 220
    • View Profile
Re: If Nikon made Canon mount lenses
« Reply #5 on: April 02, 2012, 11:38:36 AM »
The 16-35 IS lens looks interesting. And the 85 f/1.4, which costs less than the Canon 85 f/1.2, is smaller, weighs less and has faster AF. Digital sensors are blind to f/1.2 apertures anyway.

But that's it. Canon's other lenses are as good as or better than the equivalent Nikkors.

EYEONE

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 623
    • View Profile
Re: If Nikon made Canon mount lenses
« Reply #6 on: April 02, 2012, 11:48:09 AM »
Digital sensors are blind to f/1.2 apertures anyway.


 :o What?
Canon 5D Mark III w/BG-E11, Canon 7D w/BG-E7: EF 24-70mm f.2.8L, EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS II, EF 40mm f2.8 Pancake STM, Speedlite 430EXII + 430EXI, Canon EOS 3

canon rumors FORUM

Re: If Nikon made Canon mount lenses
« Reply #6 on: April 02, 2012, 11:48:09 AM »

CanineCandidsByL

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 208
    • View Profile
Re: If Nikon made Canon mount lenses
« Reply #7 on: April 02, 2012, 01:32:56 PM »
But that's it. Canon's other lenses are as good as or better than the equivalent Nikkors.

I'd agree. But I'd love for them to dabble in each others market places as it might drives prices down. That, or one of the 3rd party lens manufactures needs to be on par with their stuff for fewer dollars. Anything to shake it up.

Stephen Melvin

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 220
    • View Profile
Re: If Nikon made Canon mount lenses
« Reply #8 on: April 02, 2012, 01:51:29 PM »

Digital sensors are blind to f/1.2 apertures anyway.


:o What?

The microlenses in front of the photosites have angular sensitivity. If you have an f/1.2 lens, try this test:
1. Take a picture at f/1.2 as you normally do.
2. Turn the lens just a little bit, as if you're removing it from the camera. This disconnects the contacts, so the camera doesn't know the aperture of the lens.
3. Take another picture, with the same shutter speed.

Notice that the picture is much darker? Canon "boosts" the ISO of the sensor when large aperture lenses are attached and shot wide open. The boosting starts at anything wider than f/2.0. The reason they do this is because the bundles of rays outside the f/2.0 aperture aren't seen as well by the sensor.

JerryKnight

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 186
    • View Profile
Re: If Nikon made Canon mount lenses
« Reply #9 on: April 02, 2012, 05:16:55 PM »

Digital sensors are blind to f/1.2 apertures anyway.



:o What?


The microlenses in front of the photosites have angular sensitivity. If you have an f/1.2 lens, try this test:
1. Take a picture at f/1.2 as you normally do.
2. Turn the lens just a little bit, as if you're removing it from the camera. This disconnects the contacts, so the camera doesn't know the aperture of the lens.
3. Take another picture, with the same shutter speed.

Notice that the picture is much darker? Canon "boosts" the ISO of the sensor when large aperture lenses are attached and shot wide open. The boosting starts at anything wider than f/2.0. The reason they do this is because the bundles of rays outside the f/2.0 aperture aren't seen as well by the sensor.


Could you please link to a source that verifies this? I have a hard time believing it, both from a marketing and a physical standpoint.

Take a look at this page. I know it's not a completely accurate representation of Canon sensors, but I don't see where there could be any wide angle light field obstruction.



Of course, I'm not a physicist. I have written a few ray tracers, though, and my intuition tells me that the light coming from a wide angle still makes it to the photodiode.

Stephen Melvin

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 220
    • View Profile
Re: If Nikon made Canon mount lenses
« Reply #10 on: April 02, 2012, 05:56:19 PM »


Digital sensors are blind to f/1.2 apertures anyway.



:o What?


The microlenses in front of the photosites have angular sensitivity. If you have an f/1.2 lens, try this test:
1. Take a picture at f/1.2 as you normally do.
2. Turn the lens just a little bit, as if you're removing it from the camera. This disconnects the contacts, so the camera doesn't know the aperture of the lens.
3. Take another picture, with the same shutter speed.

Notice that the picture is much darker? Canon "boosts" the ISO of the sensor when large aperture lenses are attached and shot wide open. The boosting starts at anything wider than f/2.0. The reason they do this is because the bundles of rays outside the f/2.0 aperture aren't seen as well by the sensor.

Could you please link to a source that verifies this? I have a hard time believing it, both from a marketing and a physical standpoint.

Take a look at this page. I know it's not a completely accurate representation of Canon sensors, but I don't see where there could be any wide angle light field obstruction.

Of course, I'm not a physicist. I have written a few ray tracers, though, and my intuition tells me that the light coming from a wide angle still makes it to the photodiode.


http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Insights/F-stop-blues

CanineCandidsByL

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 208
    • View Profile
Re: If Nikon made Canon mount lenses
« Reply #11 on: April 02, 2012, 06:36:50 PM »
Well, I guess I can believe the argument that modern sensors aren't picking up strongly angled light, but I'd like to see additional sources backing up the assertion.

I'm not buying the sensor contact test as you can't be sure the aperture didn't change unless you setup something to compare depth of field. I think this might be a great test for a manual lens.

However none of this changes the two best reasons for buying faster glass...
1. Bigger glass tends to produce higher quality images; Maybe manufactures are just more careful or maybe the larger opening reduces the effects of problems in the glass.
2. Shallow depth of field

dr croubie

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1397
  • Too many photos, too little time.
    • View Profile
Re: If Nikon made Canon mount lenses
« Reply #12 on: April 02, 2012, 07:51:43 PM »
I'm not buying the sensor contact test as you can't be sure the aperture didn't change unless you setup something to compare depth of field. I think this might be a great test for a manual lens.

Other tests to do:
- 2 versions of the same lens, like a Sigma or something (i'm presuming that the sensor invisibly boosts iso for 3rd-party lenses too). 1: a native Canon EF mount, 2 the same lens in Nikon mount via adapter, so the camera doesn't know what aperture really is.
- A manual lens, like a zeiss, samyang, m42-via-adapter, so the camera doesn't know what the aperture is. Take a shot on a 5Dx /1Dsx, and take the same shot on a film-body (if you can develop the film to exact-enough standards),the film should vignette less because film doesn't have the 'wells' like digital sensors have.
- Or same test as before, without the slight-disconnecting of the lens, take one shot normally, then just tape the pins so the camera can't see the aperture for the second shot (if you're using an EF85/1.2L, focus first because you can't with taped pins).

Also, Leica's M-mount digital lenses a) are faster (like 50mm f/0.95), b) have a shorter flange-mount distance, so c) the angle of incidence of photons hitting the sensor is a lot worse than that of your typical dslr. They've got a patent along the lines of micro-mirrors around the edges of the sensor to redirect the light properly, that cuts down wide-aperture digital-sensor vignetting just like invisible-iso-boosting (but without the increased noise).


Back to OP, same here, 14-24 and 200-400mm. That Repro-Nikkor 80mm f/1.0 1:1 macro lens would be nice if it weren't a few grand (and it can fit on Canon anyway via adapter.
The opposite is more fun to speculate, like if I could mount a TS-E 24L on a D800 (if i could afford both, of course).
Too much gear, too little space.
Gear Photos

canon rumors FORUM

Re: If Nikon made Canon mount lenses
« Reply #12 on: April 02, 2012, 07:51:43 PM »

Stephen Melvin

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 220
    • View Profile
Re: If Nikon made Canon mount lenses
« Reply #13 on: April 02, 2012, 09:11:16 PM »
Well, I guess I can believe the argument that modern sensors aren't picking up strongly angled light, but I'd like to see additional sources backing up the assertion.

It's pretty well-known amongst the nerdier types. The issue, as I stated earlier, is the microlenses in front of of the photodiodes. Their sensitivity is angular. Recent generations of sensors have "offset microlenses" closer to the corners to reduce vignetting due to this angular sensitivity. Some lens/sensor combinations can have as much as two stops of vignetting introduced by the microlenses.

I'm not buying the sensor contact test as you can't be sure the aperture didn't change unless you setup something to compare depth of field. I think this might be a great test for a manual lens.

If you're shooting a Canon lens wide open, how could the aperture have changed? Have you ever seen a Canon lens stop down when you take it off?

However none of this changes the two best reasons for buying faster glass...
1. Bigger glass tends to produce higher quality images; Maybe manufactures are just more careful or maybe the larger opening reduces the effects of problems in the glass.
2. Shallow depth of field

Actually, it does change reason number 2. The DOF changes.


CanineCandidsByL

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 208
    • View Profile
Re: If Nikon made Canon mount lenses
« Reply #14 on: April 02, 2012, 09:25:55 PM »
It's pretty well-known amongst the nerdier types.F changes.
Well, optic nerds....we come in different flavors.

If you're shooting a Canon lens wide open, how could the aperture have changed? Have you ever seen a Canon lens stop down when you take it off?
Absolutely....but it was an FD lens set by mechanical action.  ;D

2. Shallow depth of field

Actually, it does change reason number 2. The DOF changes.
I can visualize how that might be true, but I'd want proof before I'd accept it. And if any light makes it from the sharpest angles, then there would still be an effect.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: If Nikon made Canon mount lenses
« Reply #14 on: April 02, 2012, 09:25:55 PM »