The Shorty Forty MTF Chart Comparison

[garyploski]

Thanks for the suggestion. 

[preppyak]

side by side + above .8 = I'll take one

Well, and on APS-C, the corners seem like they could still be fairly sharp. By the MTF chart, its stronger than the 50mm f/1,8 until the very edge of an APS-C sensor

[Albi86]

Sorry, but these charts looks very much a marketing trick.

What's the point of comparing lenses at maximum aperture, if it's not the same? Not surprising that the pancake is sharper @f/2.8 than the fifty @f/1.8. Let's compare them both @f/2.8 and let's see. Even @f/1.8 the fifty is not far behind, I would not be surprised to see it catch up by f/2.8.

The lines @f/8 might well be a measurement of maximum sharpness, but honestly, who cares? Who's buying these lenses to shoot @f/8?

I remain of the same idea, unless you shoot a lot of videos this pancake is a waste of money, as little as it could be.

[dok]

The lines @f/8 might well be a measurement of maximum sharpness, but honestly, who cares? Who's buying these lenses to shoot @f/8?

Probably a lot of people. Simply because there are a lot of people who like prime lenses and sometimes prefer them over zooms (for reasons that have been already debated). And then, I guess these people care about the IQ not only wide open because they also shoot landscapes with it. It's as simple as that.
I'm part of these people and I would be willing to buy if the IQ proved to be good from f/2.8 to f/11.

[TrumpetPower!]

Sorry, but these charts looks very much a marketing trick.

Eh, Canon's MTF charts have a well-deserved reputation. Bad individual copies of lenses excepted, I don't think anybody's ever come up with a lens that didn't perform similarly to their published charts.

What's the point of comparing lenses at maximum aperture, if it's not the same?

Because you want to know how well the lens performs at its maximum aperture. What would be the point of an MTF chart for the 400 f/2.8 that only had lines for f/5.6?

The f/8 lines are there for the apples-to-apples comparison you're hinting that you want.

Not surprising that the pancake is sharper @f/2.8 than the fifty @f/1.8. Let's compare them both @f/2.8 and let's see. Even @f/1.8 the fifty is not far behind, I would not be surprised to see it catch up by f/2.8.

Considering how much better the 40 is at f/8, I rather doubt either 50 will be as sharp at f/2.8 as the 40. It could happen, but I doubt it.

The lines @f/8 might well be a measurement of maximum sharpness, but honestly, who cares? Who's buying these lenses to shoot @f/8?

Are you kidding? Or are you not a photographer?

Seriously, wide-open shooting is the exception in the world of photography, not the rule. Sure, there are lots of types of photography that call for big apertures, but there're many more that require the entire subject to be sharp. And f/8 is the perfect aperture for that -- it's close to if not at every lens's optimum performance; it's small enough for a generous depth of field; and it's not too small for diffraction to muddy things up. There's a reason why the saying is, "f/8 and be there," and not "wide open and be there."

I remain of the same idea, unless you shoot a lot of videos this pancake is a waste of money, as little as it could be.

Again, missing the point.

Sure, the video crowd is going to eat this up with the silent autofocussing and what-not.

But I'm sure you'll find an awful lot of pros getting these as replacement body caps, and then using them in place of digicams. It's the perfect pro's party camera, for example, especially with that one-foot minimum focus distance. Imagine a wedding photographer getting out on the dance floor, in the middle of the Conga line, with one of these for what I mean.

b&

[TrumpetPower!]

The lines @f/8 might well be a measurement of maximum sharpness, but honestly, who cares? Who's buying these lenses to shoot @f/8?

Probably a lot of people. Simply because there are a lot of people who like prime lenses and sometimes prefer them over zooms (for reasons that have been already debated). And then, I guess these people care about the IQ not only wide open because they also shoot landscapes with it. It's as simple as that.
I'm part of these people and I would be willing to buy if the IQ proved to be good from f/2.8 to f/11.

If you trust Canon's MTF charts -- and there's no good reason not to -- then Canon is unambiguously stating that the Shorty McForty has better image quality than the 50mm f/1.4. Actually, it should have image quality on a par with the 35 f/1.4L, (version 1 of) the 24 - 70 and the 17-40. The 35 f/2 doesn't come close.

I'm starting to think that the joker in the other thread was right -- the reason this isn't an L lens is because there's not enough room on the barrel for the red stripe!

b&

[peederj]

Those MTFs do NOT make this lens look better than either of the non-L 50's. Draw the black lines for 2.8 on the faster primes, I think the 40 would come up well short. I'm also guessing CAs are bad enough they needed that CA correction feature before they were willing to ship these.

I don't see this as making it into my kit...the nifty fifty (I refer to the 1.4 as "nifty," not the 1.8 ) is small enough, and two stops faster. I'm guessing IQ here is not much better than whatever kit zoom you might otherwise carry, and if size matters most, I'd wait for a mirrorless body first and see whether these even fit that.

[paulc]

A few things worth noting:

1.  One hundred and ninety-nine dollars.

2.  The 5.0/1.8 from a build quality is a fierce pile of junk.

3.  50mm is a smidge long to slap onto a crop body.


I expect this to supplant the 50/1.8 as every new SLR user's second lens.

[keithfullermusic]

I think what a lot of people are forgetting is that many people with DSLRs, pros and consumers, like to use their cameras when they hang out with their friends and go out.  The camera isn't the problem, it's that huge frickin lens popping out.  With a flat lens like this you can throw your camera in a big jacket pocket or a purse and not have to worry about it.  Something like this makes your DSLR an alternative for taking a little point and shoot.

I don't know why people are angry/upset about this lens either.  Just don't get it if you don't like it.  It's not like Canon has halted all their other things to focus on this little guy.

[Rocky]

It will be an excellent walk around lens for FF, assuming the CA is good. It will be a good lens for the grand parents with APS-C for taking picture of the grand kids. It is just the perfect focal length (64mm equivalent).I still wish that Canon will come up a EF-S 30mm f2.8.

[Rocky]

I think what a lot of people are forgetting is that many people with DSLRs, pros and consumers, like to use their cameras when they hang out with their friends and go out.  The camera isn't the problem, it's that huge frickin lens popping out.  With a flat lens like this you can throw your camera in a big jacket pocket or a purse and not have to worry about it.  Something like this makes your DSLR an alternative for taking a little point and shoot.

I don't know why people are angry/upset about this lens either.  Just don't get it if you don't like it.  It's not like Canon has halted all their other things to focus on this little guy.

Totally agree, Well said. If you do not like it just do not buy it. It is the freedom of choice and Canon has just given us an excellent choice.

[boateggs]

I think what a lot of people are forgetting is that many people with DSLRs, pros and consumers, like to use their cameras when they hang out with their friends and go out.  The camera isn't the problem, it's that huge frickin lens popping out.  With a flat lens like this you can throw your camera in a big jacket pocket or a purse and not have to worry about it.  Something like this makes your DSLR an alternative for taking a little point and shoot.

I don't know why people are angry/upset about this lens either.  Just don't get it if you don't like it.  It's not like Canon has halted all their other things to focus on this little guy.

True dat! And it has a metal mount, one thing that bugged me about the nifty 50.  I guess the metal mount costs $80

[gmrza]

It will be an excellent walk around lens for FF, assuming the CA is good. It will be a good lens for the grand parents with APS-C for taking picture of the grand kids. It is just the perfect focal length (64mm equivalent).I still wish that Canon will come up a EF-S 30mm f2.8.

That is my main question: chromatic and spherical aberration.  How does it perform in that respect?

[aZhu]

It will be an excellent walk around lens for FF, assuming the CA is good. It will be a good lens for the grand parents with APS-C for taking picture of the grand kids. It is just the perfect focal length (64mm equivalent).I still wish that Canon will come up a EF-S 30mm f2.8.

That is my main question: chromatic and spherical aberration.  How does it perform in that respect?

We'll have to wait till people start getting their hands on them and begin doing some tests. I don't know of anyone with a pre-production model that has shown sample images yet. If anyone knows, please share! I pre-ordered mine already. Just hope it really will released at the end of June and not postponed till God knows when...

[gmrza]

We'll have to wait till people start getting their hands on them and begin doing some tests. I don't know of anyone with a pre-production model that has shown sample images yet. If anyone knows, please share! I pre-ordered mine already. Just hope it really will released at the end of June and not postponed till God knows when...

At least initially, I see this lens being popular purely because people are buying it out of curiosity.  At $200 odd, it's worth taking a chance.