July 07, 2015, 09:31:12 AM

Author Topic: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L USM  (Read 21181 times)

bdunbar79

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2813
Re: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L USM
« Reply #180 on: July 01, 2015, 07:53:29 PM »
It will get really interesting how this works once I get my 5DsR ... the diffraction limit is way lower than with the 5D MKIII ... really a big question mark how much f16 kills details on the 5DsR as with the 5d MkIII it is not that bad

At the same size enlargement the diffraction will be identical.

Not really as f16 (Diameter of Airy Disk: 21.3 µm) is above the diffraction limit of the 5d Mk III (Maximum Circle of Confusion @f16: 15.67 µm )but way above the diffraction limit of the 5DsR (Maximum Circle of Confusion @f16: 10.39 µm)  ... the added details of the 50,6MP 5DsR would not have any benefit if that effect cancels out all additional details ...   

That's not correct.  (See pbd's post above).

I'm surprised at how many do not understand this concept fully.  There is ALWAYS something to gain and if you claim that you get worse photo quality simply because you increase pixel density, all else equal then that just means you don't understand the concept.

Please read this quoted response by member chromophore on April 26:

"The concern over the effects of diffraction for high resolution sensors is completely misplaced.

You don't lose sharpness to diffraction by increasing pixel density, because the size of the diffraction effect is strictly determined by the lens.  To understand why, suppose you have two camera systems that are identical in every respect except that one has twice the linear pixel density than the other (i.e., every pixel in the low-resolution sensor is split into four pixels in a 2x2 arrangement in the high-resolution sensor).  Ignoring the effect this has on noise (and noise on perceived resolution), it is true that, as an increasing function of f-number, the higher resolution sensor will be able to reveal the effect of diffraction sooner than the low-resolution sensor.  But the reason for this is because the low-resolution sensor is unable to resolve that effect, not that the effect is stronger in the high-resolution sensor.  The Airy disks are IDENTICAL in the two systems because the lens is identical.

Therefore, increasing sensor resolution does not confer any disadvantage with respect to diffraction.  You always have something to gain, and you never do any worse than the low-resolution sensor.  You might not gain as much as you theoretically could (i.e., a high-resolution sensor might not realize the full sharpness in the sharpest plane of focus at f/16 compared to when it is shot at with a near-ideal lens at f/2.8 ), but you won't do worse than a low-resolution sensor that couldn't SEE the diffraction at f/16 in the first place.

The hesitation to go with higher resolution because of fears of diffraction reveals a complete misunderstanding of the phenomenon.  If you said "I don't want high resolution because I want better dynamic range," then I can be on board with that statement.  But if you said "I don't want high resolution because I would be more severely diffraction-limited," I would tell you that you don't understand what you're talking about."
2 x 1DX
B1G, MAC, GLIAC

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L USM
« Reply #180 on: July 01, 2015, 07:53:29 PM »

1982chris911

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 366
    • View my Flickr Stream here
Re: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L USM
« Reply #181 on: July 02, 2015, 03:15:01 AM »
It will get really interesting how this works once I get my 5DsR ... the diffraction limit is way lower than with the 5D MKIII ... really a big question mark how much f16 kills details on the 5DsR as with the 5d MkIII it is not that bad

At the same size enlargement the diffraction will be identical.

Not really as f16 (Diameter of Airy Disk: 21.3 µm) is above the diffraction limit of the 5d Mk III (Maximum Circle of Confusion @f16: 15.67 µm )but way above the diffraction limit of the 5DsR (Maximum Circle of Confusion @f16: 10.39 µm)  ... the added details of the 50,6MP 5DsR would not have any benefit if that effect cancels out all additional details ...   

That's not correct.  (See pbd's post above).

I'm surprised at how many do not understand this concept fully.  There is ALWAYS something to gain and if you claim that you get worse photo quality simply because you increase pixel density, all else equal then that just means you don't understand the concept.

Please read this quoted response by member chromophore on April 26:

"The concern over the effects of diffraction for high resolution sensors is completely misplaced.

You don't lose sharpness to diffraction by increasing pixel density, because the size of the diffraction effect is strictly determined by the lens.  To understand why, suppose you have two camera systems that are identical in every respect except that one has twice the linear pixel density than the other (i.e., every pixel in the low-resolution sensor is split into four pixels in a 2x2 arrangement in the high-resolution sensor).  Ignoring the effect this has on noise (and noise on perceived resolution), it is true that, as an increasing function of f-number, the higher resolution sensor will be able to reveal the effect of diffraction sooner than the low-resolution sensor.  But the reason for this is because the low-resolution sensor is unable to resolve that effect, not that the effect is stronger in the high-resolution sensor.  The Airy disks are IDENTICAL in the two systems because the lens is identical.

Therefore, increasing sensor resolution does not confer any disadvantage with respect to diffraction.  You always have something to gain, and you never do any worse than the low-resolution sensor.  You might not gain as much as you theoretically could (i.e., a high-resolution sensor might not realize the full sharpness in the sharpest plane of focus at f/16 compared to when it is shot at with a near-ideal lens at f/2.8 ), but you won't do worse than a low-resolution sensor that couldn't SEE the diffraction at f/16 in the first place.

The hesitation to go with higher resolution because of fears of diffraction reveals a complete misunderstanding of the phenomenon.  If you said "I don't want high resolution because I want better dynamic range," then I can be on board with that statement.  But if you said "I don't want high resolution because I would be more severely diffraction-limited," I would tell you that you don't understand what you're talking about."


I did not mean to loose any detail over the 5D MKIII - just that at some point I just won't gain anything from the 5DsR sensor over the 5DIII ... bc more pixel are within the airy disk (1x1 , 2x2 , 3x3 , 4x4 , 5x5).
When I use the Cambridgeincolor tool (http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm#calculator) the 5d MKIII shows 3x3 pixels are in the circle while with 7d (about same pixel size as 5DSR ) its more like 4x4 or slightly 5x5 are influenced. My gains in so far would be that I get the same information in a smaller file with MAYBE and that is a BIG MAYBE more sharpness on the 100% level ...       

I will find out anyway when my 5DsR finally makes it here... F16 is also sth. I don't use too many times and at f8 to f11 it won't play so much of a role anyway ...
5DsR, 5D M2, 5D M3, 7D, Sigma 12-24 HSM2, Canon 11-24 F4L , 16-35 F4L IS, 17-40 F4L, Canon 24-70 F2.8L, 70-200 F2.8 IS II L, 100-400 F4,5-5,6 IS II L, 100mm f2,8L Macro, Ext x2 III, etc
https://500px.com/1982chris911
https://www.flickr.com/photos/chrisk1982/

1982chris911

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 366
    • View my Flickr Stream here
Re: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L USM
« Reply #182 on: July 02, 2015, 03:17:49 AM »
It will get really interesting how this works once I get my 5DsR ... the diffraction limit is way lower than with the 5D MKIII ... really a big question mark how much f16 kills details on the 5DsR as with the 5d MkIII it is not that bad

At the same size enlargement the diffraction will be identical.

Not really as f16 (Diameter of Airy Disk: 21.3 µm) is above the diffraction limit of the 5d Mk III (Maximum Circle of Confusion @f16: 15.67 µm )but way above the diffraction limit of the 5DsR (Maximum Circle of Confusion @f16: 10.39 µm)  ... the added details of the 50,6MP 5DsR would not have any benefit if that effect cancels out all additional details ...   

That's not correct.  (See pbd's post above).

I'm surprised at how many do not understand this concept fully.  There is ALWAYS something to gain and if you claim that you get worse photo quality simply because you increase pixel density, all else equal then that just means you don't understand the concept.

Please read this quoted response by member chromophore on April 26:

"The concern over the effects of diffraction for high resolution sensors is completely misplaced.

You don't lose sharpness to diffraction by increasing pixel density, because the size of the diffraction effect is strictly determined by the lens.  To understand why, suppose you have two camera systems that are identical in every respect except that one has twice the linear pixel density than the other (i.e., every pixel in the low-resolution sensor is split into four pixels in a 2x2 arrangement in the high-resolution sensor).  Ignoring the effect this has on noise (and noise on perceived resolution), it is true that, as an increasing function of f-number, the higher resolution sensor will be able to reveal the effect of diffraction sooner than the low-resolution sensor.  But the reason for this is because the low-resolution sensor is unable to resolve that effect, not that the effect is stronger in the high-resolution sensor.  The Airy disks are IDENTICAL in the two systems because the lens is identical.

Therefore, increasing sensor resolution does not confer any disadvantage with respect to diffraction.  You always have something to gain, and you never do any worse than the low-resolution sensor.  You might not gain as much as you theoretically could (i.e., a high-resolution sensor might not realize the full sharpness in the sharpest plane of focus at f/16 compared to when it is shot at with a near-ideal lens at f/2.8 ), but you won't do worse than a low-resolution sensor that couldn't SEE the diffraction at f/16 in the first place.

The hesitation to go with higher resolution because of fears of diffraction reveals a complete misunderstanding of the phenomenon.  If you said "I don't want high resolution because I want better dynamic range," then I can be on board with that statement.  But if you said "I don't want high resolution because I would be more severely diffraction-limited," I would tell you that you don't understand what you're talking about."


I did not mean to loose any detail over the 5D MKIII - just that at some point I just won't gain anything from the 5DsR sensor over the 5DIII ... bc more pixel are within the airy disk (1x1 , 2x2 , 3x3 , 4x4 , 5x5).
When I use the Cambridgeincolor tool (http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm#calculator) the 5d MKIII shows 3x3 pixels are in the circle while with 7d (about same pixel size as 5DSR ) its more like 4x4 or slightly 5x5 are influenced. My gains in so far would be that I get the same information in a smaller file with MAYBE and that is a BIG MAYBE more sharpness on the 100% level which is of course sth. you would only see on the Monitor and not in print where the opposite should be true with the bigger files being better in all regards         

I will find out anyway when my 5DsR finally makes it here... F16 is also sth. I don't use too many times and at f8 to f11 it won't play so much of a role anyway ...
5DsR, 5D M2, 5D M3, 7D, Sigma 12-24 HSM2, Canon 11-24 F4L , 16-35 F4L IS, 17-40 F4L, Canon 24-70 F2.8L, 70-200 F2.8 IS II L, 100-400 F4,5-5,6 IS II L, 100mm f2,8L Macro, Ext x2 III, etc
https://500px.com/1982chris911
https://www.flickr.com/photos/chrisk1982/

1982chris911

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 366
    • View my Flickr Stream here
Re: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L USM
« Reply #183 on: July 02, 2015, 03:22:48 AM »
To better illustrate what I  mean you should look at the flare characteristics at f16, where the 11-24 looks by far the best to me.
Agree. I don't remember the last time I went all the way to f16 though, but that's certainly something I can change.

Well playing around with the lens all the time I also find it very hard to get a feeling for relative size in the frame ... I tend to make the things in the middle of the frame too small in regards to the outer frame and background ...
Reminds me of what they told us in a presentation here:" This lens if you are not careful will create a lot of EMPTY space in the picture"- that is very true ... also leveling it with the horizon is more critical than ever ... 
5DsR, 5D M2, 5D M3, 7D, Sigma 12-24 HSM2, Canon 11-24 F4L , 16-35 F4L IS, 17-40 F4L, Canon 24-70 F2.8L, 70-200 F2.8 IS II L, 100-400 F4,5-5,6 IS II L, 100mm f2,8L Macro, Ext x2 III, etc
https://500px.com/1982chris911
https://www.flickr.com/photos/chrisk1982/

Eldar

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2279
    • Flickr
Re: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L USM
« Reply #184 on: July 04, 2015, 03:58:06 PM »
Still struggling with this lens, but every time I get one worth having, I am thrilled. This is from today´s fishing trip, where I got the fish :)

5DSR, 1/200, f10, ISO320
Constantly learning, with more equipment than skills.

1982chris911

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 366
    • View my Flickr Stream here
Re: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L USM
« Reply #185 on: July 04, 2015, 04:13:12 PM »
Still struggling with this lens, but every time I get one worth having, I am thrilled. This is from today´s fishing trip, where I got the fish :)

5DSR, 1/200, f10, ISO320

Salmon ? Nice place you have there :-)
5DsR, 5D M2, 5D M3, 7D, Sigma 12-24 HSM2, Canon 11-24 F4L , 16-35 F4L IS, 17-40 F4L, Canon 24-70 F2.8L, 70-200 F2.8 IS II L, 100-400 F4,5-5,6 IS II L, 100mm f2,8L Macro, Ext x2 III, etc
https://500px.com/1982chris911
https://www.flickr.com/photos/chrisk1982/

Eldar

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2279
    • Flickr
Re: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L USM
« Reply #186 on: July 04, 2015, 05:12:53 PM »
Still struggling with this lens, but every time I get one worth having, I am thrilled. This is from today´s fishing trip, where I got the fish :)

5DSR, 1/200, f10, ISO320

Salmon ? Nice place you have there :-)
Nope, Trout. But beautiful it is :)
Constantly learning, with more equipment than skills.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L USM
« Reply #186 on: July 04, 2015, 05:12:53 PM »

Sporgon

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2564
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L USM
« Reply #187 on: July 04, 2015, 05:15:28 PM »
Still struggling with this lens, but every time I get one worth having, I am thrilled. This is from today´s fishing trip, where I got the fish :)

5DSR, 1/200, f10, ISO320

So I guess that's really just a small stream you can step over then  ;)

Eldar

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2279
    • Flickr
Re: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L USM
« Reply #188 on: July 04, 2015, 05:20:13 PM »
Still struggling with this lens, but every time I get one worth having, I am thrilled. This is from today´s fishing trip, where I got the fish :)

5DSR, 1/200, f10, ISO320

So I guess that's really just a small stream you can step over then  ;)
He he, not quite :)
Constantly learning, with more equipment than skills.

Eldar

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2279
    • Flickr
Re: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L USM
« Reply #189 on: July 05, 2015, 04:31:11 PM »
Here´s a (for me) different use of this lens. I wanted to show the concentration of a proper fly-fisher, when casting, at the same time as I got enough of the surroundings included in the frame. My fishing buddy became a bit distorted, but I still thing it works pretty well.

5DSR, @11mm, 1/320s, f10, ISO100
Constantly learning, with more equipment than skills.

Eldar

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2279
    • Flickr
Re: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L USM
« Reply #190 on: July 05, 2015, 04:36:55 PM »
Today´s flyfishing lake at Hardangervidda.

5DSR, @11mm, 1/250s, f8.0, ISO100
Constantly learning, with more equipment than skills.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon EF 11-24mm f/4L USM
« Reply #190 on: July 05, 2015, 04:36:55 PM »