What are Canon's sharpest lenses?

[eml58]

I own & use the following Canon Lenses;
14f/2.8L II, 15f/2.8, 35f/1.4L, 50f/1.2L, 85f/1.2L II, 100f/2.8L IS, 135f/2L, 200f/2L, 300f/2.8L II, 400f/2.8L II, 600f/4L II.
8-15f/4 L, 26-35f/2.8L II, 24-70f/2.8L II, 70-200f/2.8L II.
17f/4 TSE II, 24/f3.5 TSE II

The sharpest without doubt in my own use is the 300f/2.8L Version II, simply an amazing Lens.
The 100f/2.8L IS Macro would be next, I use it mainly for Underwater use in a Seacam Housing, but this is a sharp sharp Lens.
85f/1.2 L II is damn good, but the slow focus system takes some patience, although I've noticed now on my 1Dx it is much faster on the focus, even more so than on the 5DMK3.
The 600 & 400 Version II Lenses are great.

Zooms ?? The 24-70 is good, the 70-200 is very good, the 16-35 is So So, the 8-15 @ 15 is really good. You are not going to get the best sharpness from a Zoom when compared to a Prime, but there are benefits of course so it's a trade off.

The 17 & 24 TSE are exceptionally sharp, but they come with a learning curve that most wouldn't want to work on, they are rewarding though in the right situation.

 

[ppix]

Re: My 200 f/1.8 plus a 1.4x And a 2.0x sharpness samples

The 200 f/1.8 is amazingly sharp even with a 1.4x II and 2.0x II stacked in front of it on my 1D Mark III :

Or with just a 2.0x attached moving at 100+ MPH:

John

 

[Andy_Hodapp]

Might get some hate for this but my Sigma 105mm F/2.8 Macro EX DG is so sharp. I got it used on ebay for $300 and way outperforms my 17-40 and my 50mm 1.8. Here are some of the photos I've gotten out of the lens, well worth the $300, though I have to admit, the autofocus is pretty bad, it worked alright on my Canon T1i but when I upgraded to the Canon 5D MKII, the autofocus works even worse.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/66627224@N02/8276147216/#in/photostream

http://www.flickr.com/photos/66627224@N02/8210395424/#in/photostream

http://www.flickr.com/photos/66627224@N02/8107624722/#in/photostream

http://www.flickr.com/photos/66627224@N02/8101755629/#in/photostream

http://www.flickr.com/photos/66627224@N02/8355912864/#in/photostream

http://www.flickr.com/photos/66627224@N02/8354838679/#in/photostream

http://www.flickr.com/photos/66627224@N02/8355902460/#in/photostream

 

[bdunbar79]

I own & use the following Canon Lenses;
14f/2.8L II, 15f/2.8, 35f/1.4L, 50f/1.2L, 85f/1.2L II, 100f/2.8L IS, 135f/2L, 200f/2L, 300f/2.8L II, 400f/2.8L II, 600f/4L II.
8-15f/4 L, 26-35f/2.8L II, 24-70f/2.8L II, 70-200f/2.8L II.
17f/4 TSE II, 24/f3.5 TSE II

The sharpest without doubt in my own use is the 300f/2.8L Version II, simply an amazing Lens.
The 100f/2.8L IS Macro would be next, I use it mainly for Underwater use in a Seacam Housing, but this is a sharp sharp Lens.
85f/1.2 L II is damn good, but the slow focus system takes some patience, although I've noticed now on my 1Dx it is much faster on the focus, even more so than on the 5DMK3.
The 600 & 400 Version II Lenses are great.

Zooms ?? The 24-70 is good, the 70-200 is very good, the 16-35 is So So, the 8-15 @ 15 is really good. You are not going to get the best sharpness from a Zoom when compared to a Prime, but there are benefits of course so it's a trade off.

The 17 & 24 TSE are exceptionally sharp, but they come with a learning curve that most wouldn't want to work on, they are rewarding though in the right situation.

Actually, not quite correct anymore. Canon's 24-70L II and 70-200L II IS are sharper than some of the primes in those respective ranges.

 

[pwp]

In my bag the sharpness award goes to the 135 f/2, then the 300 f/2.8is. Both are amazing.

-PW

 

[ksagomonyants]

200 2.0, 85 1.2 ii and 135 2.0

 

[CarlTN]

John and Andy, those are great shots!

 

[ppix]

This one really shows how sharp the 200 f/1.8 is.

This is with the 1.4x II attached on a Mark III.

John

 

[Kerry B]

Without any shadow of a doubt, the canon 300f2.8 IS mkii is the sharpest lens I have ever used. Simply amazing, the images produced on my 5d mkiii are simply awesome. The images produced by the canon 70-200 f4 IS are also exceptional and compete with its bigger brother the 2.8.

 

[Canon_Wisconsin]

How 'bout NOT my nifty fifty? Great little lens and especially for the price, but I found myself using the Tamron 28-75 for a shoot I did back in November and loved the results. Super sharp (these were taken with it): http://www.rankphotography.com/2012/12/beautiful-holiday-indoor-shoot.html

Now that I have my new lenses (85mm 1.8 -- had a month and think it seems really sharp especially compared to my nifty fifty; the 135L which arrived today and I haven't played with), I cannot wait to play around more with these two and see how I like those apples.

 

[Canon_Wisconsin]

Re: This one really shows how sharp the 200 f/1.8 is.

This is with the 1.4x II attached on a Mark III.

John

Great image!!

 

[Radiating]

The difference between the 100mm Macro and the 24-105mm isn't that significant.

Canon's sharpest lenses are in order (of sharpness wide open):

200mm f/2.0 IS
24mm f/3.5 TS-E II
180mm f/3.5 Macro
300mm f/2.8 IS II
400mm f/2.8 IS II
500mm f/4.0 IS II
600mm f/4.0 IS II
70-200mm f/2.8 IS II
40mm f/2.8 STM
70-200mm f/4.0 IS
90mm f/2.8 TS-E

The 100mm Macro doesn't make it on this list but is very close to the 90mm TS-E.

 

[verysimplejason]

100mm macro usm. It's the sharpest lens I've tried so far even at 2.8.

 

[CarlTN]

John, another nice shot! I wish Canon would make another really fast telephoto. How about a 165mm f/1.6? Not that I could afford it if they did, I guess it would cost $15k.

 

[Zlatko]

Canon's sharpest lenses are in order (of sharpness wide open):

200mm f/2.0 IS
24mm f/3.5 TS-E II
180mm f/3.5 Macro
300mm f/2.8 IS II
400mm f/2.8 IS II
500mm f/4.0 IS II
600mm f/4.0 IS II
70-200mm f/2.8 IS II
40mm f/2.8 STM
70-200mm f/4.0 IS
90mm f/2.8 TS-E

The 100mm Macro doesn't make it on this list but is very close to the 90mm TS-E.

Not that I disagree, but I'm wondering how you came up with the specific order.

 

[jeffa4444]

Given the cost of some of the L lenses they should be sharp however some of the cheaper lenses are equally as sharp the 10-22mm EF-S is sharp and controls distortion very well, the 70-200 f4 L may not have IS or 2.8 but is bitingly sharp. Most people have soft / blurred images because of too slow shutter speed or not using a tripod indeed investing in a good quality tripod and a canon cable release / remote is just as important investment.

 

[CarlTN]

Given the cost of some of the L lenses they should be sharp however some of the cheaper lenses are equally as sharp the 10-22mm EF-S is sharp and controls distortion very well, the 70-200 f4 L may not have IS or 2.8 but is bitingly sharp. Most people have soft / blurred images because of too slow shutter speed or not using a tripod indeed investing in a good quality tripod and a canon cable release / remote is just as important investment.

My experience with the 10-22 was the opposite of yours, but my experience with the 70-200 non-IS is the same as yours. There are others on here who are convinced the 70-200 non-IS is softer than the IS, but I'm not one of them.

 

[Jane Cooper]

Much depends on what you will photograph. If it's jewelry, then better read it http://fixthephoto.com/how-to-photograph-jewelry.html

 

[eml58]

Canon 300f/2.8 IS II

 

[slclick]

My 3 sharpest
100L
135L
40 Pancake