Best Lenses for the Canon 5Ds

[mackguyver]

I don't think any of these lenses are more or less sharp than the others when you add in sample variation, testing procedures (distance to chart), etc. For example, I could show you a set of test shots that show my TS-E 24 f/3.5 II is far sharper than the next sharpest lens I own at that focal length, the 24-70 f/2.8 II. That's not what Roger form Lensrentals and other testers have shown, but it is a fact when looking at my own lenses.

The idea behind this post is that none of these lenses are likely to resolve 100% of 50MP, but these lenses, based on DxO measurements (not scores) are likely to yield the best results. Beyond that, as Nikon users have found, technique means everything, and keep in mind that stepping down to f/11+ is going to soften all of these lenses on this dense of a sensor.

 

[East Wind Photography]

Owning the 500mm L II, looking at how many lenses in the list are higher than it is, it is obvious that the rating system is flawed.

Flawed to the point that it is ridiculous.

It's 18MP+ like everything else. 80-90% resolve on the 5D3... The differences between 1-20 all within 10% or so. Even the Second list it's in the top 10. Thats...pretty damn good for a telephoto length like that. What's the matter??

I own or have owned many of the lenses that are higher on the list. Again it's ridiculous.

What's the matter? Obviously at some point the data or tests used to arrive at the results are flawed. Or the data and tests were proper and the manner that the conclusion was drawn is flawed. You can decide which.

I would expect the model with the AA filter will be largely disappointing to most photographers. The video guys will love it, all other lack of features not withstanding. Every time Canon comes out with a higher res sensor, the images get softer. Take the 5DIII and 7DII as examples compared to lesser resolution models of the same sensor size. I would expect that in the end all of these in the chart will have the same soft appearance out of the camera and visually indistinguishable.

I think the real winner will be one without the AA filter...but we will be seeing a lot of post AA processing in our workflows.

 

[takesome1]

Owning the 500mm L II, looking at how many lenses in the list are higher than it is, it is obvious that the rating system is flawed.

Flawed to the point that it is ridiculous.

It's 18MP+ like everything else. 80-90% resolve on the 5D3... The differences between 1-20 all within 10% or so. Even the Second list it's in the top 10. Thats...pretty damn good for a telephoto length like that. What's the matter??

I own or have owned many of the lenses that are higher on the list. Again it's ridiculous.

What's the matter? Obviously at some point the data or tests used to arrive at the results are flawed. Or the data and tests were proper and the manner that the conclusion was drawn is flawed. You can decide which.

I would expect the model with the AA filter will be largely disappointing to most photographers. The video guys will love it, all other lack of features not withstanding. Every time Canon comes out with a higher res sensor, the images get softer. Take the 5DIII and 7DII as examples compared to lesser resolution models of the same sensor size. I would expect that in the end all of these in the chart will have the same soft appearance out of the camera and visually indistinguishable.

I think the real winner will be one without the AA filter...but we will be seeing a lot of post AA processing in our workflows.

I think even with the AA filter you will see some increase in resolution and most likely it will be similar to what you see out of the 7D II.

Nikon did away with the AA filter in the D810. Did they just not see the need? How will this relate to the 5DsR?
Many questions that I hope are answered on Friday.

 

[Hjalmarg1]

I've been working more deeply with MTF data and this is my work-in-progress table of best resolving lenses for Canon EF mount. You might notice that the Canon 300mm f/2.8 L IS USM (mk-I) is not on my table because is only available second hand. I don't have any lens data on high-res sensors without AA filter so they could deliver sharper results...

OPE is what I call optical pipeline efficiency. It is how much detail can be resolved (perceived megapixels) divided by the maximum resolution of the sensor. I'm interested to see how close my modelling is to the full scale lab measurements when they eventually become available.

Ok, I am damn intrigued. How did you come up with such measurements? 24-70mkII outranks the Otus prime?

Very interesting, I will also wait for the answer

 

[K-amps]

Did they test the 180mm L? It's the sharpest lens I owned, it is not on the list, where as most lens I have now are on that list and the 180 was the sharpest lens I shot with.

 

[mackguyver]

Did they test the 180mm L? It's the sharpest lens I owned, it is not on the list, where as most lens I have now are on that list and the 180 was the sharpest lens I shot with.

DxO has tested it, but it didn't rank too highly. I own one and would agree that it's mighty sharp, but again, there are so many variables.

 

[PureClassA]

Actually Sony did away with the AA filter. Nikon just said "Yeah ok. We're desperate. Whatever"

Lens sharpness is to a degree subjective. There are SO many variables it's not even funny. Can we all agree that a Canon 135L is sharper than a 70-300 non-L at 135? Uhhh yeah. At least I'd hope so. Can we debate the merits of sharpness on a given particular shot from the Sig 35ART to the Canon 16-35 f4L at 35? ... YES. I own both. Both yield superb results if stopped to same apertures, otherwise the 35 has a style all its own that cant really be compared at 1.4. I never even use profile corrections on it at that ap.

Will all these lenses resolve beautifully on a new 50MP sensor? Hell friggin' yes. I think we have become so spoiled by so many excellent products nowadays that we have really started nit picking too hard on what amounts to almost nothing in real world terms. I look forward to the 5DS and I'll be surprised if I dont pre-order the minute it hits. I've been extremely happy with my 6D and it's detail crushing AA filter...

 

[StudentOfLight]

I don't think any of these lenses are more or less sharp than the others when you add in sample variation, testing procedures (distance to chart), etc. For example, I could show you a set of test shots that show my TS-E 24 f/3.5 II is far sharper than the next sharpest lens I own at that focal length, the 24-70 f/2.8 II. That's not what Roger form Lensrentals and other testers have shown, but it is a fact when looking at my own lenses.

The idea behind this post is that none of these lenses are likely to resolve 100% of 50MP, but these lenses, based on DxO measurements (not scores) are likely to yield the best results. Beyond that, as Nikon users have found, technique means everything, and keep in mind that stepping down to f/11+ is going to soften all of these lenses on this dense of a sensor.

I agree. With the correct conditions/lighting/shooting/sharpening techniques you can get very good detail with any of the listed lenses.

 

[Machaon]

On my side I would assume that this new FF 50Mpx should put the same kind of "strain" on a lens than the 7DII, because of nearly identical pixel size, and I do get tack sharp pics on a 7DII (with some very high quality lenses)...it does not seem to me limited at all.

I agree that the sensor offers a similar pixel pitch. However, APS-C sensors sit in the centre "sweet spot" of the lens image circle, whereas a FF sensor will reveal the poorer, peripheral optics of these (excellent) lenses.

 

[Machaon]

I think we have become so spoiled by so many excellent products nowadays that we have really started nit picking too hard on what amounts to almost nothing in real world terms.

You are absolutely spot-on. We are privileged to be photographing in an age when we nit-pick over degrees of excellence.

Imagination, composition and control of light will matter far more than any optical deficiency in superb, top-end lenses.

 

[mackguyver]

I think we have become so spoiled by so many excellent products nowadays that we have really started nit picking too hard on what amounts to almost nothing in real world terms.

You are absolutely spot-on. We are privileged to be photographing in an age when we nit-pick over degrees of excellence.

Imagination, composition and control of light will matter far more than any optical deficiency in superb, top-end lenses.

Very true, and the reality is that a great 3MP shot will trump a lousy 50MP

I'm fortunate enough to own several of Canon's sharpest lenses but that doesn't mean I'll stop using my "lesser" lenses, even when I move to a 50MP sensor.

 

[East Wind Photography]

Owning the 500mm L II, looking at how many lenses in the list are higher than it is, it is obvious that the rating system is flawed.

Flawed to the point that it is ridiculous.

It's 18MP+ like everything else. 80-90% resolve on the 5D3... The differences between 1-20 all within 10% or so. Even the Second list it's in the top 10. Thats...pretty damn good for a telephoto length like that. What's the matter??

I own or have owned many of the lenses that are higher on the list. Again it's ridiculous.

What's the matter? Obviously at some point the data or tests used to arrive at the results are flawed. Or the data and tests were proper and the manner that the conclusion was drawn is flawed. You can decide which.

I would expect the model with the AA filter will be largely disappointing to most photographers. The video guys will love it, all other lack of features not withstanding. Every time Canon comes out with a higher res sensor, the images get softer. Take the 5DIII and 7DII as examples compared to lesser resolution models of the same sensor size. I would expect that in the end all of these in the chart will have the same soft appearance out of the camera and visually indistinguishable.

I think the real winner will be one without the AA filter...but we will be seeing a lot of post AA processing in our workflows.

I think even with the AA filter you will see some increase in resolution and most likely it will be similar to what you see out of the 7D II.

Nikon did away with the AA filter in the D810. Did they just not see the need? How will this relate to the 5DsR?
Many questions that I hope are answered on Friday.

I agree you will see some increase in resolution. However my point was that with the addition of an AA filter with such a high pixel count, you wont be able to distinguish one lens from another in StudentOfLight's top 10% OPE lenses (notwithstanding corner sharpness, CA and whatnot). The MTF data gets thrown out with the bath water so to speak once you add a "fuzzing" filter in front of the sensor.

Take a look at any production 7DII raw image taken with one of the high end lenses and you will see what I'm talking about. Now with the 5DsR we could start seeing what the lenses are REALLY capable of.