Need sharp wide-open

[Kathode-Ray]

No problems with sharpness here. I have the new version, with the smooth black finish instead of the well-known Sigma 'crinkle finish'. Rumour has it that Sigma adressed some of the problems and made some changes to these lenses besides the coating, although they won't officially admit that.

See here: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=38483425

Ray

 

[wockawocka]

The 17-55 2.8 is sharp wide open.

 

[pdirestajr]

There are a lot of people on this forum with deep pockets, and fancy recommendations. I am jealous.

I'd recommend the old gem of a lens, the very affordable EF 35mm f/2. That lens is capable of beautiful images wide open. Especially on a 7D.

 

[theqspeaks]

The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is definitely a bit soft wide open, but by f/2.8, it's pretty good. Not nearly as sharp as my Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 VC (which is Tamron's version of IS). That sucker is damn sharp at f/2.8. And I hear the non-VC version is even sharper. Either Tamron is a lot cheaper than some of these L and TS lenses people are talking about.

 

[RLPhoto]

I am having a challenge finding a lens in the 24-35 mm range that is sharp at its widest aperture. I have a 60D and a 7D and I am looking for a lens for capturing family and friends indoors in both still and video. I am not having any luck. I have FoCal software so have been able to analyze lenses with it to confirm best aperture. I had hopes for the new pancake but, despite all the wonderfully sharp images being posted at f/2.8, the copy I had was optimal at f/4.5-5.6. Today, I just tried the new 24mm f/2.8 IS, and it is quite soft at 2.8 and FoCal is recommending 4.0-5.6 for sharpness which matches what I was seeing in my images. So this too shall go back to the store. Am I asking for something that does not exist? Is there not a fast prime that is sharp at its widest aperture? One of my other problems is that I don't have the steadiest of hands, so I think I really need image stabilization for spontaneous handheld people shooting.
Diane

My copy of the 24mm 1.4L II is sharp wide open, but define sharpness wide open. To me that means what is in focus, not matter how thin the DOF, is Pin sharp.

So by that definition, the 24LII is tack sharp.

I've discussed this before on this thread.
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5290.msg105477#msg105477

 

[NormanBates]

Samyang 35mm f/1.4
http://www.similaar.com/foto/equipment/us_lensc.html#samyang

only manual focus, but it's as sharp as it gets wide open, even sharper than the 35mm f/1.4L or the zeiss 35mm f/1.4, which cost 4 times as much

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=771&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=121&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=771&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=749&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

 

[robbymack]

Does the 60d have focus adjustment? If not then you will have to deal with the inheirent manufactuing limitations of lens and camera. Some will be good and others not so much. If you demand pixel level sharpness in a $200 lens, all I can really say is good luck. It's rarely a case of "this lens is soft, therefore all others of this lens are also soft". Read the outstanding "This Lens is Soft" article at Lens Rental. The other option would be to send both lens and camera to Cannon for calibration. However keep in mind all that does is get the camera in line with that particular lens. If you have other lenses that are currently acceptable don't be surprised when you get the body back that those are now OOF.

My recommendation for what it is worth, buy the lens that fits the budget from a good retailer with a good return policy and try one till it fits.

 

[Axilrod]

The Zeiss 35mm f/2 is pretty damn sharp wide open and it's focus ring is smooth as butter. You can find them for 800ish used. The ZE's are excellent lenses for video, I've barely touched my Canon glass since picking a few up.

 

[DianeK]

Does the 60d have focus adjustment? If not then you will have to deal with the inheirent manufactuing limitations of lens and camera. Some will be good and others not so much. If you demand pixel level sharpness in a $200 lens, all I can really say is good luck. It's rarely a case of "this lens is soft, therefore all others of this lens are also soft". Read the outstanding "This Lens is Soft" article at Lens Rental. The other option would be to send both lens and camera to Cannon for calibration. However keep in mind all that does is get the camera in line with that particular lens. If you have other lenses that are currently acceptable don't be surprised when you get the body back that those are now OOF.
This is the reason I ended up with a used 7D

My recommendation for what it is worth, buy the lens that fits the budget from a good retailer with a good return policy and try one till it fits. This is precisely what I am doing; that is until they start locking the door when I show up in the parking lot

 

[Daniel Flather]

My 24Lii and 35L are awesome wide open, both at f1.4 on full frame. There is a big difference between a 24 and 35mm lens' perspectives.

 

[wickidwombat]

No problems with sharpness here. I have the new version, with the smooth black finish instead of the well-known Sigma 'crinkle finish'. Rumour has it that Sigma adressed some of the problems and made some changes to these lenses besides the coating, although they won't officially admit that.

See here: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=38483425

Ray

I didnt know sigma had a 50 with the smooth finish! I haven't seen these, only the crincle version

even B&H still show the ol crincle version
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/560577-USA/Sigma_310_101_Normal_50mm_f_1_4_EX.html

 

[DianeK]

The Zeiss 35mm f/2 is pretty damn sharp wide open and it's focus ring is smooth as butter. You can find them for 800ish used. The ZE's are excellent lenses for video, I've barely touched my Canon glass since picking a few up.

I'm hopeless with manual focus!
Diane

 

[revup67]

Jumping in a bit late here but have you checked out http://www.the-digital-picture.com? if not, go there and click Tools, ISO12233. there you can compare most any lens on several different cameras at its available apertures from a center point, mid-frame to a corner point.

 

[DianeK]

Jumping in a bit late here but have you checked out http://www.the-digital-picture.com? if not, go there and click Tools, ISO12233. there you can compare most any lens on several different cameras at its available apertures from a center point, mid-frame to a corner point.

Thanks for reminding me about that site. I forgot all about it.
Diane

 

[archangelrichard]

Lets get honest

Lenses are NOT manufactured to give their best performance wide open -- but stopped down 2 or 3 stops.

That;s just a reality

Further you are looking at a zoom, which is also not designed to give it's est performance at the wwide and long ends but in the middle. These are compromises, lenses of convenience, not sharpness.

So you would do best with a prime that is a couple of f-stops wider than what you need like an F 1.4 or 1.8 shooting at f 2.8 or 3.5 - 4.0

There's no cheating physics

and "micro adjustments" don't exist on the 60D, neither will they necessarily help

 

[DianeK]

Lets get honest

Lenses are NOT manufactured to give their best performance wide open -- but stopped down 2 or 3 stops.

That;s just a reality

Further you are looking at a zoom, which is also not designed to give it's est performance at the wwide and long ends but in the middle. These are compromises, lenses of convenience, not sharpness.

So you would do best with a prime that is a couple of f-stops wider than what you need like an F 1.4 or 1.8 shooting at f 2.8 or 3.5 - 4.0

There's no cheating physics

and "micro adjustments" don't exist on the 60D, neither will they necessarily help

Actually I wasn't talking about finding a zoom but a prime and was expressing my frustration with the new pancake and the new 24mm IS and 28mm IS being so soft at f/2.8 versus f/4. Unfortunately the 24mmL is out of my price range and a 50mm is too tight on a crop camera for my needs. The only mention I made of a zoom was stating my EFS 15-85 was sharper at f/4 than any of those 3 lenses I tried.
Thanks for your input. I am coming to the conclusion that I will need to consider a lens faster than f/2.8 so that I can shoot it stopped down.
Diane

 

[tron]

Lets get honest

Lenses are NOT manufactured to give their best performance wide open -- but stopped down 2 or 3 stops.

That;s just a reality

Further you are looking at a zoom, which is also not designed to give it's est performance at the wwide and long ends but in the middle. These are compromises, lenses of convenience, not sharpness.

So you would do best with a prime that is a couple of f-stops wider than what you need like an F 1.4 or 1.8 shooting at f 2.8 or 3.5 - 4.0

There's no cheating physics

and "micro adjustments" don't exist on the 60D, neither will they necessarily help

Actually I wasn't talking about finding a zoom but a prime and was expressing my frustration with the new pancake and the new 24mm IS and 28mm IS being so soft at f/2.8 versus f/4. Unfortunately the 24mmL is out of my price range and a 50mm is too tight on a crop camera for my needs. The only mention I made of a zoom was stating my EFS 15-85 was sharper at f/4 than any of those 3 lenses I tried.
Thanks for your input. I am coming to the conclusion that I will need to consider a lens faster than f/2.8 so that I can shoot it stopped down.
Diane

I understand about your budget but spending half of the 24 f/1.4L II's cost to get one of the new 24mm IS or 28mm IS is anyway a waste of money. They cost double or even triple their real value. The 35mm f/1.4L could be a decent choice (and cheaper than the 24 1.4L II) although not the same mm and maybe still higher than your price limit.