What current Canon EF lens will work well with the new 5DS/5DSR?

[ajfotofilmagem]

How well do you all think the current EF 100 f/2.8L macro lens will work?

Judging by the performance in the body 60D (similar pixel density), should do well sharp images on the new 5DS.

 

[sdsr]

I just sold my Nikon eqipment: Nikon D810 (36Mpix) plus the new $2500 Nikon AF-S 80-400/4,5-5,6G VR. This combination gave very soft pictures between 300-400mm. I sold the eqipment after seeing one of my pictures magnified into 80x120 cm. People are still buying this picture, yes, but I saw that the resolution of my current Canon EOS 5D mk.III plus the new and very sharp EF 100-400/4,5-5,6L IS II is much higher. That's why I switched back to Canon.
And by resolution I mean more information, details not pixels.....

But all that shows is that D810 + Nikon lens yields less sharp photos than 5DIII + Canon lens (viewed how, though - did you downsize the D810 images to the same resolution as the 5DIII's first?). That may be for reasons that have nothing to do with sensor resolution. Pending the arrival of the new Canon bodies, a more telling comparison is made by mounting Canon lenses on a 36MP sensor and see what happens; you can't do that with a Nikon body, but I've done so frequently during the year I've owned a Sony a7r (much the same sensor as the Nikon's), and while I don't perform tests, the lenses perform at least as well as they did/do on my 5DIII and 6D, and the resolution is obviously better. And you would perhaps be surprised by how well a lot of old manual focus lenses work on such sensors too. (I say something along these lines every time this "will our lenses be up to it" question comes up, so I'm feeling a bit like a stuck record. Maybe privatebydesign's excellent responses will be more effective!)

 

[KimH]

Some time ago I took the time to read this article on Limunous Landscape - it helped me find my way thrugh this discussion.

https://luminous-landscape.com/do-sensors-aeoeoutresolveae%C2%9D-lenses/

With some luck (I've never linked before on this site) this link should show the chart of Aperture and SensorSize to find our way through... at least in theory.

https://luminous-landscape.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/TABLA3.jpg

 

[painya]

Won't the 70-200 v1 be better? Isn't it sharper on a full frame?

 

[JoFT]

It is pretty simple to simulate: Put your lenses on a 70D or 7D2: You can easily see wether the images are sufficient... If yes than the only problem might be in the corners....

 

[toni999]

I own the 5dsr now and the 24-70 L II 2.8.

I'm not impressed by the lense, at 5.6/8 it's "ok".

Follow here to see my updates on lenses for the 5dsr:
http://www.valentino-photography.com/photography-reviews/canon-5dsr/

 

[tron]

Won't the 70-200 v1 be better? Isn't it sharper on a full frame?

Where did you read that? The 70-200 IS (v1) is much worse than 70-200 2.8 IS II and 70-200 2.8 (non-IS)

 

[Loswr]

Won't the 70-200 v1 be better? Isn't it sharper on a full frame?

Where did you read that? The 70-200 IS (v1) is much worse than 70-200 2.8 IS II and 70-200 2.8 (non-IS)

DxOMark said so. When challenged on that conclusion, they defended it stating there had been no error. A year later they silently updated their measurements of the 70-200 II, which changes the conclusion to agree with what everyone else in the world already knew, that the 70-200 II is clearly better.

Of course, DxOMark's measurements still show that the 17-40L is sharper than the 16-35/2.8 II with both wide open. ??? :

 

[bdunbar79]

Won't the 70-200 v1 be better? Isn't it sharper on a full frame?

Where did you read that? The 70-200 IS (v1) is much worse than 70-200 2.8 IS II and 70-200 2.8 (non-IS)

DxOMark said so. When challenged on that conclusion, they defended it stating there had been no error. A year later they silently updated their measurements of the 70-200 II, which changes the conclusion to agree with what everyone else in the world already knew, that the 70-200 II is clearly better.

Of course, DxOMark's measurements still show that the 17-40L is sharper than the 16-35/2.8 II with both wide open. ??? :

I remember the v1 and v2 fiasco. That was one of "the classics." One of my other favorites is the equal scoring of the Canon and Nikon 500mm lenses due to the superior DR of the D800, or how about the nifty fifty being better than the 600mm f/4L II IS. Or wait, there's just too many.