Not flawless but easily a HR:
[url="http://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/752-canon_40_28_ff"]http://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/752-canon_40_28_ff[/url]
It almost looks like you wanted to hate this lens but just couldn't help giving it a HR in the end. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='  ' />
So the "interesting" MTF was referring to the consistently high results?
Will this also be tested on crop sensor? I can well imagine it will be on many even with the odd field of view it may give.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
In a silent environment there's also a noticeable amount of AF noise although it remains unobtrusive.
[url="http://www.petapixel.com/2012/06/25/the-autofocus-noise-of-canons-new-40mm-pancake-lens/"]This noise[/url] is unobtrusive?
What's your opinion Klaus, is it worth twice the price of the 50/1.8 even though it is 1.5 stops slower?
There's no reference in that video to anything else, so we can't tell what the absolute level in that video was. For all we know the gain was turned all the way up. And if you don't do video anyway, it's what you hear outside that could matter.
And now we have the test results in, putting aside the big differences of focal length and physical size, the 50/1.8 only compares in MTF from f/4 upwards. The '40 arguably has better bokeh too.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
Well - that was one quick review <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='  ' />
Now, if they would come out with a Rebel size full frame body, or mirror-less full frame, to put the lens on, we'd have something interesting.
[quote name='Ron H' timestamp='1340763548' post='19175']
Now, if they would come out with a Rebel size full frame body, or mirror-less full frame, to put the lens on, we'd have something interesting.
[/quote]
Rebel size full frame, sure.
But a mirrorless full frame does not make sense at all, as this lens is designed with the flange distance for an EOS DSLR.
[quote name='Yakim' timestamp='1340746337' post='19168']
In a silent environment there's also a noticeable amount of AF noise although it remains unobtrusive.
[url="http://www.petapixel.com/2012/06/25/the-autofocus-noise-of-canons-new-40mm-pancake-lens/"]This noise[/url] is unobtrusive?
What's your opinion Klaus, is it worth twice the price of the 50/1.8 even though it is 1.5 stops slower?
[/quote]
That is a silly trolling video. Of course if you turn the gain WAY up any soft sound will appear to be loud.
[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1340740228' post='19151']
Not flawless but easily a HR:
[url="http://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/752-canon_40_28_ff"]http://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/752-canon_40_28_ff[/url]
[/quote]
Thanks for nice review. As usual with few words you say everything. You don't need to browse between kilometers long forum threads.
Regards,
Miro
|
