Are there any plans for a test of the 24L II on APS-C?
Regards
~sth
genotypewriter
Unregistered
[quote name='sth' timestamp='1292767785' post='5105']
Are there any plans for a test of the 24L II on APS-C?
Regards
~sth
[/quote]
A 24LII on a APS-C is effectively a 35mm f/2.2 lens on FF.
So instead of paying $1500 to get the same effect, why not put $1200-1250 towards a FF body (even a used 5D) and get a 35mm f/2 for $300 or an even sharper 28mm f/2.8 for $250?
You'll get an automatic 1 stop aperture upgrade for all your other full frame lenses this way too <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='  ' />
GTW
PS:
24LII APS-C and FF:
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1229/cat/10
28 2.8 APS-C and FF:
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/84/cat/10
35mm f/2 APS-C and FF:
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/147/cat/10
[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1292797369' post='5117']
A 24LII on a APS-C is effectively a 35mm f/2.2 lens on FF.
So instead of paying $1500 to get the same effect, why not put $1200-1250 towards a FF body (even a used 5D) and get a 35mm f/2 for $300 or an even sharper 28mm f/2.8 for $250?
You'll get an automatic 1 stop aperture upgrade for all your other full frame lenses this way too <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=' ' />
[/quote]
Which is why we don't plan a test on APS-C here.
[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1292797369' post='5117']
A 24LII on a APS-C is effectively a 35mm f/2.2 lens on FF.[/quote]
Only in terms of DOF, not in terms of shutter speed...
Besides, why buy a second camera body just to be able to use one of Canon's late-80s lenses, instead of a modern fast-focusing, weather sealed L lens with your current camera - for the same price?
Doesn't make much sense to me except for people who want to switch to FF anyway.
[quote name='sth' timestamp='1292847702' post='5124']
Only in terms of DOF, not in terms of shutter speed...
Besides, why buy a second camera body just to be able to use one of Canon's late-80s lenses, instead of a modern fast-focusing, weather sealed L lens with your current camera - for the same price?
Doesn't make much sense to me except for people who want to switch to FF anyway.
[/quote]
Also in terms of shutter speed, as ISO is not fixed......
There are two ways of looking at it, full frame gets you a higher image resolution. But APS-C gets you a smaller body. And more reach with tele lenses. Also, APS-C will be a bit cheaper even with an expensive 24mm f1.4, because if you switch to FF you would need also new standard zooms and what not.
I do not think it is strange at all, to get a 24mm f1.4 L USM II for an APS-C body, as 35mm FF equivalent. But you do not need a test to know how it will perform.... Just read the FF test and disregard the border/edge resolution figures (and the vinetting/light fall off).
It will be a stunning lens on APS-C as 35mm equivalent, just like it is a stunning lens on FF.
On the weather seal, only important if your camera, and you, are also weather sealed. Fast focussing it is, yes, but so is the non-USM 35mm f2.
In short, you do not really need an APS-C test when you have an FF test available.
I didn't want to start another FF vs. APS-C discussion. Personally, I benefit more from the added reach of APS-C, therefore I don't really plan buying a FF camera anytime soon.
Also, I don't think that weather sealing is that important, I just wanted to spotlight the differences between a late-80s consumer lens vs. a 2008 L lens besides optical quality (I know that some of the older primes are very good optically).
Anyway, I just thought it would be nice to see how well it stacks up on a high-resolution APS-C sensor. Of course the FF results point in the right direction but a dedicated APS-C test is always nice to have.
Anyway, thanks for the info. It's not that I'm eager to buy this lens, it's just on my "might buy one used if the price is right" list. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=' ' />
@genotypewriter: Thanks for the links!
@Klaus: Keep up the good work!
genotypewriter
Unregistered
[quote name='sth' timestamp='1292860543' post='5126']
I didn't want to start another FF vs. APS-C discussion.
[/quote]
But as Brightcolours and I put it... you can up the ISOs on the FF (to match the APS-C shutter speeds that you would have used) and still get the same output (if not better).
[quote name='sth' timestamp='1292860543' post='5126']
Personally, I benefit more from the added reach of APS-C, therefore I don't really plan buying a FF camera anytime soon.
[/quote]
There are two problems here:
1. People forget that for a given lens (focal length and f-number), due to the wider FOV on FF, you can use a slower shutter speed and therefore increase the light gathering ability further. So even if you ignore light gathering equivalence completely, hand-holdability differences are obvious.
2. I seriously doubt you're going to get any more "reach" by using this lens at f/1.4 on an APS-C because of lens resolution and shallow DOF. Plus if you get a 35mm lens for FF, you get the same reach as the 24mm on APS-C... in fact, you get more, because there's no 21MP APS-C camera at the moment.
[quote name='sth' timestamp='1292860543' post='5126']
Anyway, I just thought it would be nice to see how well it stacks up on a high-resolution APS-C sensor.
[/quote]
If you're going to use this lens stopped down... you'll get some of the highest resolution you can get at this focal length using DSLR lens. If you want plain resolution (not aperture), go for the TS-E 24L. A comparison of them all can be found below:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Zeiss-21mm-f-2.8-ZE-Distagon-Lens-Review.aspx
If you're going to shoot wide-open, then you don't need to worry about resolution that much because DOF takes care of it to a good extent.
GTW
Your points are all completely valid but I think we're talking past each other here. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/unsure.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='  ' />
Of course a FF camera with a 35mm lens will be the better option over an APS-C camera with a 24mm. But that wasn't really what I was asking for.
[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1292890831' post='5135']If you're going to use this lens stopped down... you'll get some of the highest resolution you can get at this focal length using DSLR lens.[/quote]
I'm not looking for the maximum possible sharpness, just "good" sharpness. I'm not much into pixel-peeping but I had the chance to try the original 24L on an APS-C camera a while ago and was not really impressed by the sharpness of it, even comparing it to my "cheap" consumer primes. Maybe a bad copy... I don't know, but that's why I was curious about how the 24L II fares on a high-resolution APS-C body.
Tilt-shift lenses are interesting but that's not what I'm looking for at the moment.
[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1292890831' post='5135']
2. I seriously doubt you're going to get any more "reach" by using this lens at f/1.4 on an APS-C because of lens resolution and shallow DOF. Plus if you get a 35mm lens for FF, you get the same reach as the 24mm on APS-C... in fact, you get more, because there's no 21MP APS-C camera at the moment.[/quote]
I was not talking about this particular lens, just about reasons why not everyone wants to buy a FF camera.
I'm shooting quite a bit of motorsport and for that, I can get a 7D complete with a 160-640mm equiv. telezoom for ~2500€ new. That's the main reason for me not switching to FF. And carrying a second body just for the non-tele shots is a no-go for me (I'm not shooting weddings after all - at least not at my own will <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=' ' /> ).
Anyway, Klaus stated his reasons why there won't be a review and I'm fine with that.
genotypewriter
Unregistered
[quote name='sth' timestamp='1292904348' post='5137']
I'm not looking for the maximum possible sharpness, just "good" sharpness. I'm not much into pixel-peeping but I had the chance to try the original 24L on an APS-C camera a while ago and was not really impressed by the sharpness of it, even comparing it to my "cheap" consumer primes. Maybe a bad copy... I don't know, but that's why I was curious about how the 24L II fares on a high-resolution APS-C body.
[/quote]
Well [url="http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/tags/ef24mmf14lusm/"]I had the 24L[/url] (Mk I) before I got the 24LII. The main optical improvements between the two lenses are in the corners (FF). The Mk II has better sharpness and much less CA than the older one. So the center performance should be similar, but keep in mind that the Mk II's AF is noticeably improved (accuracy) over the old one so you'll get good shots like you're supposed to get with a lens of this rank.
[quote name='sth' timestamp='1292904348' post='5137']
Tilt-shift lenses are interesting but that's not what I'm looking for at the moment.
[/quote]
Just thought of mentioning them because those two lenses also happen to be the best sharpness/landscape lenses, at the moment, for DSLRs at comparable focal lengths.
[quote name='sth' timestamp='1292904348' post='5137']
I'm shooting quite a bit of motorsport and for that, I can get a 7D complete with a 160-640mm equiv. telezoom for ~2500€ new. That's the main reason for me not switching to FF.
[/quote]
In that case, you might also want to consider the Olympus 70-300 which is equivalent to a 100-600mm and when combined with a capable camera like an E-5, is only 1.4Kg and ~USD2100. The 7D + 100-400L combo will be 2.2Kg and ~USD3200... a difference of around 750€.
GTW
[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1292909141' post='5138']
In that case, you might also want to consider the Olympus 70-300 which is equivalent to a 100-600mm and when combined with a capable camera like an E-5, is only 1.4Kg and ~USD2100. The 7D + 100-400L combo will be 2.2Kg and ~USD3200... a difference of around 750€.[/quote]
Thanks for the suggestion but I'm happy with my Canon gear and don't plan to change systems.
|
