06-22-2010, 12:28 PM
[quote name='wim' date='22 June 2010 - 08:33 PM' timestamp='1277202799' post='649']
<img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
I'd like to see a test on 16:9.net with the 24L II and Nikkor 24 F/1.4G included in their world class comparison <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />. I think I know which lens wins.
Anyway, I think the quality of these lenses is a bit of a moot point. They are both world class lenses. Personally I prefer the Canon, but that's just me. I do like this competitor thing hotting up, though, It does result in lenses beyond what we were used too, IQ-wise, and that is only a good thing AFAIAC <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />.
Kind regards, Wim
[/quote]
lol ah yes... the 16-9.net's backyard shrub test <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> I liked how they were looking at different "zones" but they were never clear about where exactly they focused.
Yes, the sharpness thing becomes moot on fast lenses but I see it as an ugly thing that has to be tested to know the absolute truth <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' /> After being very familiar with the 24 1.4 type (I also had Mk I before Mk II became available), I can say that the far focus sharpness isn't all that useful for serious shooting because you can't isolate subjects as soon as you focus more than a few feet away and then if sharpness is also important, you can put it on a tripod and stop it down. The only time the large-aperture sharpness can help is when doing long exposures to get effects like this:
![[Image: 3727437284_a7b0492ca1.jpg]](http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2496/3727437284_a7b0492ca1.jpg)
[url="http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/3727437284/sizes/o/in/set-72157613286508755/"]See 933x1400 version[/url]
Even then, none of these lenses are capable of getting sharp corners for any real enlarged output.
So that leaves us mainly with close focusing shots. Then the DOF becomes really shallow, making it difficult to perceive sharpness under normal usage. As you can see, even when put on a tripod with everything done to ensure sharpness, you really have to view huge to see fine detail (let alone differences between two lenses). And by enlarging, you're effectively magnifying all the ugly aberrations because these ambitious lens designs have more aberrations than IQ.
For me, a 24 1.4 is a multi-purpose lens (although everyone calls it a specialised one): I love using it for travel because it does handheld low light extremely well, isolates subjects when I get close (but the bokeh isn't the best I've seen) and the 24L II in particular turns in to one of the best landscape lenses at f/8-f/11 (but not the best, compared to TS-E 17L and TS-E 24L II. I don't know how the 24G is for small apertures).
<img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />
GTW
<img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />I'd like to see a test on 16:9.net with the 24L II and Nikkor 24 F/1.4G included in their world class comparison <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />. I think I know which lens wins. Anyway, I think the quality of these lenses is a bit of a moot point. They are both world class lenses. Personally I prefer the Canon, but that's just me. I do like this competitor thing hotting up, though, It does result in lenses beyond what we were used too, IQ-wise, and that is only a good thing AFAIAC <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />.Kind regards, Wim
[/quote]
lol ah yes... the 16-9.net's backyard shrub test <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' /> I liked how they were looking at different "zones" but they were never clear about where exactly they focused.Yes, the sharpness thing becomes moot on fast lenses but I see it as an ugly thing that has to be tested to know the absolute truth <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' /> After being very familiar with the 24 1.4 type (I also had Mk I before Mk II became available), I can say that the far focus sharpness isn't all that useful for serious shooting because you can't isolate subjects as soon as you focus more than a few feet away and then if sharpness is also important, you can put it on a tripod and stop it down. The only time the large-aperture sharpness can help is when doing long exposures to get effects like this: [url="http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/3727437284/sizes/o/in/set-72157613286508755/"]See 933x1400 version[/url]Even then, none of these lenses are capable of getting sharp corners for any real enlarged output.
So that leaves us mainly with close focusing shots. Then the DOF becomes really shallow, making it difficult to perceive sharpness under normal usage. As you can see, even when put on a tripod with everything done to ensure sharpness, you really have to view huge to see fine detail (let alone differences between two lenses). And by enlarging, you're effectively magnifying all the ugly aberrations because these ambitious lens designs have more aberrations than IQ.
For me, a 24 1.4 is a multi-purpose lens (although everyone calls it a specialised one): I love using it for travel because it does handheld low light extremely well, isolates subjects when I get close (but the bokeh isn't the best I've seen) and the 24L II in particular turns in to one of the best landscape lenses at f/8-f/11 (but not the best, compared to TS-E 17L and TS-E 24L II. I don't know how the 24G is for small apertures).
<img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />GTW