Sharpest lenses (for EOS 5D) at good prices

J

jodyflorian

Suspended / Banned
Messages
26
Edit My Images
No
Hi,

After having bought a Canon 5D and very pleased with it, I now need to start a lens collection! I was hoping for some advice...

After going to a site which allows you to actually see and compare the image quality of various lenses...

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...CameraComp=9&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2

It would seem that the Canon 50mm f/1.8 II lens I got for £60 can easily compete with the image quality of all the L-series lenses, and beats the majority of the zooms costing approx 20 times the price?!

In short, I'm shocked by the apparent average performance from extremely expensive lenses especially compared with the cheapness and image quality of the 50mm! Are there no telephoto zooms that can beat the sharpness of the 50mm, let alone at a good price? Or do I need to stick to using prime lenses if I want the sharpest pictures with least aberrations?

And last but not least, can anyone recommend any lenses to invest in the 20-200mm range? Any lenses that could be described as classics - that are good value and give outstanding image quality? I'm not too concerned about largest aperture, image stabilising, macro etc.

Cheers
 
If image quality is the prime concern, then I'd say the canon 24-70 f2.8 and the 70-200 f4 non IS are the pick of the bunch. :)
 
Canon's EF 85 1.8 LIVES on my 5D. Used it so much I sold the 24-70L.

Only other lens I would highly recommend for the range you describe is the 24-105L IS but once again, price is high new.

Used 17-40L's can go for as cheap as £400-£500.
 
You've got to remember that it's all relative, while the 50mm f/1.8 is very, very good for the price, the construction takes a bit hit (made out of cheap plastics). I'm fairly sure the 50mm f/1.4, or f/1.2 L will be sharper, give better colours etc (but not sure, as I've never used them). You've got to remember the expensive lenses often have things like weather sealing which also add to the price.

The 'classic' lenses are usually the ones held in very high regard BECAUSE of the features you mention. They're so well known and used because they have great features and do the job with excellent sharpness and clarity. One that come to mind immediately is the Canon 24-70 f/2.8, which is a staple lens for most full-framers. If you want a true 'classic', you'll be hard pushed to find one more distinct than the 1200mm f/5.6 :)

How much are you looking to spend? And do you want that all in one lens? If not, maybe the 24-70 f/2.8, and 70-200 f/2.8? As soon as light gets low, you'll start to care much more about that large aperture!

Chris
 
jodyflorian said:
Hi,

It would seem that the Canon 50mm f/1.8 II lens I got for £60 can easily compete with the image quality of all the L-series lenses, and beats the majority of the zooms costing approx 20 times the price?!
Click to expand...

It's a prime - it has less elements inside the lens = better sharpness, colours & contrast.

Are there no telephoto zooms that can beat the sharpness of the 50mm, let alone at a good price?
Click to expand...

Nope

Or do I need to stick to using prime lenses if I want the sharpest pictures with least aberrations?
Click to expand...

If those are your main considerations, then primes are the only way to go.

And last but not least, can anyone recommend any lenses to invest in the 20-200mm range? Any lenses that could be described as classics - that are good value and give outstanding image quality? I'm not too concerned about largest aperture, image stabilising, macro etc.
Click to expand...

24 1.4 II
35 1.4
50 1.8 / 1.2
85 1.8 / 1.2
135 2.0

All great lenses, only the 1.8's are anything like reasonable money though ...
 
You are looking at the 50mm at f/8. Generally most lenses will work better stopped down a bit. Primes will also typically out resolve zooms.
 
I use the 50mm f/1.4 on my 5D for candid/low-light stuff. I went over to the digital dark side from my Nikon film SLRs, where I used a 50mm f/1.2 for many years. I thought the difference between f/1.2 and f/1.4 wasn't worth the extra £££'s :)

Anyways, no complaints about the quality of the Canon 50mm, it's sharp as a pin.

A.
 
Wow thanks for the amazing responses, I couldn't have asked for more! I think I understand it all a lot better now :)

Prime lenses it is ... but eventually I think I'll get a zoom and I suppose in spirit of what zooms are best used for, IS and a large aperture wouldn't hurt, in for a penny in for a pound!

I'm surprised no-one mentioned Sigma - looking on that site I mentioned above, some of their primes look sharp, and some of their zooms even rival a couple of Canon's equivalents in sharpness? The only negative I've heard about Sigma's lenses is the autofocus being a bit slower?
 
jodyflorian said:
Wow thanks for the amazing responses, I couldn't have asked for more! I think I understand it all a lot better now :)

Prime lenses it is ... but eventually I think I'll get a zoom and I suppose in spirit of what zooms are best used for, IS and a large aperture wouldn't hurt, in for a penny in for a pound!

I'm surprised no-one mentioned Sigma - looking on that site I mentioned above, some of their primes look sharp, and some of their zooms even rival a couple of Canon's equivalents in sharpness? The only negative I've heard about Sigma's lenses is the autofocus being a bit slower?
Click to expand...

Primes are sharp by Sigma but their quality control is not really reassuring. In my experience, I have tried a few and all have backfocused (on two bodies) but then switching to a Canon prime, bang on.
 
jodyflorian said:
In short, I'm shocked by the apparent average performance from extremely expensive lenses especially compared with the cheapness and image quality of the 50mm! Are there no telephoto zooms that can beat the sharpness of the 50mm, let alone at a good price? Or do I need to stick to using prime lenses if I want the sharpest pictures with least aberrations?
Click to expand...

You do if you're sure that's what you want. But it's easy to get carried away viewing lens tests. In the real world, the differences between the lenses are not as clear cut as the tests can imply. A lot depends on how you'll be viewing the final images. If you'll mostly be viewing them on a monitor or as typically-sized prints, then the differences between the lenses is not always easy to spot.

It's well worth browsing pbase (scroll down) to see examples from the different lenses.
 
Having owned the 50mm F1.4 the 50mm F1.8 and now the 50mm F1.2 L I can say the difference is huge. But that all depends on what your looking for, the bokeh on the 50mm F1.2 L is amazing and it's built like a tank, while the others feel like a toy next to it.
 
Canon Bob said:
This is a wind up..right ?

Bob
Click to expand...

.....It would seem that the Canon 50mm f/1.8 II lens I got for £60 can compete with the image quality of some the L-series zoom lenses, .....


That may be a tad more accurate. :thumbs:
 
If you have got the 5D then get L series lenses, whats the point of putting anything less on it. Save up your money and get the 24-70 F2.8 or even the 24-105 F4 IS USM. Then save up some more and get the 70-200 F2.8 L and the 1.4 X extender, jobs a good un.
 
Royston Vasey said:
If you getting a 5D MKII then get L series lenses, whats the point of putting anything less on it. Save up your money and get the 24-70 F2.8 or even the 24-105 F4 IS USM as the kit lens.
Click to expand...

Some primes out there perform just as well. It doesnt NEED L series lenses but due to high pixel count, you may notice higher levels of CA (lens dependant). There will be a limit where it starts happening with even L series lenses.
 
Royston Vasey said:
If you have got the 5D then get L series lenses, whats the point of putting anything less on it. Save up your money and get the 24-70 F2.8 or even the 24-105 F4 IS USM. Then save up some more and get the 70-200 F2.8 L and the 1.4 X extender, jobs a good un.
Click to expand...
I would normally agree with this sentiment Royston, but if the OP can't see any difference in the results then it would be a total waste of money for him/her.

Bob
 
jodyflorian said:
It would seem that the Canon 50mm f/1.8 II lens I got for £60 can easily compete with the image quality of all the L-series lenses, and beats the majority of the zooms costing approx 20 times the price?!
Click to expand...

I bet it's great in your world Jody! ;)
 
jodyflorian said:
.....And last but not least, can anyone recommend any lenses to invest in ......
Click to expand...

I'm tempted to suggest the next one/pair should come from SpecSavers

(but that would be a little disreSPECful)

Bob
 
When I had the 50f1.8 I could not wait to get rid of it, yes it was sharp but I think thats all it has going for it, to me the contrast and colour were not the best I have seen dog slow focusing and the Bokeh was a bit ropey. I found that the 1.4 was a far better lens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top