Sharpest Canon 1.6 crop lens
 

Ok forget build quality...forget focus luxuries...forget super wide open apertures.

What is the best IQ standard zoom when stopped down from between f8 to f16. This includes edge to edge sharpness, contrast and colour. The best image blown up to large print size. This is all regardless of available light and wether it's hand held or not. In fact lets say it's on a tripod to be sure.

Not super wide but lenses that could be regarded as walk arounds.

Lets add bang for buck marks as well.

And the contenders are (in no specific order):

1. Canon 17-85 IS
2. Canon 17-40 L
3. Sigma 17-70 2.8/4.5
4. Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC
5. Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8

I won't include the up and coming Tokina. Apoligies if I missed something.

Let the contest begin!

Sie

Sharpest Canon 1.6 crop lens
 

wrote in message
...
Ok forget build quality...forget focus luxuries...forget super wide open
apertures.

What is the best IQ standard zoom when stopped down from between f8 to
f16. This includes edge to edge sharpness, contrast and colour. The best
image blown up to large print size. This is all regardless of available
light and wether it's hand held or not. In fact lets say it's on a tripod
to be sure.

Not super wide but lenses that could be regarded as walk arounds.

Lets add bang for buck marks as well.

And the contenders are (in no specific order):

1. Canon 17-85 IS
2. Canon 17-40 L
3. Sigma 17-70 2.8/4.5
4. Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC
5. Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8

I won't include the up and coming Tokina. Apoligies if I missed something.

Let the contest begin!

Sie


Look at he http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html

Br. Jukka

Sharpest Canon 1.6 crop lens
 

a écrit dans le message de
...
Ok forget build quality...forget focus luxuries...forget super wide open
apertures.

What is the best IQ standard zoom when stopped down from between f8 to
f16. This includes edge to edge sharpness, contrast and colour. The best
image blown up to large print size. This is all regardless of available
light and wether it's hand held or not. In fact lets say it's on a tripod to
be sure.

Not super wide but lenses that could be regarded as walk arounds.

Lets add bang for buck marks as well.

And the contenders are (in no specific order):

1. Canon 17-85 IS
2. Canon 17-40 L

I have a Canon 17-40 L and it is sharp as a tack, it is my stay on the
camera lens. I have samples of the 17-85IS and it is nowhere near as sharp.
The others I do not have and have no wish of trying.

Jean

3. Sigma 17-70 2.8/4.5
4. Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX DC
5. Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8

I won't include the up and coming Tokina. Apoligies if I missed something.

Let the contest begin!

Sie

Sharpest Canon 1.6 crop lens
 

wrote:
Ok forget build quality...forget focus luxuries...forget super wide open apertures.

What is the best IQ standard zoom when stopped down from between f8 to f16. This includes edge to edge sharpness, contrast and colour. The best image blown up to large print size. This is all regardless of available light and wether it's hand held or not. In fact lets say it's on a tripod to be sure.

Not super wide but lenses that could be regarded as walk arounds.

Canon 17-55/2.8 IS
Canon 24-70/2.8

http://digitcamera.tripod.com/#slr

Sharpest Canon 1.6 crop lens
 

"jean" wrote in message
...

a écrit dans le message de
...
Ok forget build quality...forget focus luxuries...forget super wide open
apertures.

What is the best IQ standard zoom when stopped down from between f8 to
f16. This includes edge to edge sharpness, contrast and colour. The best
image blown up to large print size. This is all regardless of available
light and wether it's hand held or not. In fact lets say it's on a tripod
to
be sure.

Not super wide but lenses that could be regarded as walk arounds.

Lets add bang for buck marks as well.

And the contenders are (in no specific order):

1. Canon 17-85 IS
2. Canon 17-40 L

I have a Canon 17-40 L and it is sharp as a tack, it is my stay on the
camera lens. I have samples of the 17-85IS and it is nowhere near as
sharp.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

now, now...you're overreacting just a bit, don't you?
It's not like biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig difference as you say.
It is, sure. But not THAT big.
but then again, comparing the two would be unfair, since only one is L

Sharpest Canon 1.6 crop lens
 

"Protoncek (ex.SleeperMan)" wrote in
message ...

And the contenders are (in no specific order):

1. Canon 17-85 IS
2. Canon 17-40 L

I have a Canon 17-40 L and it is sharp as a tack, it is my stay on
the
camera lens. I have samples of the 17-85IS and it is nowhere near
as sharp.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

now, now...you're overreacting just a bit, don't you?
It's not like biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig difference as
you say. It is, sure. But not THAT big.

I own the 17-40 L plus I've used the 17-85 IS and it's not an
exaggeration, there is a big difference. You can't use the 17-85 wide
open, and even when stopped down to improve sharpness, it still lacks
contrast and it has nasty CA at the wide end. The 17-85 is a poor
performer for the price. It has the advantage of IS and a wide zoom
range for convenience, but that's it. Optically it's nothing to get
excited about, and the cheap $100 18-55 kit lense is about as good as
the 17-85.

For the price, I'd rather spend the money on the 17-40 L that has
great performance - it's one of the best deals available from Canon.
Sure it lacks the range of some others, but what you lose in zoom
range you gain in image quality.

but then again, comparing the two would be unfair, since only one is
L

But the comparison here is based on price, and it's somewhat fair
because even with the price drop on the 17-85 they are still in the
same range along with the other three that were mentioned. The 17-40 L
can be found for about $150 more over the 17-85 and it's well the
extra money.

Sharpest Canon 1.6 crop lens
 

"Bill" wrote in message
.. .
"Protoncek (ex.SleeperMan)" wrote in message
...

And the contenders are (in no specific order):

1. Canon 17-85 IS
2. Canon 17-40 L

I have a Canon 17-40 L and it is sharp as a tack, it is my stay on the
camera lens. I have samples of the 17-85IS and it is nowhere near as
sharp.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

now, now...you're overreacting just a bit, don't you?
It's not like biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig difference as you
say. It is, sure. But not THAT big.

I own the 17-40 L plus I've used the 17-85 IS and it's not an
exaggeration, there is a big difference. You can't use the 17-85 wide
open, and even when stopped down to improve sharpness, it still lacks
contrast and it has nasty CA at the wide end. The 17-85 is a poor
performer for the price. It has the advantage of IS and a wide zoom range
for convenience, but that's it. Optically it's nothing to get excited
about, and the cheap $100 18-55 kit lense is about as good as the 17-85.

For the price, I'd rather spend the money on the 17-40 L that has great
performance - it's one of the best deals available from Canon. Sure it
lacks the range of some others, but what you lose in zoom range you gain
in image quality.

but then again, comparing the two would be unfair, since only one is L

But the comparison here is based on price, and it's somewhat fair because
even with the price drop on the 17-85 they are still in the same range
along with the other three that were mentioned. The 17-40 L can be found
for about $150 more over the 17-85 and it's well the extra money.

with one difference...that 17-85 has IS and 17-40 has not. Note that 17-85
without IS would come ---say about 200 $ tops. The main question is however
how much do you really need IS at that modest zoom. While i found IS at
70-300 IS a must (since i shoot from hand only), here is not that a
nuisance. But bigger minus is short coverage. I've shot a few times with my
17-85 now and it's range usefulness is just great. That barrel distortion is
easily corrected on a PC, and also CA in a great deal. The main point here
is that i have no problem doing this, while someone with hundred's of shots
per day would die before correcting each and everyone photo he/she makes.
Also sharpness can be somewhat gained by, say, unsharp mask. It's a good
thing for what it's ment. But definitely NOT for pro's. I've read several
reviews, from good to bad, and found out that all bad were compared to pro
lenses, while all good were estimated as "very good for the price" so not as
a comparison with pro lens, but rather a relative conclusion. I admit, i did
look at 24-105 lens, but....not just yet. I also looked to new 70-200 IS f4,
but...again not yet---

Sharpest Canon 1.6 crop lens
 

On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 02:00:35 -0400, "jean" wrote:


a écrit dans le message de
...
Ok forget build quality...forget focus luxuries...forget super wide open
apertures.

What is the best IQ standard zoom when stopped down from between f8 to
f16. This includes edge to edge sharpness, contrast and colour. The best
image blown up to large print size. This is all regardless of available
light and wether it's hand held or not. In fact lets say it's on a tripod to
be sure.

Not super wide but lenses that could be regarded as walk arounds.

Lets add bang for buck marks as well.

And the contenders are (in no specific order):

1. Canon 17-85 IS
2. Canon 17-40 L

I have a Canon 17-40 L and it is sharp as a tack, it is my stay on the
camera lens.

Not on the edge, unless you really stop it down.
http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/57631694

Sharpest Canon 1.6 crop lens
 

"RichA" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 02:00:35 -0400, "jean" wrote:


a écrit dans le message de
...
Ok forget build quality...forget focus luxuries...forget super wide open
apertures.

What is the best IQ standard zoom when stopped down from between f8 to
f16. This includes edge to edge sharpness, contrast and colour. The best
image blown up to large print size. This is all regardless of available
light and wether it's hand held or not. In fact lets say it's on a tripod
to
be sure.

Not super wide but lenses that could be regarded as walk arounds.

Lets add bang for buck marks as well.

And the contenders are (in no specific order):

1. Canon 17-85 IS
2. Canon 17-40 L

I have a Canon 17-40 L and it is sharp as a tack, it is my stay on the
camera lens.

Not on the edge, unless you really stop it down.
http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/57631694

that's what i meant...people (who own it) just like to exagerrate a bit...

Sharpest Canon 1.6 crop lens
 

"Protoncek (ex.SleeperMan)" wrote in
message ...

"RichA" wrote in message
And the contenders are (in no specific order):

1. Canon 17-85 IS
2. Canon 17-40 L

I have a Canon 17-40 L and it is sharp as a tack, it is my stay on
the
camera lens.

Not on the edge, unless you really stop it down.
http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/57631694

that's what i meant...people (who own it) just like to exagerrate a
bit...

It's not an exaggeration at all. The lense is well known to be that
good, and my own experience with it agrees with the general consensus.
You're free to believe what you want, but believing RichA is like
believing that Superman is real - it's all in a fantasy world.

For some background - Rich is well known in these groups as a troll
and a questionable source of information and/or facts. He doesn't own
the equipment he claims to have "tested" nor is there any evidence
that he even owns a camera, let alone a DSLR.

Now for the facts - the image Rich posted is of questionable origin.
The reason it's questioned is three-fold:

1 - The image sucks for a 17-40 which I know performs much better.

2 - The image size is wrong for the 30D - original size is 4368x2912
which is the 5D file size at 12.7 megapixels (30D is 3504x2336 8.2mp).

3 - There is no exif data and we have no idea if the image was
processed or not.

And finally, here's a link to a comparison of the 17-40 and 16-35
lenses from Canon. The results agree with my own personal experience:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/re...on-17-40.shtml

You may wish to do yourself a favour and question anything Rich has to
say. Personally, I filter his posts so I don't have to see his
trolling drivel.