A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Equipment » 35mm Photo Equipment
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

"Normal" Canon Zoom Lens that's worth a damn?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old June 30th 04, 07:19 AM
AW
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Normal" Canon Zoom Lens that's worth a damn?

I've been using mine for 10 years now (1.8 Mk II) and never had a failure/
problem.

The mount looks like new.

I think if you handle your gear well, it does not matter if its
polycarbonate or metal!

Only the result counts, and this lens is capable of very good ones.


"Skip M" wrote in message
news:[email protected]
"Martin Francis" wrote in message
...
"Tony Spadaro" wrote in message
. com...
It is also 80 bucks brand new and one hell of a lens for the money.

There
is no recorder incident of the mount ever failing.


I have seen the front section of an EF 50m/1.8 MKII unscrew from the

mount.
A brand new one, too.

--
Martin Francis http://www.sixbysix.co.uk
"Go not to Usenet for counsel, for it will say both no, and yes, and
no, and yes...."


That is impossible. I'm looking at the lens right now, and there ain't

any
threads, there are screw that hold the mount on. Since that is the way
other lenses are built, that is a failure that could have happened with

any
lens, if it indeed did happen.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com




  #22  
Old June 30th 04, 08:11 AM
AW
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Normal" Canon Zoom Lens that's worth a damn?

I think seeing a full format sensor on a 10d successor is more likely to
happen than the production of lenses "fitting" the 10D/ 300D sensor size.


"David Littlewood" wrote in message
...
In article , Karl
Winkler writes
Maybe I'm looking for a ghost... but it seems that Canon does not
really make a "normal" length zoom lens. Here's the quandry:

For a 4-lens setup along with two bodies (EOS 3 and EOS 10D), I have
been considering the following:

17-40mm f/4 L USM (very wide to normal)
??? (normal to short tele)
100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 IS USM (long tele)
100 f/2.8 Macro USM (macro and portrait)

In looking at reviews of the two potential choices for the "midrange"
zoom, neither seem to be all that great:

28-105 f/3.5-4.5 II USM
28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

I'd be willing to pay more if they had a really well-corrected L
series slightly faster zoom, say 28-105 f/2.8-4 L USM or even a
constant aperture 28-105 f/4 L USM...

Any idea why they don't? I know, most of you don't work for Canon and
can't speak for them. And the other option, a set of 2 or 3 prime
lenses is I suppose another possibility but seems counter-intuitive
for the setup I'm contemplating.

Any input (other than sarcastic troll nonsense) will be much
appreciated.

Karl,

It would help if you said what kind of work you intend to use the lenses
for. I am slightly mystified as to what you are lacking.

There are some superb "mid range" lenses - the 35 f/1.4, the 50/1.4 and
the 85/1.8 spring to mind. The 100/2.0, 100/2.8 macro, and 135/2.0 are
al superb

If you need a zoom, the 28-70 f/2.8L is superb, and the 28-135 IS is
excellent, though its restricted maximum aperture can be limiting. Some
of the 28-105 versions are also very highly regarded. I agree a slightly
wider range for the 24-70L (and IS) would be very welcome - let's say a
24-105 f/2.8L IS. For all I know they may be working on one.

At the slightly wider end, the 24/3.5 TS-E is a lens I rarely leave home
without.

IMO, the real gap in the Canon range is at the very wide end. 1400 for
the 14mm is very steep (and there is no way I am ever going to waste my
money on another Sigma - I already have a Sigma 14mm which doesn't work
on my 10D). I would like to see a good 12-25mm L Canon for use on the
10D.
--
David Littlewood



  #23  
Old June 30th 04, 09:40 AM
TP
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Normal" Canon Zoom Lens that's worth a damn?

"Skip M" wrote:

Moving is the only way to control perspective, apart from using a
tilt/shift lens. Zooming alone can only change magnification, and leaves
perspective absolutely unaltered.
--
David Littlewood


That, I think, was the point. Once you've gotten the perspective you want,
"zooming with your feet" would disturb that. Zooming with the lens would
leave that intact and only change the framing of the image.



Given the poor optical quality of early zoom lenses, someone writing
in a 1970s photo mag coined the phrase "zooming with your feet", which
is what you had to do when using the (then) optically superior fixed
focal length lenses. It was considered almost lazy use a zoom lens,
stand still and zoom to get the framing you wanted.

Much of that prejudice against zooms remains, mostly among people of a
certain age. g But the advent of top quality "pro" zooms has
changed all that.

When we are out looking for a shot, and find one we want, it is a joy
to be able to stand in one position, retaining the chosen viewpoint
(and therefore the chosen perspective) and zoom to crop the shot.
This cannot be done with fixed focal length lenses unless your chosen
cropping just happens to coincide with the focal length in use.

What this means is that you have to adopt a very different approach,
depending whether you use a zoom or a selection of fixed focal length
lenses.

But the fact remains that fixed focal length lenses have a better
optical performance than all but the best zoom lenses, and if you want
that optical performance, you either buy top quality pro zooms, use
fixed focal length lenses or accept the limitations of shooting with
consumer grade zooms at f/8 or f/11 and at those focal lengths where
distortion is less apparent.


  #24  
Old June 30th 04, 10:04 AM
David Littlewood
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Normal" Canon Zoom Lens that's worth a damn?

In article , Sander Vesik
writes
David Littlewood wrote:

Not in the normally-accepted use of the word in photography. You would
get exactly the same result (apart perhaps from more grain) by using a
wide and blowing up the central portion as using a long lens.


No you won't. Try shooting a row of trees at 17mm, 20mm, 35mm and 50mm.
Now look at the center crops.

I have. Apart from slight changes in grain and DoF, and possibly a touch
of distortion, the pictures are identical.

What do you think they would show?
--
David Littlewood
  #25  
Old June 30th 04, 10:06 AM
David Littlewood
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Normal" Canon Zoom Lens that's worth a damn?

In article [email protected], Skip M
writes
"David Littlewood" wrote in message
.. .
In article , Karl
Winkler writes

What part of having high quality optics at reasonable price and

actually
moving instead of zooming is counterintuitive?

Perspective. Moving does not replace the ability to control
perspective.

Moving is the only way to control perspective, apart from using a
tilt/shift lens. Zooming alone can only change magnification, and leaves
perspective absolutely unaltered.
--
David Littlewood


That, I think, was the point. Once you've gotten the perspective you want,
"zooming with your feet" would disturb that. Zooming with the lens would
leave that intact and only change the framing of the image.

No; he was saying exactly the opposite.
--
David Littlewood
  #26  
Old July 1st 04, 12:00 AM
Skip M
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Normal" Canon Zoom Lens that's worth a damn?


I've had mine about 5 years now, and not a vestige of a problem.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com

"AW" wrote in message ...
I've been using mine for 10 years now (1.8 Mk II) and never had a failure/
problem.

The mount looks like new.

I think if you handle your gear well, it does not matter if its
polycarbonate or metal!

Only the result counts, and this lens is capable of very good ones.




  #27  
Old July 1st 04, 06:27 AM
William Graham
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Normal" Canon Zoom Lens that's worth a damn?


"TP" wrote in message
...

But the fact remains that fixed focal length lenses have a better
optical performance than all but the best zoom lenses, and if you want
that optical performance, you either buy top quality pro zooms, use
fixed focal length lenses or accept the limitations of shooting with
consumer grade zooms at f/8 or f/11 and at those focal lengths where
distortion is less apparent.


Oh, sometimes there is a third alternative....If you watch the used market
and do a little research....I picked up a beautiful 75-150mm Nikkor "E" lens
for only $100, and it is beautifully sharp throughout its range, and seems
to have very little if any distortion. It's a little large by today's
standards, but it has come to be a lens that I use very often......


  #28  
Old July 1st 04, 10:55 AM
TP
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Normal" Canon Zoom Lens that's worth a damn?

"William Graham" wrote:

Oh, sometimes there is a third alternative....If you watch the used market
and do a little research....I picked up a beautiful 75-150mm Nikkor "E" lens
for only $100, and it is beautifully sharp throughout its range, and seems
to have very little if any distortion. It's a little large by today's
standards, but it has come to be a lens that I use very often......



The 75-150mm f/3.5 Nikon Series E is one of the finest lenses Nikon
ever produced. It has a constant f/3.5 maximum aperture, is superbly
sharp and has just about the best bokeh of any Nikon portrait lens -
certainly at least on a par with the legendary 105mm f/2.5 AI(S).

The downside is that, being a Series E lens, it is less well made than
contemporary AIS Nikkors, suffering from serious zoom creep, and it
also suffers from significant light fall-off towards the corners.

A great many Nikon pros pleaded with Nikon to make this lens in a
Nikkor version with less light fall-off and better build quality, alas
Nikon never took up the challenge.

Look after this lens and it will serve you well. The zoom creep
cannot be cured, except for a short time after repair, but it soon
gets loose again. I used a tubular elastic bandage (from a drugstore)
to counter the zoom creep problem on one of mine - I have owned three
examples of this lens and they were all great performers.

There are very few better portrait lenses than this one, light
fall-off notwithstanding.


  #29  
Old July 1st 04, 07:54 PM
William Graham
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Normal" Canon Zoom Lens that's worth a damn?


"TP" wrote in message
...
"William Graham" wrote:

Oh, sometimes there is a third alternative....If you watch the used

market
and do a little research....I picked up a beautiful 75-150mm Nikkor "E"

lens
for only $100, and it is beautifully sharp throughout its range, and

seems
to have very little if any distortion. It's a little large by today's
standards, but it has come to be a lens that I use very often......



The 75-150mm f/3.5 Nikon Series E is one of the finest lenses Nikon
ever produced. It has a constant f/3.5 maximum aperture, is superbly
sharp and has just about the best bokeh of any Nikon portrait lens -
certainly at least on a par with the legendary 105mm f/2.5 AI(S).

The downside is that, being a Series E lens, it is less well made than
contemporary AIS Nikkors, suffering from serious zoom creep, and it
also suffers from significant light fall-off towards the corners.

A great many Nikon pros pleaded with Nikon to make this lens in a
Nikkor version with less light fall-off and better build quality, alas
Nikon never took up the challenge.

Look after this lens and it will serve you well. The zoom creep
cannot be cured, except for a short time after repair, but it soon
gets loose again. I used a tubular elastic bandage (from a drugstore)
to counter the zoom creep problem on one of mine - I have owned three
examples of this lens and they were all great performers.

There are very few better portrait lenses than this one, light
fall-off notwithstanding.


Mine seems to have little or no zoom creep, but then, it's a one touch type
lens, so my left hand is on it while I am shooting to both focus and zoom,
so it doesn't have the freedom to creep. The first few rolls of slides I
have gotten back have pleased me greatly.....I think I will continue looking
for another one, just to have as a back-up..........


  #30  
Old July 14th 04, 04:58 PM
pioe[rmv]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Normal" Canon Zoom Lens that's worth a damn?

David J. Littleboy wrote:

"pioe[rmv]" wrote:


The Canon EF 50mm F/1.8 is inferior in build quality as well as in
performance to the 1.4 USM as well as the former version which had a
distance scale and metal mount.
I have tested both extensively, and have found that the 50mm 1.8 is
not a top-class lens,


Of course it's a "top-class" lens: it performs better than any Canon lens
with a shorter focal length*. Other than the 50/1.4, it's the best
normal-to-wide lens Canon makes.
*: http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~ashon/photo/comparo6.htm


Well, irrespective of what theoretical MTF models say, I just maintain
that it is inferior to both the 1.4 and the previous model. If MTF
numbers are to be of any value, they have to be measured, not
theoretical models from the manufacturer.

This comparison shows the true pictu

http://www.seittipaja.fi/data/Pontif...sus_fifty.html

Here is my own test, which is in Norwegian, but the aperture values
and pictures should explain themselves. The quality difference in
favor of the 1.4 is plain to see:

http://akam.no/art.php?artikkelid=913

My impression is that the Canon EF 50mm 1.8 II fails to qualify as a
top-class lens. The former 50mm 1.8 I was superior, and had/has a much
better construction.

even if it is cheap. The plastic lens mount
excludes as a long-term investment.


Of course it's not a long-term investment: it's a $79.95 throwaway lens you
buy if you don't know if you would really use the 50/1.4 all that much.


Agreed, but there are good reasons to buy something that lasts.

Per Inge Oestmoen, Norway



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
what does the focal distance actually mean? scott Digital Photography 10 July 1st 04 10:51 PM
General Lens ZOOM question.... advid Digital Photography 11 June 30th 04 10:07 PM
50mm "normal" lens with digital SLR? Chris Brown Digital Photography 5 June 27th 04 06:58 PM
Canon EF long lens rental Florida US Michael C. Smith 35mm Photo Equipment 9 June 25th 04 12:23 PM
Choose a standard zoom lens for Maxxum Bill Tuthill 35mm Photo Equipment 0 June 14th 04 07:11 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:43 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2022 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.