***some Canon Glass Suggestions***Part 2

[Ketch Rossi]

Hi guys,

this is the second post in continuation of the one were I posted info about Zooms, here I post about Primes.

as a Canon user for very many years, I have had and used any camera and lens Canon has produced in the past twenty years, so I like to share my opinion on its Glass, the EOS series, in the hope that some of you will find such info helpful in some way, with your upcoming purchases.

Anyway below I'll list the lenses in which I had personal and suffice experience to share in off info to let any one here have something to go with when making their purchasing decisions.


I strongly suggest that every one uses permanently mounted ***UV HAZE*** filters screw in to your lenses strong and well fit, as not only will be a great protection fro your glass but also in some L series glass will make the lens fully Weather Resistance. Some don't agree to have an extra glass in front of your lens, but you do must have it on, the focusing moves the elements in and out dust can get in your lens and cause expensive repairs and cleanings in Labs. Also it is much easier to clean a flat filter then it is a curved Glass.



***PRIMES***

EF 14mm f/2.8L II USM FILTER SIZE: only gel filter at rear of lens. $1,949

This lens is a marvel to shoot with, ***(DON'T GET THE MKI)*** at this super wide angle, stays very resistant to flair and CA, vignetting it is just a factor on a FF but not on RED, and like the 17-40 and 16-35 is well controlled anyways. Very sharp and fast at its focal, this is a fantastic choice, but the front element fixed hood can make this one a bit of a challenge to mount with MB's and filters, but with little ingenuity a work around will be well rewarded by the image quality and the angle covered by this prime.


EF 15mm f/2.8 FISHEYE FILTER SIZE: like the 14mm only rear gel $579

This lens is a must have for the price point and the Super Fun and good image quality it produces, having this little one on your kit will get you creative on your shots, and make you happy you got it. Image quality comparison can not be made to any of the L primes, at it is both unfair and a waste of time, this is a FX lens and any little defects will be perceived as intended and will add to the image composition rater then take away, also because of the intended distortion, it is a lens in a class of its own. To note however that with current great options in post, images from this little lens can be rendered rectilinear, but again only use this technic if in a tight budget and don't want to forge out the Cash for a 14mm, in the prime range or 10-22, 17-40 or 16-35II in the Zoom range, as quality of any of this will better the the 15mm fisheye. Also to note that the hood on this one is fixed just like in he 14mm. Also to note that as this is the oldest of the bunch does not have USM, so in turn it is slower in focusing and just a bit stiffer.


EF 24mm f/1.4L USM FILTER SIZE: 77mm $1,119

This lens is fast and sharp, but not as sharp as the 35L, if this focal length is a must have, then by all means do get it, you will be pleased with the image quality and build of this lens, and it can share the same screw in filters as your zooms. But if not get the 35L as it is a better lens and if only going with primes it will share the 72mm filter thread with the rest of the primes family.


EF 35mm f/1.4L FILTER SIZE: 72mm $1,119

This lens is considered the best 35mm lens available, and it is, as fast, but sharper then the 24L, more resistant to flair and CA, while vignetting is about the same, very little, and of no consideration on RED. It produces great images even up close, for full body shots.


EF 50mm f/1.4 USM FILTER SIZE: 58mm $309

this lens is no doubt the best value out there, as it produces very good images, it is incredibly small and light, and it focuses very fast, as well as at f/1.4 makes for shooting in low light a good choice, it is not at par however with the f/1.2, but again at this price range you can't ask for more then what it gives, and it gives a lot!


EF 50mm f/1.2L FILTER SIZE: 72mm $1,359

This lens is definitely sharper and of incredible build, when compared to the little 1.4, but you do pay for it, however if money is not the object here, and quality, build, SPEED, is then get this lens with out thinking about it to much, you will sing about it, and sing you will, when you marvel at the Very Shallow DOF this baby can produce, I have found this lens as close at the Zeiss super Speeds as you can get.


EF 85mm f/1.8 USM FILTER SIZE: 58mm $339

This lens is also a great deal for the money, not as good in quality and not as fast as the 50 1.4, but it still remains a good deal in compromising a image quality for price, build on this lens, like the 50 1.4 is a bit plasticky filing, and obviously like the 50 it can not be compared to any of the L lenses on that, as far as image quality comparison against the BIG brother the 1.2 II, image differences are evident but for many will not be, as the price tag is very stiff.


EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM FILTER SIZE: 72mm $1,789

This lens is the best of the best, I consider this to be my favorite hands down. Image quality is unmatched by any of the other lenses and at this focal and speed, with a very large heavy glass it still focus very fast, not as fast as the much lighter 50 1.2 but fast in off to capture any image you like with surprising fantastic results, I do consider this a FX lens more then I do a portrait one. However consideration must be noted when using an MB, as the front element of this lens expends when focusing. If money is no issue do get this lens vs. the MKI (as it is much better in controlling bot CA and vignetting and Flair) and for sure do get this lens over the 1.8, you will scream about this one, at first for what you paid it will be likely that your ladies will scream at you knowing that you could have purchase one that cost it a fraction, but probably they already screamed you hears off when you purchased RED!


EF 135mm f/2L USm FFILTER SIZE: 72mm $899

This lens is extremely sharp, and will resolve avery detail of your subject, it is very fast in focusing and at f/2 will provide for great shooting even when light is dimming down, CA, vignetting and flair are all well controlled, and wide open it still produce great images, this is a very sharp lens!


EF 180mm f/3.5L MACRO USM FILTER SIZE: 72mm $1,239

This lens is also very sharp and I consider this to be the best Macro option available, period! If you are looking for something a little faster I'll suggest to go with the 200 f/2.8 II with a diopter, a close up lens like the Canon 500D or Tiffens, or even the great Red Rock 72mm lens from their 35mm adapter system sold separately at their web page.


EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM FILTER SIZE: 72mm $659

This lens, and especially at this price range makes it for a very desirable lens to have in your kit, especially because is fast, and produces great images. With this too, Ca, vignetting and Flair are well controlled, and its focal length, speed, build quality and price makes this one of the best deals in L glass.


EF 200mm f/2L IS USM FILTER SIZE: 52mm Drop In $5,999

This lens it is Huge and it is not yet available, but so far the talk i the Photography world, points out this big baby to be the most desirable lens in its focal length, matched by none other lens form any other manufacture.
And at $1 short of $6k it better be. will see when it comes out, as far as the size it will not be any different to use on RED the using the RED 300mm.



EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM FILTER SIZE: 52mm Drop In $3,899

This lens is what I consider to be a very close match to the RED 300mm.
As fast as RED's 300, same size, different filter size from 43 to 52mm.
This lens is the sharpest in the Super Telephoto range, only rival by the equally fast and impressive 400mm f/2.8, but this one still holds the edge in focusing speed and image sharpness, by little, but still better. I'm sure that this one as well as we already know for the RED 300mm, will find a place in the kits of many Documentary shooters as well as for those that like a long focal range on large sets. The lens controls well CA, vignetting and flair, but a hood or MB it is always suggested. As far as for the IS, this again we hope will work great on Birger as it could be a fantastic advantage when shooting in such focal to have the extra sturdiness provided by the IS system.


EF 400mm f/2.8L IS USM FILTER SIZE: 52mm Drop In $6,500

This lens, like the 300mm f/2.8 shares most of the same quality, but it is a lens in steroids when compared to the 300mm, it is huge. image quality is great, just a little bity less sharp then the 300mm f/2.8, but I will challenge any one to notice, so if you do need the extra range this is a great choice at the same speed, but unfortunately not at the same price.


The EF 500mm f/4L IS USM, EF 600mm f/4L IS USM, and EF 800mm f/5.6L IS USM, are absolutely great lenses as well, the 800mm it is not yet out. If you are a documentary shooter or a have badass extra large set and can't get close to your subject, then get any of this big boys and shoot away, just consider this as if they were the Angenieux 24-290 when camera support, comes in consideration.


I hope that some of this info will serve you guys well and I will answer any questions to the best of my knowledge with great pleasure in trying and bring a little support to those that needed.



:excl:***GO TO THE OTHER SUGGESTIONS POST FOR ZOOMS***:excl: HERE: http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=10396

*Photos will come soon*

Ciao

 

[MikeHedge]

thanks for this

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Welcome.

ciao

 

[Andrew Madu]

You the man, Ketch!

 

[Michael Hastings]

Question about certain primes

Question about certain primes

You the man, Ketch!

You are the man, Ketch. Thanks for this.

There are some deficiencies with some lenses that make them unusable. For example, the 50mm f/1.4 has 2 issues that make it unusable, the focus drifts and the barrel moves while focusing, causing the image to jump. The 35mm F/2 is supposed to be junk. If you want a 35mm or 50mm prime you will need to get the 'L'.

On the flip side I have the 28mm f/1.8 and the 85mm f/1.8 and they focus flawlessly (on my work bench at least). Like everyone else here I am waiting on Eric to get me the new mount so I can redo my controller in Bluetooth.

Bob

The 50mm f/1.4 isn't up to date, it has the old Micro USM instead of the new Ring USM. The 35mm f/2.0 has the AFD that is an "antique" AF-motor. The 24mm f/2.8, 28mm f/2.8, 135mm f/2.8 softfocus, 50mm f/2.5 macro have AFD and the 50mm f/1.8 has MM (micromotor, is obsolete), I think it is better not to use these lenses.
So it is better to use EF-lenses with Ring USM and the best way to go is with L lenses, much better build quality.

As you can see there are issues with some of the lenses. Since you seem to be the most knowledgeable of the Canon line of lenses, I wonder if you could try to relate these issues with the lenses you have already mentioned, and (I know it will take some work) try to keep track as we find out some of these issues when the mount comes out. Ultimately this should probably become a sticky as I think this is going to be critical information.

Thanks again, Ketch

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Most welcome guys,
I'm very pleased that you guys find this info useful.

AquaVideored206, both, Bob Gruen and Hamlet, stand correct, the build on the non L series it is far from good on most lenses at only exception of the few mentioned on my post.

Of them the 50mm f/1.4 and the 85mm f/1.8 are the ones with more issues, especially on build quality, and focus ring, the motor on this lenses it is old technology and the material used are mostly plastic, also the barrel construction and the elements in this lenses are simply cheap, but so is the price.

So it has to be clear to those that wish to spend $300 on a lens like the 50/1.4 or 85/1.8, vs. spending any were from over $1,300 for the great 50/1.2L and over $1,700 for the fantastic 85/1.2L II.

You do get what you pay for, (not with RED, here we are getting far more then what we are paying, but this are rare exceptions).

Again the image quality on the non L glass I mentioned in my posts, are good to very good, but you will not find, in any of them, the fantastic build quality of the L series glass. If you want to experiment and before spending thousands then you can just spend few hundreds and still have the possibility to produce very good images with RED, just don't expect Build quality to be at par with lenses 5 to 7 times the price, from the same manufacturer, it will not happen.


My suggestion remains to use only L glass on RED/BIRGER, first of all they are just incredibly well built, and they produce stunning images, secondly they just look so SEXY on RED, and again you are already spending a fraction of what you would have to spend on any Cine Glass, so get the L glass, you will not repent of this, just get the latest generations.

Ciao

 

[Andrew Young]

Breathing

Breathing

Hi Ketch,

Thanks for this great rundown. I am planning to go all L series with my Birger Mount, but one concern I have is breathing. I have 2 L series zooms (17-40 and 28-70 and they breath surprisingly little. Can you comment on how much breathing you've seen in the L primes and other L zooms? Thanks for any info.

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Hi Andrew,

my pleasure, still lenses are not manufactured for elimination or control of Breathing as in still photography there is just no concerns on this factor, so all Still Zooms do have breathing, in some more or less pronounced.


The EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II, is a great lens in this regard with little breathing, and very acceptable for filming, also to remember that the greater the area of the extend zooming range of any still lens will prompt to more of a chance for breathing.

The EF 17-40mm f/4L is a fantastic lens, a bit slow for some situations but extremely sharp, much better then the 16-35L first generation, but not at par of the new 16-35MKII, and it also performs well in the breathing, but it does however do so a little more then the 16-35MKII, the EF 28-70mm f/2.8L is a fantastic lens, of extremely well build, and very sharp, you can get great results even wide open on this lens, which it is now been replaced by the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L, both this lenses are fantastic, and while the newer 24-70L has a well known image factor of a beautiful 3dimensional and organic look, the 28-70L does not fall far behind at all, the breathing in this two lenses is a bit more pronounced then in the 16-35L II or the 17-40L, but to my opinion incredibly good and very usable.


One thing to remember is that any fantastic lens in the wrong hands can easily become a bad lens, it is this far more true in Cinema, were moving images require a Focus Puller very skilled to be able to pull out a smooth focus out of still lenses, we hope that the Birger mount will help in achieving this goal.

Ciao

 

[Harmonica]

Thanks for the great reviews, Ketch!

I have a few questions about some primes not included here:

What are your thoughts about the 100mm f/2.8 macro ($450)? I own one, and not only is it a great 1:1 macro, but it's a great telephoto lens as well. What I don't know is how it compares to the 100mm f/2 as a telephoto. Obviously the f/2 is faster, but besides that, how does the image compare? The f/2.8 is also great because the front doesn't extend. Does the physical length of the f/2 change at all?

Because the 50mm f/2.5 macro ($230) focuses to infinity, I'd like to know how it stacks up against the other 50mm primes, besides the obvious speed differences. The 50mm macro focuses down to .5x, but with a $230 adapter ($460 total), it will focus down to 1x (although you'd probably get better performance out of the 100mm for $10 less). Does the 50mm macro have any of the issues, mentioned by Bob Gruen, that the f/1.4 has, (referenced by Aqua above)? If not, it seems to me that it'd be a great alternative to the f/1.4 at $70 less! Of course, I'd ultimately get the L as soon as my budget permits.

Although the 200mm f/2.8L is mentioned, can anyone share some anecdotal experience with the breathing (esp. as compared to the 70-200mm zooms)? Does the physical length change at all? How does it perform as a macro when used with one of the extension tubes (esp. as compared to the 50mm w/ converter, the 100mm, and the 180mm macros)? How does it compare to the 300mm and the 400mm when used with the extenders?

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Most welcome Harmonica,

the EF 50mm Macro f/2.5 is a great lens, very sharp and fun to shot with, especially when you put on the Life Size Adapter, but it is to note that this lens not only is a bit slow, do to old technology focusing gear, but it is also noisy, as it doesn't have an USM motor.

As for the Ef 100mm Macro f/2.8 USM is way better in both speed of focusing and smothness of focusing do to the USM, and this lens also has great saturation in the color reproduction, it is also surprisingly resistant to flair, for a Micro that is a very good thing since many times you try to not shoot with the hood on, as it may scare away the little ones you are shooting, I would not look at any other lens in this range, this is a good one.

As far as the 200 prime vs. the 7-200, simply the 200 prime has the edge hands down on the image quality, it is a prime, and even so it is a bit old, it is a fantastic lens, and is cheap too, so you can't get any better at 200, for a prime this is the way to go.


When talking about Breathing this is some what of an area were the still lenses have a huge difference with Cine Lenses, the mechanical shifting that takes place when changing the focal length when focusing, creates this effect, and for some it is undesirable, but for me it is a signature of each lens and must be taken in consideration when purchasing and shooting with, Primes are always a better way to go especially with Still lenses.

The only lenses that have conquered and mastered the capability of manufacturing Breathing FREE lenses are ARRI/ZEISS MASTER PRIMES and LWZ-1 ZOOM, and Angenieux Optimo's, but look at their prices!

We must each come to terms with what we can afford and use it to the best of its capacity, and in the week points of each lens create a particular look, and deal with the lens issues, at last it always will be the Story and Contents that will win the Hearts of the viewers, as they know very little about Breathing and other lenses issues.

Ciao

 

[Andrew Young]

Hi Andrew,

my pleasure, still lenses are not manufactured for elimination or control of Breathing as in still photography there is just no concerns on this factor, so all Still Zooms do have breathing, in some more or less pronounced.


The EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II, is a great lens in this regard with little breathing, and very acceptable for filming, also to remember that the greater the area of the extend zooming range of any still lens will prompt to more of a chance for breathing.

The EF 17-40mm f/4L is a fantastic lens, a bit slow for some situations but extremely sharp, much better then the 16-35L first generation, but not at par of the new 16-35MKII, and it also performs well in the breathing, but it does however do so a little more then the 16-35MKII, the EF 28-70mm f/2.8L is a fantastic lens, of extremely well build, and very sharp, you can get great results even wide open on this lens, which it is now been replaced by the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L, both this lenses are fantastic, and while the newer 24-70L has a well known image factor of a beautiful 3dimensional and organic look, the 28-70L does not fall far behind at all, the breathing in this two lenses is a bit more pronounced then in the 16-35L II or the 17-40L, but to my opinion incredibly good and very usable.


One thing to remember is that any fantastic lens in the wrong hands can easily become a bad lens, it is this far more true in Cinema, were moving images require a Focus Puller very skilled to be able to pull out a smooth focus out of still lenses, we hope that the Birger mount will help in achieving this goal.

Ciao

Thanks for that additional info, Ketch. Would you say the L primes breathe more than the L zooms, or does it just depend on the lens?

 

[Jason Ing]

...moving images require a Focus Puller very skilled to be able to pull out a smooth focus out of still lenses, we hope that the Birger mount will help in achieving this goal.

so the birger mount has follow focus? with the blue tooth?

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Most welcome Andrew,

technically speaking Primes should not breath at all as this is a result of focus Racking especially known to Zooms, for me even so I haven't tested this facts with an extensive test, I still prefer Primes, because they have less barrel distortion then Zoom and always have a better resolution, giving a better detailed image, more organic, and are usually sharper.

Know having said that, some of the new Zoom, are nothing short of Fantastic in what they achieve, a Prime lens job is set at one specific focal length while a Zoom, depending from Zoom to Zoom is asked to perform far more tasks then a prime, and at a variety of focal lengths, so it is natural to have some fall offs in image sharpness and other lens carateristics, such a Barrel distortion and Chromatic Aberration.

Ciao

 

[Ketch Rossi]

so the birger mount has follow focus? with the blue tooth?

Yes!

KLICK HERE: http://www.reduser.net/forum/uploaded/5_1189309106.jpg


Ciao

 

[Michael Hastings]

technically speaking Primes should not breath at all as this is a result of focus Racking especially known to Zooms,

Ciao

Ketch: this isn't quite true. Breathing is the slight zooming effect that can happen as you change focus. Remember when focusing you are physically moving some of the elements and when that happens you create a very slight zoom, even on primes - unless this effect is somehow compensated for in the design.

Modern cine lenses have extensive design effort to try to eliminate it and as you said earlier still lenses don't worry about it much in their design. On the other hand modern use of aspheric elements, etc. mean that even the still lenses may tend not to breathe much even if the engineers didn't focus on that in the design.

In fact one of the advantages of a zoom is that it is possible for Birger or Viewfactor to create software in the controller to recognize the lens and it's breathing characteristics and automatically do actual zoom to offset the breathing. In other words say you have a 28-135 zoom and you are set at 40mm and you rack focus. Due to breathing it may appear that you slightly zoomed (as if you zoomed to 41mm) the controller would simply smoothly microzoom back to 39mm to compensate and voila no breathing.

This type of compensation has been stated as in development by both Erik and viewfactor (it would require a zoom motor as well). It won't work on the very end(s) of the zoom because there would be no where to go to compensate - so for example with the 28-135 it would only work if you were starting at between 32 and 130mm. And it won't work at all with primes because they are fixed, you can't zoom anywhere to compensate.

Breathing can also be compensated in your editing software by slightly enlarging or shrinking the image and this is fairly easy to do with most modern systems. (similar to barrel distortion correction in still photo software)

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Yes it is exactly what I meant, the focus racking that causes Breathing as the focus shifts ever slitly in the bringing to focvus foreground subject and viceversa, as from the foreground coming to front, switching focus from subject to subject, this however it is much more pronounced in Zooms, as Primes have a much simpler design to del with, and usually the aspherical elements in each lens are in deed designed with reducing such as several known lens defects, as one being Breathing.

In the latest generations, even in Still lenses, this is bringing great results, minimizing greatly Breathing, Chromatic Aberration, Barrel distortion, and ever increasing the power of resolve, giving this new lenses not only better sharpness, but also the capacity to separate elements in the colors, and shadows, giving a better detailed and more organic images.

It is the same technology involved in the construction of the Zeiss lenses, but not off course at their level, at list not on the current batches, but I'm sure the new EF 200mm f/2L IS USM, son to be, it will prove the next generation of still lenses from Canon L series to be incredibly difficult distinguish from far more expensive lenses in the cinematic world.

As far as correcting any lenses defects, some are already done by software in the photography world, such as DXO Elite 5, as this are capable of correcting several of the above mentioned issues, off course not the Breathing as this we know well, it is not an issue with Still Photography.

If Birger and other will do the same in controlling the lenses issue of Breathing this will be a great thing, as it will allow for great lenses to be use, even those that might have a more pronounced Breathing issue.

I do still believe that this are much smaller issues that some make to believe, as our artistic nature will overcome all obstacles, and this will be just defects of image that will be not easy seen by the untrained eye, about 95% of the viewers.

At last and nonetheless I'm a pursuer of perfection, and when all possible I trive to achieve results as close as possible to perfection, as been Human we are told that Perfection can not be achieved.

Were money it is not an issue this are not issues to concern one self, as the technology in the Top Cine Lenses has already toke care on eliminating much of all, even so some argue the presence of Ca and other difects even on a $30,000 lens, so you see there is no perfection, for any one at any cost.


We hope that true our post we get to share our knowledge, and inform each other of the available choices, and what they compromise or bring to the table.

Ciao

 

[Emanuel A.]

***** thread... Grazie once again Ketch!

E.

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Prego ... once again Emanuel.

Ciao

 

[Jim Hoffman]

Hey Ketch - great posts.

I thought the extenders might be worth mentioning. I know they slow things down and take away from the sharpness a bit - but still are an economical way to get more out of your lens set. I have both and from time to time they are nice to have when you can't carry a huge lens collection.

Extender EF 1.4x II
Extender EF 2x II

They are about $280 each I think...

JIM

 

[Ketch Rossi]

Hey Ketch - great posts.

I thought the extenders might be worth mentioning. I know they slow things down and take away from the sharpness a bit - but still are an economical way to get more out of your lens set. I have both and from time to time they are nice to have when you can't carry a huge lens collection.

Extender EF 1.4x II
Extender EF 2x II

They are about $280 each I think...

JIM

Hi Jim,

the EF 1.4x II is an excellent way to get a bit further with your lens, both for the need of the extra reach or simply just so to get a shallower DOF, this is a good one and much better then the MK I, as far as sharpness loss, I don't notice any drop on the image quality at all, on any of the L glass the I have used on, like the 135L, 200L and 400L 2.8.


The EF 2x II on the other hand, is only to be used as an extreme situation, as this will have a drop off both in quality of the image, and as well as light loss, but still very usable.

Good thing of you to mention this good little suckers.

Ciao