> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Félix López > de Maturana > Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 3:35 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [inbox] Re:EOS Advices needed for lens purchase > > > >Ah Chip-not nice to Assume! For I too am a professional > photographer (36 yrs > >worth and Certified with the PPofA). Yes I realize the lens will > give you > >distortion (especially wide angles close in) but for 25 yrs I shot with > >Leica-my all time favorite lens was the 19 f 2.8 and it DID NOT > distort like > >the 16mm end of this lens does. > > Quoting Chasseur d'Images reputed French magazine the distortion > of 16-35mm at 16mm is 1.3%: Same figure at 17 for the previous > 17-35mm. This is a not bad distortion amount for the kind of > zoom. The Leica 21-35mm has a smaller figure at 21: 0.8% but it's > not open at f2.8 but at f3.5 and reaches only 21mm. Canon 14mm > has a distortion of 0.7 and Nikon 17-35mm has, at 17mm, 1.3%. > > I'm speaking about lenses I actually own and use. These > rectilinear extreme wides have not so much distortion, at least > the primes, but they produces images much bigger if the object is > close the lens and if the lens is inclined the lines are > converging much quicker that standard lens, but it's a small > price for the extreme field of view. I use them too for > architectural work and the pictures may be postreated very well > in PS correcting this extreme converging. > > The Canon 15mm is another completely different beast. The wider > of all of them but here with a huge distortion due to his fisheye > character. Leica lenses have in general better figures at > distortion, sharpness and vignetting and with a better behaviour > full open but are lenses with minor capabilities, for instance > the zooms are slower and with less range and up to now -DMR just > launched- with scarce digital possibilities at least in a Leica > body. I have too quite a lot of Leica lenses and the pictures can > be better but very often you find yourself unable to shoot the > picture you want. In digital most of the pictures I shoot are > full frame so the distortion issues are the same but the corners > are a little bit softer than with film. No that bad the defenders > of APS digital sensors pretend but I suppose that a new > generation of extreme wide tele centric Canon zooms and primes > are on the way. I'm switching continuously between Canon and > Leica and very often I forget which camera took a picture. I use > a APS digital Canon - just with a 18-50mm f2.8- but only when > traveling too light. It seems to me, too, that the future in > Canon is full frame. > > Regards > > Felix >
Hi Felix, Have you tried an EF 15 2.8 FF fisheye and defished it? It's AMAZING! My own experience has me in agreement with you, even though the linear distortion levels are pretty low with the EF 14 2.8L there is some kind of aberration going on in the corners that makes the resulting FF digital images appear softer that at the center. This softness is present to a much lesser degree on chrome but it's all but invisible without a loupe where with FF images it is easy to see if you are looking for it. At some point the sensors will be flat and the AA filters will be improved to reduce the diffraction problems. Then the sensor sourced image quality issues will be reduced to the levels of film and all the "digital" lens design claims will be made redundant. Cheers/Chip * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
