- This topic is empty.
Zeiss Glass for Canon
-
Thought I would share this with all my fellow Canon shooters…
Over the last number of months I have been researching Shift lenses and after reading
countless reviews about the 3 Canon EF shift options particularly the 24mm I opted for
an alternative which is not Canon. and not Zeiss either.Anyway while reviewing the option I happened across some interesting
things mentioned regarding Canon lenses.Like anything considered WIDE ANGLE or wider than 35mm from Canon is not actually as great
at producing good images as previously thought and that includes the famous L lenses.It seems Canon are particularly good and are probably the market leaders in long Telephoto
lenses.I read that a lot of photographers from experienced enthusiasts to professionals are actually
using lenses from other manufacturers like Zeiss, Leica, Nikon, Minolta, Olympus, Tamron Adaptall,
Vivitar, and many other from not so long ago to 20 year old lenses at very low money in some models
and it really got me thinking.I did a lot of reading in particular on Carl Zeiss lenses used on Canon bodies and have since before
christmas sold my Canon 28-70 F2.8 L and 70-200 F4 L lenses and bought a Carl Zeiss 24-85 F3.5-4.5
T* lens in a Contax N mount which will not fit on any other camera other than a Contax N even with
special adapters . . . but can be converted mechanically to EF by http://en.conurus.com/index.html to
retail auto focus and auto aperture.This lens will outperform Canon glass from the same range, and the Zeiss 17-35 F2.8 will out perform
Canons 16-35 L also. so It is my objective to switch all my glass over to alternative glass below 70mm in
the coming year or so. hopefully Zeiss!I have become very disillusioned with Canon lenses after reading many reports regarding their Quality
control with many people stating that the L in Canons L series glass stands for LOTTERY, you may or may
not get a good copy. this actually is probably true to say about other manufacturers but if you pay top dollar
for a lens you expect it to be actually in Canon L terms Perfect simply.We constantly strive for the best results in our photography and I think having good quality equipment
is a very importand key. Getting nice contrasty, sharp, low distortion images with good colour rendition
will really only come from good quality glass.I did a test recently between my Canon 17-40 F4 L (€500.00 paid approximately) and a Sigma 15-30
F3.5-4.5 (€200.00 paid) and the sigma actually outperforms the Canon. There is less chromatic abberation
and less distortion. The Sigma has some drawbacks over the Canon but on my test is actually a better
resolving lens than the canon.Does anyone here on PI have the same thoughts?
Just a little rant to share my findings.
Aoluain
The conversion cost me about €240.00.
It works great but the auto focus is not as quick as the Canon USM but is
silent!I will be thinking of getting a Contax Zeiss 17-35 converted later on too, this lens
is supposed to beat the EF 16-35.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
