Michael Fontana
pro member
Nicolas
you're right off course; its the - keeping my fingeer crossed -
the left one. Busy days... and the adaptor jumping in...
-
Please use real names.
Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed
Firstname Lastname
Register
We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know! -
Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!
The ultimate 14mm lens for full frame (24x36mm) DSLRs?
- Thread starter Bart_van_der_Wolf
- Start date
Nicolas
you're right off course; its the - keeping my fingeer crossed -
the left one. Busy days... and the adaptor jumping in...
Michael Fontana
pro member
I'm quite amazed about the image quality wide open (f 2.8), the focus was on the house at the right of the street lamp, 14 mm, again :
frame:
The center bottom:
and center:
frame:
The center bottom:
and center:
Michael Fontana
pro member
Same frame, at the left:
but then weaker at the right:
That lens must have a interesting curvature of field
but then weaker at the right:
That lens must have a interesting curvature of field
nicolas claris
OPF Co-founder/Administrator
Thanks Michael
that is indeed realy good to see these "real life" tests.
Congrats for your new lens!
I wouldn't want to spoil your fun and satisfaction, but if you can put your hand on a 1Ds3 I would be happy to see the same kine of test with the Nikon lens.
In the past I have been really happy with my Sigma 12-24 and the 1Ds2, but the 1Ds3 is much more demanding and it was the start of quite a frustration for me, hence my search of a new super wide… and my purchase of the Canon 14.
I don't say here that the Canon is better, I just don't know, but it would be interesting to compare these 2 lenses on a 1Ds3…
Anyway you, as already said, have found an obviously good glass for your camera, and that's the good news!
Congrats again
that is indeed realy good to see these "real life" tests.
Congrats for your new lens!
I wouldn't want to spoil your fun and satisfaction, but if you can put your hand on a 1Ds3 I would be happy to see the same kine of test with the Nikon lens.
In the past I have been really happy with my Sigma 12-24 and the 1Ds2, but the 1Ds3 is much more demanding and it was the start of quite a frustration for me, hence my search of a new super wide… and my purchase of the Canon 14.
I don't say here that the Canon is better, I just don't know, but it would be interesting to compare these 2 lenses on a 1Ds3…
Anyway you, as already said, have found an obviously good glass for your camera, and that's the good news!
Congrats again
Michael Fontana
pro member
Fine Nicolas,
I probably can get a - III, from the museum's internal photographer, for a test. Just not these days, to busy.
Actually, I can see perfectly, why you chosed the 14 mm-II (AF); meanwhile I love rather to use the 14- 24 in the 16-24 mm-range, the 14 and 15 mm beeing a nice add-on, for some rare occasions, like staircases, etc.
Prior to get the 14-24, I tested a 16-35-II, but that wasn't a solution, as beeing just marginally better than the 17-40, only.
Anyway, tommorrow, the new baby has to work, some interiors.... so a few testshots made sense,
I probably can get a - III, from the museum's internal photographer, for a test. Just not these days, to busy.
Actually, I can see perfectly, why you chosed the 14 mm-II (AF); meanwhile I love rather to use the 14- 24 in the 16-24 mm-range, the 14 and 15 mm beeing a nice add-on, for some rare occasions, like staircases, etc.
Prior to get the 14-24, I tested a 16-35-II, but that wasn't a solution, as beeing just marginally better than the 17-40, only.
Anyway, tommorrow, the new baby has to work, some interiors.... so a few testshots made sense,
Bart_van_der_Wolf
pro member
Yes, it's impressive.
As Nicolas commented in a later post, achieving pixel perfect quality of a lens on the 1Ds Mark III represents an even higher challenge. Therefore it would be interesting to see how that combination works out, but the results sofar are promising. I'm also curious as to how internal reflections/flare is handled by the Nikon's coatings, which is especially important for interior shots with lights/windows in the image.
Cheers,
Bart
Michael Fontana
pro member
Bart, I used it today for quite a lot of shots and started editing this evening. Obviuosly, I couldn't verify all shots and focal lenghts, but it looks like that lens is quite good in the entire range and resistent to flares as well!
So here's a shot in backlight, screenie from the converter only:
(the architectural structure becomes visible, as they' re taking away the exhibition architecture; these rooms are closed for the public, as these rooms are going to be transformed and extended.
At 18 mm it has very little distortion, but I corrected it in the next sample with Lenscorrector; it's a edited image:
sorry, but I have to put the ©logo, as it migh be used in the catalog...
Ivan Garcia
New member
Did I get a Lemon?
Having seen this back in 2008 and needing a UWL. I took the plunge and purchased this lens about a month ago. Not knowing where to post my concerns, I thought it would be best to awake this 3 year old thread.
Nicolas, your copy of the 14mm MKII sure looks good and you images played a big part in my decision making. With hindsight, I should have asked this question before departing with my hard earned cash. Alas, that's not the case so, here I go...
Did you correct your images of Bordeaux for CA? If not, I think I might have a lemon...
Please do look at the images below, they have been taken today and, they are the view to the front part of my garden.
All images @ ISO 100 Tripod mounted - mirror up and 10sec delay release. RAW conversion through PS CS5 extended at default settings. then straight save to jpg. No sharpening or PP.
Canon EOS 1DsMKIII + EF 14mm F/2.8 L MKII @ f/2.8 full frame
Canon EOS 1DsMKIII + EF 14mm F/2.8 L MKII @ f/2.8 Top Right
Canon EOS 1DsMKIII + EF 14mm F/2.8 L MKII @ f/8 full frame
Canon EOS 1DsMKIII + EF 14mm F/2.8 L MKII @ f/8 Top Right
The top right corner has what I consider to be unacceptable amounts of CA at both f/2.8 and f/8 apertures. The image corners are all but mashed potato at anything below f/5.6 which, I also consider to be unacceptable for a lens in this price band.
Having said that, I am a big lens shooter with no experience of UWL so, I don't know what's normal in this realm.
Is this what I can expect from this lens? or should I return it?
Having seen this back in 2008 and needing a UWL. I took the plunge and purchased this lens about a month ago. Not knowing where to post my concerns, I thought it would be best to awake this 3 year old thread.
Nicolas, your copy of the 14mm MKII sure looks good and you images played a big part in my decision making. With hindsight, I should have asked this question before departing with my hard earned cash. Alas, that's not the case so, here I go...
Did you correct your images of Bordeaux for CA? If not, I think I might have a lemon...
Please do look at the images below, they have been taken today and, they are the view to the front part of my garden.
All images @ ISO 100 Tripod mounted - mirror up and 10sec delay release. RAW conversion through PS CS5 extended at default settings. then straight save to jpg. No sharpening or PP.
Canon EOS 1DsMKIII + EF 14mm F/2.8 L MKII @ f/2.8 full frame
Canon EOS 1DsMKIII + EF 14mm F/2.8 L MKII @ f/2.8 Top Right
Canon EOS 1DsMKIII + EF 14mm F/2.8 L MKII @ f/8 full frame
Canon EOS 1DsMKIII + EF 14mm F/2.8 L MKII @ f/8 Top Right
The top right corner has what I consider to be unacceptable amounts of CA at both f/2.8 and f/8 apertures. The image corners are all but mashed potato at anything below f/5.6 which, I also consider to be unacceptable for a lens in this price band.
Having said that, I am a big lens shooter with no experience of UWL so, I don't know what's normal in this realm.
Is this what I can expect from this lens? or should I return it?
nicolas claris
OPF Co-founder/Administrator
Hi Ivan
As Asher knows that I'm nowadays too busy to follow day by day OPF, I answer you a bit late, sorry for that !
To reply precisely, I should try the same kind pf shot, but I'm pretty sure you got a lemon or even a grapefruit!
My dealer would replace it immediately… A great advantage to buy to brick and mortar stores! but maybe you did? then you should try to get it exchanged…
Kind regards
As Asher knows that I'm nowadays too busy to follow day by day OPF, I answer you a bit late, sorry for that !
To reply precisely, I should try the same kind pf shot, but I'm pretty sure you got a lemon or even a grapefruit!
My dealer would replace it immediately… A great advantage to buy to brick and mortar stores! but maybe you did? then you should try to get it exchanged…
Kind regards
Ivan Garcia
New member
Thank you Nicolas for your prompt answer, I know you are a busy man and I appreciate you taking the time to look and advise on my problem.
I bought the lens from Calumet UK (I buy all my photo gear from them). So, armed with the images I took a trip down town, the salesman was horrified and provide me with a new lens no questions asked.
Well, it is a slight improvement but, I still think is not what it should be. Of course and like I said, I have no experience with this extreme wide angle lenses and so I don't know what to expect.
Below, for your perusal, the same set up as yesterday with the new lens attached.
All images @ ISO 100 Tripod mounted - mirror up and 10sec delay release. RAW conversion through PS CS5 extended at default settings. then straight save to jpg. No sharpening or PP.
Canon EOS 1DsMKIII + EF 14mm F/2.8 L MKII @ f/2.8 full frame
Canon EOS 1DsMKIII + EF 14mm F/2.8 L MKII @ f/2.8 Top Right
Canon EOS 1DsMKIII + EF 14mm F/2.8 L MKII @ f/8 full frame
Canon EOS 1DsMKIII + EF 14mm F/2.8 L MKII @ f/8 Top Right
I have a feeling this one is also a Lemon... I live very close to Canon Uk service centre (5 minutes drive)... Should I take it there and see what they say?... Or is this one OK and I am just being too demanding?
I bought the lens from Calumet UK (I buy all my photo gear from them). So, armed with the images I took a trip down town, the salesman was horrified and provide me with a new lens no questions asked.
Well, it is a slight improvement but, I still think is not what it should be. Of course and like I said, I have no experience with this extreme wide angle lenses and so I don't know what to expect.
Below, for your perusal, the same set up as yesterday with the new lens attached.
All images @ ISO 100 Tripod mounted - mirror up and 10sec delay release. RAW conversion through PS CS5 extended at default settings. then straight save to jpg. No sharpening or PP.
Canon EOS 1DsMKIII + EF 14mm F/2.8 L MKII @ f/2.8 full frame
Canon EOS 1DsMKIII + EF 14mm F/2.8 L MKII @ f/2.8 Top Right
Canon EOS 1DsMKIII + EF 14mm F/2.8 L MKII @ f/8 full frame
Canon EOS 1DsMKIII + EF 14mm F/2.8 L MKII @ f/8 Top Right
I have a feeling this one is also a Lemon... I live very close to Canon Uk service centre (5 minutes drive)... Should I take it there and see what they say?... Or is this one OK and I am just being too demanding?
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Ivan,
Looking carefully at the review article here on the Canon 14 mm f2.8 II v. the Nikon 12-24mm G zoom lens, I'm sorry to say that the CA you see in the corners seems to be part of the lens characteristic!
Have you tried correcting this in Photoshop or Capture One? What scenes do you need yo photograph and will it show up in them. It could be that the color, contrast and resolution in the center is so wonderful that it's fine for what you do. Once you use a standard RAW processing workflow in DXO, Capture One or whatever, the characteristics of this lens can be corrected on the fly. After all, Hassy lenses are all corrected by software in the camera before the file is delivered to the CF card!
Still, I believe that the Nikon lens, with live view focusing is the better lens. I'm more used to MF now as I use the 24mm T/S a lot. So I'd consider swopping out for the Nikon lens and you'd be ahead. It's just a matter of whether or not you need AF.
Asher
Looking carefully at the review article here on the Canon 14 mm f2.8 II v. the Nikon 12-24mm G zoom lens, I'm sorry to say that the CA you see in the corners seems to be part of the lens characteristic!
Have you tried correcting this in Photoshop or Capture One? What scenes do you need yo photograph and will it show up in them. It could be that the color, contrast and resolution in the center is so wonderful that it's fine for what you do. Once you use a standard RAW processing workflow in DXO, Capture One or whatever, the characteristics of this lens can be corrected on the fly. After all, Hassy lenses are all corrected by software in the camera before the file is delivered to the CF card!
Still, I believe that the Nikon lens, with live view focusing is the better lens. I'm more used to MF now as I use the 24mm T/S a lot. So I'd consider swopping out for the Nikon lens and you'd be ahead. It's just a matter of whether or not you need AF.
Asher
Ivan Garcia
New member
Thank you Asher for the kind response. I do take these comparison "tests" with a large pinch of salt. Specially where it involves Canon vs. Nikon... just too many "mine is better than yours" fan boys to take such reviews seriously.
This second copy does seem to be a lot better. I am, however, quite disappointed with the performance of this lens. Software corrected or not, at this price band (£1900 sterling), the amount of CA and corner softness is just unacceptable.
I guess I will just have to bite the bullet, get rid of the imperfections at the RAW conversion stage and get on with it. Time will tell whether the lens is appropriate for my intended usage or not... With hindsight, I do wish I had taken the lens for a test drive before I departed with my monies. You live and learn as they say.
This second copy does seem to be a lot better. I am, however, quite disappointed with the performance of this lens. Software corrected or not, at this price band (£1900 sterling), the amount of CA and corner softness is just unacceptable.
I guess I will just have to bite the bullet, get rid of the imperfections at the RAW conversion stage and get on with it. Time will tell whether the lens is appropriate for my intended usage or not... With hindsight, I do wish I had taken the lens for a test drive before I departed with my monies. You live and learn as they say.
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Why not test drive the Nikon lens too. I've heard such good reports about this and I believe it!
Or is you wish, I could try to go to Samy's camera and then test the two lenses, but would that help you decide? I'd go to the store and try out this lens with your own camera. for sure Calumet has an adapter.
Asher
Or is you wish, I could try to go to Samy's camera and then test the two lenses, but would that help you decide? I'd go to the store and try out this lens with your own camera. for sure Calumet has an adapter.
Asher
Bart_van_der_Wolf
pro member
Hi Ivan,
I don't have personal experience with the 14mm II, but wide angles in general give totally different results in the corners than a telephoto lens design. Here is a test that shows (with a mouse-over) what the difference between f/2.8 and f/8 is in the corners.
Also, i'm not so sure that it's just Chromatic Aberration you are seeing, it may well be overexposure that could cause some blooming effect. Perhaps you could try reducing the exposure and see if the color fringes are reduced. Real CA usually manifests itself as green/magenta fringes on the opposite sides of contrasty edges, although the 14mm seems to tend towards blue/yellow.
Another review suggests that you need to stop down to f/5.6 to get good sharpness across the image and in the corners, look at the Full-frame results tab and click on the Blur index tool. The sharpness at f/5.6 to f/11.0 should be stunning, but also don't underestimate the thin DOF at wide apertures, even for a 14mm lens. The 1Ds3 needs sharpening to show the full potential of any lens.
Good luck with your inquiries,
Bart
Ivan Garcia
New member
Thank you Bart.
The images I posted where left unsharpened and un-processed to illustrate the problems. Having had my 1DsIII for 3 years, I have, over that period of time, developed a good workflow to get the best out of it. But, yes, it does need a fair amount of sharpening to bring the details out.
Still, The first lens was obviously faulty and, no amount of sharpening would get any definition out of that mush.
This second lens is somewhat better but, I am still not quite happy with the amount of CA at the corners. I will try your suggestion and shoot the scene with a slight underexposure to see if things improve.
Asher.
I am not sure I follow... The lens was purchased out right and so, I can't return it for a refund. Purchasing the Nikon is out of the question. I can't justify keeping two lenses with similar focal length. I could sell the canon but, I am not prepared to take the loss in value.
Like I said, time will tell if it is any good for my intended use... If it isn't, I will have to reconsider my position.
Again I like to thank you all for the kind help. I sure appreciate you all taking the time to answer my queries.
The images I posted where left unsharpened and un-processed to illustrate the problems. Having had my 1DsIII for 3 years, I have, over that period of time, developed a good workflow to get the best out of it. But, yes, it does need a fair amount of sharpening to bring the details out.
Still, The first lens was obviously faulty and, no amount of sharpening would get any definition out of that mush.
This second lens is somewhat better but, I am still not quite happy with the amount of CA at the corners. I will try your suggestion and shoot the scene with a slight underexposure to see if things improve.
Asher.
I am not sure I follow... The lens was purchased out right and so, I can't return it for a refund. Purchasing the Nikon is out of the question. I can't justify keeping two lenses with similar focal length. I could sell the canon but, I am not prepared to take the loss in value.
Like I said, time will tell if it is any good for my intended use... If it isn't, I will have to reconsider my position.
Again I like to thank you all for the kind help. I sure appreciate you all taking the time to answer my queries.
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Ivan,
First, as Bart points out, dropping that aperture to f5.6 will allow sharpening to make a perfect image.
The lens can be swopped at the store for the Nikon lens!! You just have to have the box and everything pristine.
Asher
Ivan Garcia
New member
Hi Asher.
Unfortunately Calumet UK has a policy of no refund. Unless, of course, they are unable to fix the problem in which case, an option of refund and/or exchange for a new product is offered.
In my case, they offered a new lens which, and thinking that would be the end of it, I happily agreed to.
If the new lens fails to deliver in the task I have intended for it, I might try to talk my way into an exchange for the Nikon but, I very much doubt their response will be in the affirmative.
Unfortunately Calumet UK has a policy of no refund. Unless, of course, they are unable to fix the problem in which case, an option of refund and/or exchange for a new product is offered.
In my case, they offered a new lens which, and thinking that would be the end of it, I happily agreed to.
If the new lens fails to deliver in the task I have intended for it, I might try to talk my way into an exchange for the Nikon but, I very much doubt their response will be in the affirmative.
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Ivan,
Send me a PM with your home address, the purchase details and your request and the names of the managers at Calumet and I'll try my best.
Asher
Send me a PM with your home address, the purchase details and your request and the names of the managers at Calumet and I'll try my best.
Asher
Ivan Garcia
New member
Asher you have a PM.
Jerome Marot
Well-known member
This is quite simple, actually.
This
is a defective lens. There is no way a Canon 14mm should have such poor corners at f/8. At f/2.8, you get some fuzzyness, but not obvious at that size. At f/8, you should not see such poor corners on the left-hand side.
So the lens is defective and Canon should exchange or repair it. Simple. Whatever happened with the previous lens is not relevant to that lens.
Statistically, unlikely events do happen twice. Rarely, but they do.
Another note: a simple optical test is to go on a tall building or mountain and take a picture with the horizon on the diagonal, like here:
Since the horizon is always at the infinite, there are not alignment problems. This way you can easily check the lens corner to corner.
(This is a 16-35 zoom at f/8, by the way, but not from Canon. But that should give you an idea of what you should get from a wide-angle lens at f/8. The image is clickable and the full resolution is online if you want to peep pixels.)
Ivan Garcia
New member
Interesting development.
Jerome, do you own the 14mm MKII? if so, could you post some image examples for comparison. I say this because Canon has told me the lens is within manufacturer tolerances. Like you, I beg to differ but, I like to have something solid from which I can challenge their opinion and images taken with the same camera lens model combination, would help in this endeavour.
Jerome, do you own the 14mm MKII? if so, could you post some image examples for comparison. I say this because Canon has told me the lens is within manufacturer tolerances. Like you, I beg to differ but, I like to have something solid from which I can challenge their opinion and images taken with the same camera lens model combination, would help in this endeavour.
Jerome Marot
Well-known member
No, I don't own that lens. But it would not be a surprise that a manufacturer answers that a lens is "within manufacturing tolerances" while the lens is malfunctioning. Try to rent or borrow another copy, take a picture of the horizon tilted as I showed and send the two prints to Canon with your malfunctioning lens.
Mike Shimwell
New member
Ivan
Look up 16-9 dot net (I think the last part is right) as I think he did some comparisons of the canon 14 against the Nikon and has some good res sampes online. He is also particular, so the tests are carefully done.
Mike
Look up 16-9 dot net (I think the last part is right) as I think he did some comparisons of the canon 14 against the Nikon and has some good res sampes online. He is also particular, so the tests are carefully done.
Mike
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Exactly! That's the link we've given above from post # 1 by Bart!!
That study made a lot of folks go for the nikon lens!
Asher
Ivan Garcia
New member
Well Calumet has been incredibly nice to me and they have exchanged the 14mm MKII for the Nikon version... I am much happier with the Nikon. Sharp as a razor blade and no CA to be seen anywhere. Still, I don't know if I am shooting wide open or fully closed. The viewfinder is pretty dark so, I will guess the lens is closed.
Now, they only had a basic adapter in stock which, for testing purposes, will suffice. But, I do need to control aperture. How do I control aperture with my 1DsMKII and this Nikon lens is a bit a of a mystery. Do I need an specific adaptor? if so, can anyone point me in the right direction.
Edit... Never mind I found it. Here It should be with me Tuesday. So far, although the lens fully closed, I am over the moon. Lets see if I am still in high spirits comes Tuesday.
Edit II... Also, the Nikon lens came with some £600 saving (1300 for the Nikon Vs. £1900 for the Canon) Talking about a rip off.....
Now, they only had a basic adapter in stock which, for testing purposes, will suffice. But, I do need to control aperture. How do I control aperture with my 1DsMKII and this Nikon lens is a bit a of a mystery. Do I need an specific adaptor? if so, can anyone point me in the right direction.
Edit... Never mind I found it. Here It should be with me Tuesday. So far, although the lens fully closed, I am over the moon. Lets see if I am still in high spirits comes Tuesday.
Edit II... Also, the Nikon lens came with some £600 saving (1300 for the Nikon Vs. £1900 for the Canon) Talking about a rip off.....
jake klein
Member
So will there be a 12-24mm f4 vs nikkor 24mm f1.4G anytime soon?
Ivan Garcia
New member
Well, I have returned the Nikon and took a new 14mm Canon. The Canon lens is not as good as the Nikon but, It will serve my needs.
Now, the Nikon is an unbelievable lens but, the need for a 14mm arises from my Job as Freelance Photojournalist and a project involving architectural interiors, (this project could be a nice little earner hence my head scratching) . For the former, the lack of autofocus on my 1DsIII or my 1DIV is something I can't live without. For the interiors the Nikon would be superb and, I returned it very reluctantly. Sadly, I can't justify keeping them both.
I just wish Canon had got it right, they are seriously falling behind Nikon in all corners (pun intended) and that's just not good at all.
I must spare a thought for Calumet UK who have been superb in accommodating what I would class as my nightmare client. So a big thank you to them, specially Richard, what a patient young man! after all, It has been a rollercoaster with this lens.
Now, the Nikon is an unbelievable lens but, the need for a 14mm arises from my Job as Freelance Photojournalist and a project involving architectural interiors, (this project could be a nice little earner hence my head scratching) . For the former, the lack of autofocus on my 1DsIII or my 1DIV is something I can't live without. For the interiors the Nikon would be superb and, I returned it very reluctantly. Sadly, I can't justify keeping them both.
I just wish Canon had got it right, they are seriously falling behind Nikon in all corners (pun intended) and that's just not good at all.
I must spare a thought for Calumet UK who have been superb in accommodating what I would class as my nightmare client. So a big thank you to them, specially Richard, what a patient young man! after all, It has been a rollercoaster with this lens.
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Frankly, Ivan, I'd think you could zone focus the Nikon lens for those times you really wanted AF! It's so wide and you can stop down that Z-focus has to be very acceptable.
Then you have the perfect unbeatable lens for your interiors!
Canon shouldn't be rewarded for sloppiness!
The more you use MF, the more you will use it with skill and forget about not having AF at this wide aperture.
Subject distance 10 ft
Depth of field
Near limit 2.76 ft
Far limit Infinity
Total Infinite
In front of subject 7.2 ft
Behind subject Infinite
Hyperfocal distance 3.84 ft
Circle of confusion 0.03 mm
Tell me why this can't work for your needs?
Asher
Then you have the perfect unbeatable lens for your interiors!
Canon shouldn't be rewarded for sloppiness!
The more you use MF, the more you will use it with skill and forget about not having AF at this wide aperture.
Subject distance 10 ft
Depth of field
Near limit 2.76 ft
Far limit Infinity
Total Infinite
In front of subject 7.2 ft
Behind subject Infinite
Hyperfocal distance 3.84 ft
Circle of confusion 0.03 mm
Tell me why this can't work for your needs?
Asher
Cem_Usakligil
Well-known member
Hi Asher,
I would not count on this if my success rate of capturing an event is critical, such as when shooting a wedding or a PJ event.
Since I work mainly with a MF lens myself for almost 1.5 years (the Canon 24mm TSE), and it is mounted on the 5DII which has the same sensor as Ivan's 1DsIII, let me tell you that this fails more often than not. Firstly, your dof calculation is based on a CoC of 0.03 mm but it is a generic figure which does not work for this sensor. The sensel pitch is 0.006 mm. based on Bart's previous tests and calculations on this topic, the acceptable CoC should be 1.5 time the sensel pitch. This gives us a CoC of only 0.009 mm. Your example above by the way does not mention the f-stop? So the total DoF is actually much less than one can expect using the classical formula.
I would not count on this if my success rate of capturing an event is critical, such as when shooting a wedding or a PJ event.
Last edited:
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Cem,
I used f 5.6, which is reasonable, 2 stops from wide open.
Lots of arguments about COC, I agree. One consideration is how much magnification there would be.
The 24 mm TSE is also my favorite lens on the 5DII and yes, I admit to some failures, but with digital I cover that with more shots and then checking at 10X.
The 14 mm focal length is far more forgiving.
Asher
I used f 5.6, which is reasonable, 2 stops from wide open.
Lots of arguments about COC, I agree. One consideration is how much magnification there would be.
The 24 mm TSE is also my favorite lens on the 5DII and yes, I admit to some failures, but with digital I cover that with more shots and then checking at 10X.
The 14 mm focal length is far more forgiving.
Asher