|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
January 13th, 2009, 08:47 AM
|
#16 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Beijing
Posts: 665
|
Christopher,
MM lenses do work, honest. I find the Contax Zeiss lenses to be nicer in rendition than my Canon L lenses, but that is personal taste. As a side note, contrary to popular belief the L lens designation has never by itself been any guarantee of optical performance, just an indication that the lens contains fluorite elements Canon Technology Canon Advantage - Fluorite and UD Glass - Canon USA Consumer Products There are several older L lenses like the 17-35mm f2.8L zooms, the 20-35mm f2.8 and the 35-350mm that were pretty average and way below prime lenses of their day like the humble Contax or Nikon 28mm f2.8. Newer L lenses are all pretty exceptional (perhaps excepting the 28-300 and 100-400mm) but not necessarily better or sharper than a Nikon or Contax prime, just different. Dan |
|
|
|
January 13th, 2009, 08:50 AM
|
#17 |
|
Major Player
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Beijing
Posts: 665
|
Grant,
Forgot to add, I've got the Contax Zeiss 85mm f1.4, you can see the results here 5DmkII in Uganda part 2 on Vimeo I also have the Nikon AF 85mm f1.4D lens and manual focus 85mm f2, not sure which I prefer yet for 5DmkII use but both are very sharp. Dan |
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
||||||
|
|
