[nextpage title=”Introduction”] Canon 17-40mm f4 v Nikon 17-35mm f2.8 v Zeiss 21mm f2.8 Distagon [published march 2007] The first time I tested a lens purposefully was in 2001. I’d bought a Canon 17-40mm f4 L for the 1Ds Mark I and couldn’t believe the results I was getting – in a bad way. The incredulous …
Photography is part art, part science; choosing and using lenses similarly blends subjective and objective views. The ultimate merit of a lens is arguably best measured by its ability to become invisible, to deliver unadulterated reality to the film plane. However, lenses by definition offer the camera an interpretation of reality. They are designed according to constraints …
[nextpage title=”Introduction”] Canon 16-35mm f2.8 II v Leica 19mm f2.8 v Olympus 18mm f3.5 [published may 2007] I had two questions in mind when preparing this test: first, can the new Mark II Canon 16-35mm f2.8 L cut the mustard where no mustard has previously been cut by Canon? And second, what is the best …
At the start of the millennium, we were pleased with the performance of the recently-launched Pentax 645 FA 35mm f3.5, which we used for shift movements and stitching on Canon DSLRs via the Zörk PSA. We found it improved on the sharpness of the best 28mm shift lens (Schneider PC Super-Angulon), which in turn was …
[published february 2007] DXO: Digital Problems, Digital Solutions Once upon a time, the photographer’s work was done when the shutter curtain fell. Now it’s just beginning. The digital age has somewhat diminished the role of the ‘shutter monkey’ in today’s busy studios. Supervised creatively by Art Directors, in technical matters they are likely to defer …
[nextpage title=”First Impressions (June 2007)”] For me, this system, comprising a Mamiya 645 AFD and the brand new ZD digital back, represents both a step backward and a step forward: a sort of karmic splits: a return to Mamiya medium format (I loved my 7 II), and a tentative move into the realm of ‘oversized’ …
You may have noticed and/or been confused by the convention used here in which lens performance is addressed by ‘Zones’ rather than the more commonplace ‘centre, edge and corner’ designation. At the risk of treading on the toes of Ansel Adams of Fred Archer, I feel that this, more empirically explicit, system is helpful. Here’s …
Contax PC-Distagon 35/3.5 v Nikon 35/2.8 PC-Nikkor v Olympus 35/2.8 Shift First published December 2007 Comparative data about 35mm shift optics is hard to find, but there’s no shortage of options: Nikon, Contax, Olympus and Pentax all have 35mm f2.8, f3.5 or f4 versions branded as shift, PC or Perspective Control. Canon previously offered a …
12mm Rectilinear v 15mm Rectilinear v 16mm Fisheye How useful is that Sigma 12 -24mm! A bit squishy, flarey, and prone to wild sample variation, but uniquely useful for interiors and landscapes – and uncommonly free of Sigma Jaundice. How to scratch the upgrade itch, then? I would suggest that the Canon 14mm L and …
Nikon 14-24mm f2.8 G v Contax Vario Sonnar 17-35mm f2.8 v Contax 21mm f2.8 [published january 2008] Very few zoom lenses behave consistently from end to end. Most are deliberately optimised for wide- or long-biased performance; some vary that way accidentally from sample to sample. It is probably more common for lens to be at …
