# Leica/Canon GLASS



## sanj (Feb 20, 2012)

I keep reading that most Canon lenses are not good enough if Canon makes cameras with higher MP count. It is also mentioned several places that Leica/Zeiss lenses will be able to take advantage of the higher MP sensors.
I am trying to understand what quality of the lens (sharpness/corner sharpness/'resolution' etc) that effects this phenomenon and how can I measure which lens is 'better' in this regard.
Thank you so much for any thoughts.
Sanjay


----------



## D.Sim (Feb 20, 2012)

sanj said:


> I keep reading that most Canon lenses are not good enough if Canon makes cameras with higher MP count. It is also mentioned several places that Leica/Zeiss lenses will be able to take advantage of the higher MP sensors.
> I am trying to understand what quality of the lens (sharpness/corner sharpness/'resolution' etc) that effects this phenomenon and how can I measure which lens is 'better' in this regard.
> Thank you so much for any thoughts.
> Sanjay


Wouldn't this be more at home in the Lenses discussion board - rather than the bodies rumours board?

That said, I don't think the L lenses have any issues as yet, and plenty of new lenses have already been announced..


Theres a good discussion going on here

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,3310.0.html


----------



## Leopard Lupus (Feb 20, 2012)

I have heard what you are talking about, time and time again. Canon makes wonderful glass, and that glass becomes even better when used by someone with experience. It really comes down to an individuals opinion. Personally, I love Canon glass as long as it is in the L lineup. That's not to say the lesser lenses are bad, it is just my opinion. Now in regards to Leica/Zeiss, great glass as well. I tried the Canon 50mm f/1.4 for about 6months and was unhappy with it. I own the 50L f/1.2 but had a craving for some Zeiss. I went and bought the 50mm f/1.4 standard Zeiss and don't regret it for a second, superb IQ and very unique colouring.

Canon/Leica/Zeiss all make great lenses, but not all lenses by them are great. Some work well on FF while others fall short and work best with a crop sensor. Trying the lenses you are interested in out for a bit is my recommendation. As of right now, Canon does not fall short of producing quality glass. However, having AF in Canon lenses and a priority for Canon to deliver that, makes one consider this: The money that is put into the AF design and manufacturing could go elsewhere. Where in regards to Zeiss, the money and emphasis seems to be placed on optics.


----------



## sanj (Feb 20, 2012)

Yeah, agree that perhaps this belongs in the lenses discussion but I put it here as it is a sensor/lens relationship question. 8)
Am wondering if there is any method to calculate which lens will work with hi MP sensor.
Thx Leopard/D.Sim


----------



## dr croubie (Feb 20, 2012)

sanj said:


> Am wondering if there is any method to calculate which lens will work with hi MP sensor.



The more expensive ones?

Try reading the reviews at www.photozone.de, look at the MTF charts (usually on the second page).
As an example, here's the TS-E 24 f/3.5L:



Note how the bar is off the chart? That means it's more than outresolving the 5Dmk2 sensor.

For other examples, try the 14 f/2.8L II, 24 f/1.4L II (at least in the centre, soft corners though), the Samyang 35 f/1.4 at f/4-5, even the Nifty Fifty outresolves a 5D2 sensor (at f/4.0, in the centre).


----------



## sanj (Feb 20, 2012)

Thank you so much Dr crouble. This is what I was searching for. 
Appreciate!!


----------



## psolberg (Feb 21, 2012)

sanj said:


> I keep reading that most Canon lenses are not good enough if Canon makes cameras with higher MP count. It is also mentioned several places that Leica/Zeiss lenses will be able to take advantage of the higher MP sensors.
> I am trying to understand what quality of the lens (sharpness/corner sharpness/'resolution' etc) that effects this phenomenon and how can I measure which lens is 'better' in this regard.
> Thank you so much for any thoughts.
> Sanjay



I don't think you have anything to worry about until they push MPs far far beyond what they are. even nikon's 36MP monster is very confortable at the current level with their glass. to put it in perspective, if canon blew the 7D sensor to FF it would be over 40s and if sony blew their 24MP A77 sensor it would be over 50. Are your 7D pics soft? 

while it is true that newer sensors will reveal more flaws, you're still resolving more than you would with say 22MP even if the corners don't match the center. this same panic happened when canon introduced the 7D and 1DsIII. Even at high 30s, it is only a 20% linear resolution increase. we got room to spare.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Feb 21, 2012)

Resolution is not a issue, however, as photosites get smaller, we can see more diffraction effects. The gradual roll-off of resolution will start at wider apertures.

For FF, 50mp won't be a issue.


----------



## gene_can_sing (Feb 22, 2012)

I own Canon L lenses as well as several Zeiss lenses. I actually think the Canon's are better overall. I do video, so the Zeiss lenses have amazing mechanics for manual focusing and interesting color.

With that said, Zeiss (at least the 50mm f1.4 and the 85mm f1.4) have fairly strong Chromatic Aberrations when shot wide open to f2. The Canon's tend to do better when shooting between f1.4 to f 2 with less CAs.

Also, I notice that the Canon's tend to have rounder Bokeh. On the f1.4 Zeiss lenses, once you start shooting at f2, the Bokeh is no longer circular, but a very pronounced hexagonal shape. On the Canon's, much less so.

I do love the mechanics of the Zeiss, but overall, I would say Canons have the better IQ, even though Zeiss has a great and unique way with color.

Plus, in the near future, lenses with electronic focus and aperture control will have an edge with many of the soon to come video features such as continuous autofocus. Plus the AV mode is great for day to night timelapses, if you have a program to take out the flicker. I do a lot of time lapses, so that's important to me.


----------



## sanj (Feb 25, 2012)

Thank you friends for your inputs.
No, I do not find my 7D pictures soft at all.


----------



## samueljay (Mar 15, 2012)

Wow..... absolutely sensational image! ^


----------



## Rav (Mar 17, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Resolution is not a issue, however, as photosites get smaller, we can see more diffraction effects. The gradual roll-off of resolution will start at wider apertures.
> 
> For FF, 50mp won't be a issue.


Indeed, it depends on the apertures you'll be using: http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/digital.sensor.performance.summary/

For instance, at f8 you can barely justify a pixel pitch like the 7D's (4.3 micron).
At f4, the upper bound would be about 2.5-3 micron, which translates to a whole lot of mpix.

Of course I consider this mostly academic (although very interesting), as the center resolution of a lens is just one of many relevant aspects, and even the $20k+ PL mount cine lenses have problems matching today's sensors resolution off-center.


----------



## samueljay (Mar 18, 2012)

Rav said:


> even the $20k+ PL mount cine lenses have problems matching today's sensors resolution off-center.


I was under the impression that the $20k+ cine lenses were so expensive for reasons other than resolving power.


----------



## ScottyP (Mar 25, 2012)

sanj said:


> Thank you friends for your inputs.
> No, I do not find my 7D pictures soft at all.



Clearly autofocus has its uses though. I know I couldn't have captured those lions running towards me as sharp as this while I'd simultaneously be running, screaming and soiling myself, if I had to use a manual focus lens.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Mar 25, 2012)

ScottyP said:


> sanj said:
> 
> 
> > Thank you friends for your inputs.
> ...


 

The trick is to use a 800mm lens with stacked 
tc's. The lions can be running at you 1/4 mile away


----------

