# Need sharp wide-open



## DianeK (Jun 29, 2012)

I am having a challenge finding a lens in the 24-35 mm range that is sharp at its widest aperture. I have a 60D and a 7D and I am looking for a lens for capturing family and friends indoors in both still and video. I am not having any luck. I have FoCal software so have been able to analyze lenses with it to confirm best aperture. I had hopes for the new pancake but, despite all the wonderfully sharp images being posted at f/2.8, the copy I had was optimal at f/4.5-5.6. Today, I just tried the new 24mm f/2.8 IS, and it is quite soft at 2.8 and FoCal is recommending 4.0-5.6 for sharpness which matches what I was seeing in my images. So this too shall go back to the store. Am I asking for something that does not exist? Is there not a fast prime that is sharp at its widest aperture? One of my other problems is that I don't have the steadiest of hands, so I think I really need image stabilization for spontaneous handheld people shooting.
Diane


----------



## wickidwombat (Jun 29, 2012)

the 16-35 f2.8L IS II is sharp wide open

softens a bit in the corners on FF but on a crop it will be corner to corner sharp

also i dont own the 35 f1.4L yet but i'm going to get it soon its supposed to be a real winner

also i've heard really good things about the sigma 30 f1.4 DC for crop only if its even close to my siggy 85
then it will be mind blowing sharp much cheaper too


----------



## DianeK (Jun 29, 2012)

Thanks. I suppose something that also has IS is a bit of a stretch, huh?
Diane


----------



## wickidwombat (Jun 29, 2012)

Nah for your requirements I would go with the f1.4 lenses stopped down to f2 in that focal range for shooting swift beasts like kids you dont want your shutter speed much under 1/100th second anyway and even then you will most likely be getting subject blur IS wont give any real benefits in this regard

depends on budget really 
if you can afford it the 35L is propably going to be the best (although i am only basing this on others experiences so far)
and the budget option for crop would be the sigma 30 I know lots of people that shoot both canon or nikon that love this lens

of course there is also the 24 f1.4L II if you want wider and more expensive


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 29, 2012)

Just about every lens out there gets sharper when stopped down - that's especially true for wide angle lenses, which are more challenging to design. But, better quality lenses (= L-series) may be sharper wide open, especially in the center (which is where the APS-C sensor samples an EF image circle), than a cheaper lens stopped down. Also, compared to an f/2.8 lens, the 24L or 35L would be stopped down 2 stops at the max aperture of the 24/2.8 or 40/2.8. 

Don't really see why you need IS for spontaneous people shots at those focal lengths - remember, IS works by allowing a slower shutter speed. Generally, you need around 1/60 s minimum to freeze the small, involuntary motions of subjects, even when they are posing. 1/60 s in the 24-35mm range, even x1.6 for APS-C, should be fast enough to overcome camera shake.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 29, 2012)

Most lenses improve when stopped down. Canon, in particular does not tend to have wide angle lenses that are extremely sharp at wide apertures. 
Its tough to make such a animal for reasonable prices. if you are willing to spend $65K on a good cine lens, you might find something. You can rent one along with a Canon adapter if you really need that performance. They are rated in T stops, so they will seem to be a little slower, but aren't.
You should look for reasonably sharp from border to border, those that are exceedingly sharp in the center tend to be a compromise at the borders. 
If you manual focus, the Zeiss 21mm is impressive, Even so, it gets sharper when stopped down. 
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/470-zeiss_zf_21_28_5d?start=1

I'm not sure how deep your budget goes, but it gets very expensive for a tiny improvement, and if you are looking at $200 lenses like the 40mm pancake and expecting perfection, you are destined to be disappointed.


----------



## risc32 (Jun 29, 2012)

100% what the last two guys said. damn, i had a post ready to go and then i was beat to the punch.


----------



## Policar (Jun 29, 2012)

Although the above is almost always true, there are a few exceptions...the new Leica cinema lenses, which are $150,000+ per set, are apparently as sharp as they get around t2 or t2.8. No one's going to mount that on a dSLR, but their new Summicron (which is $8000, I think--so that's a little more reasonable, not that I could ever afford it) is f2 and apparently sharpest wide open--pretty incredible, and if their cinema lenses are that sharp, maybe they can match that performance in a still lens.

The sharpest (wide) lens I've used wide open is the 35mm f1.4 Samyang, which is extremely inexpensive but it flares a bit and has some mild CA and, like all other lenses at reasonable prices, isn't at its theoretical sharpest until an f4/f5.6 split (though the center is sharp by f2.8 almost). It's useless to me for stills, though, due to its lack of autofocus. The 35mm L is sharper in the center but softer toward the edges.

That said, even at 18''X12'', you'll never notice the difference induced by either spherical aberration (wide stops) or diffraction (stopped down) so long as you're shooting normally. Technique is thousands of times more important at any normal stop. The sharpest prints I've ever seen were shot on 4x5 film, often at f64, which limits theoretical megapixels for that format to like less than 20? And the wall-sized (40''x50'' prints) were absolutely tack sharp. So I wouldn't worry unless you're printing wall-sized photos. A 100% crop represents an 80'' wide print on the 5D II or III and I can't tell the difference between f2.8 and f8 on a decent lens at 100%, even if software specifically designed to can.

If you must have sharp wide open, get a Leica M9 and the new Summicron, if you can afford the $15,000 investment. But it seems silly when a D4 or 1DX will have significantly superior high ISO performance to negate the difference in practice. What body do you have? Maybe a 1DX or D4 or other low light monster is a better investment?


----------



## TrumpetPower! (Jun 29, 2012)

The TS-E 24mm II will carve your eyes out and serve them to you skewered through a rapier at any aperture. It's not exactly the best lens for shooting kids, though....

b&


----------



## DianeK (Jun 29, 2012)

Thanks to all for chiming in here. Back to the store tomorrow to review options (after reviewing bank account :-\)
Diane


----------



## bkorcel (Jun 29, 2012)

Chaaaaarrrrrggggge IT!



DianeK said:


> Thanks to all for chiming in here. Back to the store tomorrow to review options (after reviewing bank account :-\)
> Diane


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 29, 2012)

DianeK said:


> Thanks to all for chiming in here. Back to the store tomorrow to review options (after reviewing bank account :-\ )
> Diane


 
Let us know if you find one you like, we are all alwas looking for something good and cheap.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jun 29, 2012)

The 24L is the clear winner here, if you want to pay for it. A tilt-shift lens for indoor family stills and video? Why?


----------



## darrellrhodesmiller (Jun 29, 2012)

i love my sigma 10-20mm lens.. i really want to like sigma's other lenses.. i am also hoping for a cheaper alternative to canon's 35mm L lens.. i've rented multiple copies of sigma's 30mm f1.4 and i want to like it.. i really do.. but the autofocus in low light is useless. and thats where i'd use such a lens. even a 35mm f1.8 i could live with.. at around 600-800.00 but i cant justify 1200.00 lens right now.


----------



## Zlatko (Jun 29, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> The 24L is the clear winner here, if you want to pay for it. A tilt-shift lens for indoor family stills and video? Why?


Yes! I agree about the 24/1.4L version II ... a super outstanding lens even wide open, and more practical than the 24 tilt-shift. It is a bit sharper than the 35/1.4L. Of course it will be even sharper stopped down a bit. It works very well on the 60D and 7D; I have used it on both.


----------



## Zlatko (Jun 29, 2012)

DianeK said:


> I had hopes for the new pancake but, despite all the wonderfully sharp images being posted at f/2.8, the copy I had was optimal at f/4.5-5.6. Today, I just tried the new 24mm f/2.8 IS, and it is quite soft at 2.8 and FoCal is recommending 4.0-5.6 for sharpness which matches what I was seeing in my images.


Of course, just about *every* f/2.8 lens will be sharpest at f/4.0-5.6. I don't know of any exceptions. So test any f/2.8 lens with FoCal and you will likely get the same recommendation. For the better lenses, the improvement when stopping down will only be slight, but it will be measurable. What is surprising, however, is that you got two soft lenses in a row.


----------



## DianeK (Jun 29, 2012)

Zlatko said:


> DianeK said:
> 
> 
> > I had hopes for the new pancake but, despite all the wonderfully sharp images being posted at f/2.8, the copy I had was optimal at f/4.5-5.6. Today, I just tried the new 24mm f/2.8 IS, and it is quite soft at 2.8 and FoCal is recommending 4.0-5.6 for sharpness which matches what I was seeing in my images.
> ...



If you knew my history of bad luck you wouldn't be at all surprised (I must be the only person who got a lemon Subaru). I must have been a very bad person in a previous life


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jun 29, 2012)

Zlatko said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > The 24L is the clear winner here, if you want to pay for it. A tilt-shift lens for indoor family stills and video? Why?
> ...



I love it on my FF's and 1D4. That little sucker is sharp! My gosh, I did a landscape shot the other day and cropped in really far, on a distant farm house, and the house was still tack sharp! Now that's impressive.


----------



## Kathode-Ray (Jun 29, 2012)

Hi,

How about the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM? I use it on my 60D and I have very good results with it. Corners are not that sharp wide open, but the center is excellent. 30mm is a nice length for indoors on APS-C bodies. Plus, it won't cost you an arm and a leg .

Ray


----------



## 51m0n (Jun 29, 2012)

Kathode-Ray said:


> How about the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM?



Good luck on finding a sharp copy. I had 2 of these in the past. Even after calibrated still not that sharp as widely praised. And very soft at f/1.4. The sharpest lens in my wide angle collection is 10-22mm.


----------



## Kathode-Ray (Jun 29, 2012)

No problems with sharpness here. I have the new version, with the smooth black finish instead of the well-known Sigma 'crinkle finish'. Rumour has it that Sigma adressed some of the problems and made some changes to these lenses besides the coating, although they won't officially admit that.

See here: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=38483425

Ray


----------



## wockawocka (Jun 29, 2012)

The 17-55 2.8 is sharp wide open.


----------



## pdirestajr (Jun 29, 2012)

There are a lot of people on this forum with deep pockets, and fancy recommendations. I am jealous.

I'd recommend the old gem of a lens, the very affordable EF 35mm f/2. That lens is capable of beautiful images wide open. Especially on a 7D.


----------



## theqspeaks (Jun 29, 2012)

The Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is definitely a bit soft wide open, but by f/2.8, it's pretty good. Not nearly as sharp as my Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 VC (which is Tamron's version of IS). That sucker is damn sharp at f/2.8. And I hear the non-VC version is even sharper. Either Tamron is a lot cheaper than some of these L and TS lenses people are talking about.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jun 29, 2012)

DianeK said:


> I am having a challenge finding a lens in the 24-35 mm range that is sharp at its widest aperture. I have a 60D and a 7D and I am looking for a lens for capturing family and friends indoors in both still and video. I am not having any luck. I have FoCal software so have been able to analyze lenses with it to confirm best aperture. I had hopes for the new pancake but, despite all the wonderfully sharp images being posted at f/2.8, the copy I had was optimal at f/4.5-5.6. Today, I just tried the new 24mm f/2.8 IS, and it is quite soft at 2.8 and FoCal is recommending 4.0-5.6 for sharpness which matches what I was seeing in my images. So this too shall go back to the store. Am I asking for something that does not exist? Is there not a fast prime that is sharp at its widest aperture? One of my other problems is that I don't have the steadiest of hands, so I think I really need image stabilization for spontaneous handheld people shooting.
> Diane



My copy of the 24mm 1.4L II is sharp wide open, but define sharpness wide open. To me that means what is in focus, not matter how thin the DOF, is Pin sharp.

So by that definition, the 24LII is tack sharp.

I've discussed this before on this thread.
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5290.msg105477#msg105477


----------



## NormanBates (Jun 29, 2012)

Samyang 35mm f/1.4
http://www.similaar.com/foto/equipment/us_lensc.html#samyang

only manual focus, but it's as sharp as it gets wide open, even sharper than the 35mm f/1.4L or the zeiss 35mm f/1.4, which cost 4 times as much

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=771&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=121&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=771&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=749&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0


----------



## robbymack (Jun 29, 2012)

Does the 60d have focus adjustment? If not then you will have to deal with the inheirent manufactuing limitations of lens and camera. Some will be good and others not so much. If you demand pixel level sharpness in a $200 lens, all I can really say is good luck. It's rarely a case of "this lens is soft, therefore all others of this lens are also soft". Read the outstanding "This Lens is Soft" article at Lens Rental. The other option would be to send both lens and camera to Cannon for calibration. However keep in mind all that does is get the camera in line with that particular lens. If you have other lenses that are currently acceptable don't be surprised when you get the body back that those are now OOF. 

My recommendation for what it is worth, buy the lens that fits the budget from a good retailer with a good return policy and try one till it fits.


----------



## Axilrod (Jun 29, 2012)

The Zeiss 35mm f/2 is pretty damn sharp wide open and it's focus ring is smooth as butter. You can find them for 800ish used. The ZE's are excellent lenses for video, I've barely touched my Canon glass since picking a few up.


----------



## DianeK (Jun 29, 2012)

robbymack said:


> Does the 60d have focus adjustment? If not then you will have to deal with the inheirent manufactuing limitations of lens and camera. Some will be good and others not so much. If you demand pixel level sharpness in a $200 lens, all I can really say is good luck. It's rarely a case of "this lens is soft, therefore all others of this lens are also soft". Read the outstanding "This Lens is Soft" article at Lens Rental. The other option would be to send both lens and camera to Cannon for calibration. However keep in mind all that does is get the camera in line with that particular lens. If you have other lenses that are currently acceptable don't be surprised when you get the body back that those are now OOF.
> This is the reason I ended up with a used 7D
> 
> My recommendation for what it is worth, buy the lens that fits the budget from a good retailer with a good return policy and try one till it fits. This is precisely what I am doing; that is until they start locking the door when I show up in the parking lot


----------



## Daniel Flather (Jun 30, 2012)

My 24Lii and 35L are awesome wide open, both at f1.4 on full frame. There is a big difference between a 24 and 35mm lens' perspectives.


----------



## wickidwombat (Jul 2, 2012)

Kathode-Ray said:


> No problems with sharpness here. I have the new version, with the smooth black finish instead of the well-known Sigma 'crinkle finish'. Rumour has it that Sigma adressed some of the problems and made some changes to these lenses besides the coating, although they won't officially admit that.
> 
> See here: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=38483425
> 
> Ray



I didnt know sigma had a 50 with the smooth finish! I haven't seen these, only the crincle version

even B&H still show the ol crincle version
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/560577-USA/Sigma_310_101_Normal_50mm_f_1_4_EX.html


----------



## DianeK (Jul 2, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> The Zeiss 35mm f/2 is pretty damn sharp wide open and it's focus ring is smooth as butter. You can find them for 800ish used. The ZE's are excellent lenses for video, I've barely touched my Canon glass since picking a few up.


I'm hopeless with manual focus!
Diane


----------



## revup67 (Jul 2, 2012)

Jumping in a bit late here but have you checked out http://www.the-digital-picture.com? if not, go there and click Tools, ISO12233. there you can compare most any lens on several different cameras at its available apertures from a center point, mid-frame to a corner point.


----------



## DianeK (Jul 2, 2012)

revup67 said:


> Jumping in a bit late here but have you checked out http://www.the-digital-picture.com? if not, go there and click Tools, ISO12233. there you can compare most any lens on several different cameras at its available apertures from a center point, mid-frame to a corner point.


Thanks for reminding me about that site. I forgot all about it.
Diane


----------



## archangelrichard (Jul 7, 2012)

Lets get honest

Lenses are NOT manufactured to give their best performance wide open -- but stopped down 2 or 3 stops.

That;s just a reality

Further you are looking at a zoom, which is also not designed to give it's est performance at the wwide and long ends but in the middle. These are compromises, lenses of convenience, not sharpness.

So you would do best with a prime that is a couple of f-stops wider than what you need like an F 1.4 or 1.8 shooting at f 2.8 or 3.5 - 4.0

There's no cheating physics

and "micro adjustments" don't exist on the 60D, neither will they necessarily help


----------



## DianeK (Jul 7, 2012)

archangelrichard said:


> Lets get honest
> 
> Lenses are NOT manufactured to give their best performance wide open -- but stopped down 2 or 3 stops.
> 
> ...



Actually I wasn't talking about finding a zoom but a prime and was expressing my frustration with the new pancake and the new 24mm IS and 28mm IS being so soft at f/2.8 versus f/4. Unfortunately the 24mmL is out of my price range and a 50mm is too tight on a crop camera for my needs. The only mention I made of a zoom was stating my EFS 15-85 was sharper at f/4 than any of those 3 lenses I tried.
Thanks for your input. I am coming to the conclusion that I will need to consider a lens faster than f/2.8 so that I can shoot it stopped down.
Diane


----------



## tron (Jul 10, 2012)

DianeK said:


> archangelrichard said:
> 
> 
> > Lets get honest
> ...


I understand about your budget but spending half of the 24 f/1.4L II's cost to get one of the new 24mm IS or 28mm IS is anyway a waste of money. They cost double or even triple their real value. The 35mm f/1.4L could be a decent choice (and cheaper than the 24 1.4L II) although not the same mm and maybe still higher than your price limit.


----------

