Sharp L Lens / 5D Mark III COMBO.
- Thread starter terence19
- Start date
Hi there,
I think the 50/1.2L is famous for being soft. I read that many people like to use 85L or 135L for portraits. I personally prefer the drawing of the Zeiss 50/2 MP for portraits. Just my two cents. =]
I think the 50/1.2L is famous for being soft. I read that many people like to use 85L or 135L for portraits. I personally prefer the drawing of the Zeiss 50/2 MP for portraits. Just my two cents. =]
You are comparing a Leica Summilux and a Canon 50L. Of course no fight lah. 50L is not Canon's sharpest prime. Let us know what aperture you are shooting at, what distance, and shooting condition.
If you want a sharp portrait lens, the 50L, 85L and 135L stopped down to f/2.8 will deliver superb results.
Yes, 50L is not going to be sharp from 1.2 to 2.8 probably. But still a great lens for bokeh. 85L is another fav portrait L lens. Or alternatively, telephotos like 70-200 is a fav.
I use 70-300L for portraits too. a very sharp lens
At such price points, I am sure you are looking for more than just sheer resolution. Maybe you should qualify your idea of "sharpness".
I've tried my 35 1.4L, 24-70L, 135F2L. To me, all the lenses seems to have seen an improvement in sharpness and focusing accuracy. Must be the brilliant new AF system at work.
How about the most classic comparison?
Show us the 2 pictures, let us know the settings and we'll tell you what's wrong.
Show us the 2 pictures, let us know the settings and we'll tell you what's wrong.
hows your 17-40 on this new body neh??...
heard from kenrockwell there's auto fringing correction in built into camera?..
you can download the correction data from canon support and install in your cam also (if your cam doesn't have the info yet)
Nice pics you got there! Lovely children you've got! =]
Can I venture a guess? That the first picture was taken by the 5D3/50L combo and the bottom by the Leica M9/50Lux combo? Correct?
Hehe... Thanks! After poisoning myself looking at so many pictures from Leica M9, I can roughly tell already. That's why I so love my Zeiss manual lenses. They are the closest to the Leica look I can get for Canon! =]
I can tell mainly cos of the 3D characteristic. The micro contrast is much better compared to the Canon and that imparts a certain 3D look to the pictures it produce compared to the Canon which has a "flatter" look. The colours produced by the Leica lenses also have a richer depth to it compared to the Canon.
Hehe... I tried to get the Leica look using my 35L and previous Sigma 50/1.4 before but failed to do so. Think it is the drawing of the lens that impart the "look".
I have both the 35L and Zeiss 35/1.4 Distagon ZE and the Zeiss lens win hands down. That explains why the Zeiss lens is always on my 5D2 and 35L in my dry cabinet 95% of the time. Haha.. Just my honest opinion so please don't flame me now!!!
I can tell mainly cos of the 3D characteristic. The micro contrast is much better compared to the Canon and that imparts a certain 3D look to the pictures it produce compared to the Canon which has a "flatter" look. The colours produced by the Leica lenses also have a richer depth to it compared to the Canon.
Hehe... I tried to get the Leica look using my 35L and previous Sigma 50/1.4 before but failed to do so. Think it is the drawing of the lens that impart the "look".
I have both the 35L and Zeiss 35/1.4 Distagon ZE and the Zeiss lens win hands down. That explains why the Zeiss lens is always on my 5D2 and 35L in my dry cabinet 95% of the time. Haha.. Just my honest opinion so please don't flame me now!!!
Similar threads
