genotypewriter's reviews
-
Canon EF 200mm f/2L IS USM
10 out of 10 points and recommendedUnparalleled image quality, 4 stops rated/5 stops effective IS, lightning fast AFNeed to find your own perfect lens cap!It produces an image with a DOF+compression effect that is a bit more than the 85L does @ f/1.2 but the image quality is better than the 85 @ 5.6!
reviewed November 22nd, 2008
Add to that lightning fast and accurate AF and unbelievable IS and this is the most handholdable lens that Canon has at the moment (ignoring shutter speed)!
This thing outresolves the 40D's 10MP APS-C sensor wide open! I can't see any improvement in sharpness all the way up to f/5.6! It's also sharper than the 70-200 f4 IS, both wide open.
I gave a 9 for construction because I honestly think that Canon could've used a better material for focusing rings of their top lenses. Apart from that, it's every bit as good as pro lenses get.
I have the 85LII which I use for pretty much everything and I'd use this 200 f2 IS as a replacement whenever I'm allowed the increased distance to the subject.
I have pictures at:
http://www.flickr.com/genotypewriter -
Canon EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM
10 out of 10 points and recommendedvery sharp and extremely handholdablenothing specific to this lensHere is my very detailed review of the 24L II vs. Nikon 24mm f/1.4G (both on a 5D MkII):
reviewed June 14th, 2010
http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/4698284415/ -
Nikon 24mm f/1.4G ED AF-S Nikkor
10 out of 10 points and recommendedFar/infinity IQClose distance IQ (see my review link below), current price is a bit unfair when comparing to the Canon 24L IIHere is my detailed review of the Nikon 24mm f/1.4G compared to the Canon 24L f/1.4 II (both on a 5D MkII):
reviewed June 14th, 2010
http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/4698284415/ -
Olympus 150mm f/2 Zuiko Digital
10 out of 10 points and recommendedMy favourite prime on FTNot the most sensible choice if you only need a 300 f/4 (see details)I like super-long teles and I've also used the ZD 300 2.8 too but the 150 f/2 was a more satisfying lens to use for general shooting. Even the general apperance of the lens is great. The bokeh, sharpness and colours were all very very good. This would be the first lens I'd buy if I get a FT camera.
reviewed June 14th, 2010
All nice things aside, one still has to think about the practicality of such a lens. A 150 f/2 on a FT system is equivalent to a *300 f/4* (not a 300mm f/2) on a 35mm DSLR, both in terms of noise and DOF. If the buyer is not currently tied to the FT platform and just wants a stabilised 300 f/4, the ZD 150 f/2 is not a sensible option for the following reasons:
1. While there's no doubt about the image quality of the ZD 150/2, it is not better by a factor of approx 3.8x than a good 300/4 available for 35mm DSLRs. (The 35mm full-frame area is 3.8x larger than that of FT and so it is 3.8x less demanding in terms of spatial resolution). So a good 300 f/4 lens on a 35mm FF body will easily match or surpass the resolution of this lens at a much cheaper price. Demosaic'ing artifacts will also be much smaller on higher resolution FF images when final images are reproduced at the same size.
2. The lens is too big and heavy when compared to an equivalent lens on a 35mm DSLR.
3. The lens has no built-in image stabilisation or SWM despite point #2 above.
Conclusion: If you want this lens, by all means, go for it. You won't be disappointed. But if your motive is application-oriented and you have the freedom to choose another platform, go for a good, stabilised 300 f/4 on a FF body instead. -
Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS USM
10 out of 10 points and recommendedEverythingNitpicking a bit but CAIt's an excellent lens in every regard. Compared to the 200 f2L IS (which I have) it falls a bit short in the CA performance. But if you've used the 200L IS this is something you'll fuss about with every lens you use and unfortunately the 800L IS isn't immune to it. It won't upset your photography at all but I expected a bit less CA from this lens since it has not one but _two_ expensive fluorite elements.
reviewed June 16th, 2010
If the IS and the AF isn't a concern, I'd also look in to fluorite or ED telescopes for clinical-IQ-critical work. For everything else, there's no match for this lens. -
Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS USM
10 out of 10 points and recommendedSuper sharpHeavier than the new Nikon 400 2.8 VRI haven't only used the 500L IS and the 600L IS but compared to _everything_ else in the line-up, the 400 2.8L IS (wide open) ties for Canon's #1 position for IQ alongside the 200 2L IS. The 400 2.8 shows very slight traces CA compared to the shorter 200 2 in near-undetectable quantities towards the edges. This is a great achievement since it's twice as long (and CA generally increases with focal length) but it's also a stop slower (slower lenses are easier to optimise for CA).
reviewed June 16th, 2010
I have also used the Nikon 400 2.8 VR and I was even able to handhold it:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/4375194653/
The Canon one is however quite a bit heavier. This point aside, I do prefer the Canon over the Nikon since it has smoother bokeh and seems sharper than the Nikon:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/3852064595/
I'm guessing the next iteration of this lens will improve the weight and have even better IQ. -
Canon TS-E 90mm f/2.8
10 out of 10 points and recommendedCanon's most underrated lens. Exceptionally good sharpness and bokehNot easy to change shift axis w.r.t. tilt axisI have the 24LII, 85LII, 200 2L IS and nothing else. After using the TS-E 90, I figured it has every right to be in the same team as the above lenses. Although it's not an L-series lens, I have also used the new Nikon PC-E 85 2.8D ED Micro-Nikkor and the TS-E 90's build quality feels even slightly better.
reviewed June 17th, 2010
This is an exceptionally good lens. The sharpness is not short of amazing and what's even more impressive is the bokeh. The best thing about this lens is the combination of the above two points. Too often, new lenses don't have good bokeh because they have large apertures and manufacturers use aspheric elements to correct the spherical aberrations. Thanks to not being an overly ambitious design (relatively slow aperture and simpler optical design), it's blessed with very good sharpness and bokeh. I'm also willing to bet it even bests the new Hartblei Super-Rotator 80mm f/2.8 ("Optics by Zeiss" model) in terms of sharpness.
The only thing I wish was different in this lens is the axis matter, like in the TS-E 24L II, TS-E 17L and Hartblei's Super-Rotators. The good news is this is a change that you can do at home and there are enough illustrations on the net on how to do it. From what I've read, the new (and equivalent) PC-E 85mm 2.8 Micro-Nikkor needs to be sent to the Nikon service center as it is a far more complex modification. -
Nikon 300mm f/2.8D ED-IF II AF-S Nikkor
10 out of 10 points and recommendedOptics, build, mechanics... everything's greatNo benefits worth $700 over the older Canon 300 2.8 ISHere's my sharpness comparison of the Nikon 300 2.8 VR vs. the Canon 300 2.8 IS (both on a 5D Mark II):
reviewed June 17th, 2010
http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/3852798932/
As we speak, B&H advertises the Nikon at USD5200 and the Canon at USD 4500. Although there's such a high price premium over the Canon, the Nikon offers practically nothing extra over the much older Canon, apart from slightly better IS.
Here is also a bokeh comparison that I did, comparing the 300 2.8 VR, 300 2.8 IS (and also the Sigma 120-300 2.8):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/tags/300mmf28bokehtest/ -
Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM
9 out of 10 points and recommendedGreat optics, mechanics...IS is showing a bit of ageHere's my sharpness comparison of the 300 2.8 IS and the currently USD 700 more expensive Nikon 300 2.8 VR (both on a 5D Mark II):
reviewed June 17th, 2010
http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/3852798932/
Here's also a bokeh comparison of the 300 2.8 IS vs. Nikon 300 2.8 VR and Sigma 120-300 2.8:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/tags/300mmf28bokehtest/
Considering these points and the age of this lens, it's a real bargain.
Compared to newer lenses like the 200/2L IS and 800/5.6L IS, this lens is showing its age, mainly in the IS department.
If anyone's wondering whether a 200/2L+1.4x TC is just as good as a 300 2.8L IS... the short answer is no. The bare 200/2L is optically a bit better but adding a 1.4x TC to it will take that lead away. Get the 300 if you want the reach. -
Sony E 16mm f/2.8 SEL16F28
9 out of 10 points and recommendedAF speed, size, weight, build, looks, handlingSee details belowThis is a great little lens. It's not as bad as some reviews say it is. See this test I did below:
reviewed September 26th, 2010
http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/5025935854
If you're looking at getting a Nex camera as a great pocket camera, this lens is perfect. If you're looking to replace/match your DSLR for high quality work, maybe this lens isn't for you.
It's perfect in all other aspects. AF is really fast. Almost weightless and the size is very well balanced on the Nex. The build is great, feels solid as it looks. Manual focusing ring (electronically coupled, not mechanical) is as smooth as the best manual focus lenses out there.
This is the only lens I have for my Nex 5 at the moment (I only get primes) and it's a pleasure to use everyday. Sometimes I wish it was made slightly faster, even if a bit longer, like the similar sized Panasonic 20 1.7 which almost covers the APS-C frame. Also the lens doesn't focus as close as some of the 24mm primes on FF DSLRs, but is still quite good for close-ups with blurred backgrounds.
Looking at the other E mount lenses available now (18-55 and 18-200), this is highly recommended. -
Nikon 85mm f/1.4G AF-S Nikkor
8 out of 10 points and recommendedgeneral image qualitybuild, center sharpness, coma85 1.4G compared against the 85 1.2L II, both on a Canon 5D Mk II:
reviewed October 6th, 2010
http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/5057691550/
Aspects compared:
* Far distance corner sharpness
* Far distance center sharpness
* Bokeh (general and highlights)
* Close distance center sharpness, rear and front bokeh
* Close distance corner sharpness, rear and front bokeh
* Relative illumination between the two lenses and vignetting, close-up and infinity
It's a very good lens but the build quality makes you wonder. A simple tap on the lens leave the entire plastic casing and the glass within vibrating. Quite similar to the 24 1.4G in that regard. It'll make great pictures but I wouldn't get one as a long term photographic investment. -
Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM
9 out of 10 points and recommendedExcellent image quality and uniquenessFocus by wire2010 Nikon AF-S 85 1.4G compared against the 85 1.2L II, both on a Canon 5D Mk II:
reviewed October 6th, 2010
http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/5057691550/
Aspects compared:
* Far distance corner sharpness
* Far distance center sharpness
* Bokeh (general and highlights)
* Close distance center sharpness, rear and front bokeh
* Close distance corner sharpness, rear and front bokeh
* Relative illumination between the two lenses and vignetting, close-up and infinity
Even at f/1.2 it's sharper than most high-end 85 1.4 lenses from other manufacturers. The build quality is solid when compared to the new Nikon 85 1.4G (see comparison above). Focusing is not the fastest but fast enough for most action.
I only wish they made the focusing a mechanically coupled one instead of an electronic focus-by-wire system because the ring is too sensitive to mild touches and quickly changes focus (in MF). This makes it a bit difficult to use in street photography, etc. compared to other lenses and needs a bit of getting used to.
