Same motiv, 5 different lenses

I read a lot camera,- and lens reviews (mainly www.DPReview.com for cameras and www.The-Digital-Picture.com for lenses).

I havn't found a comparison like this one, so I made one myself...

How big differensce is it between a 17 mm and a 15mm diagonal fisheye?

Is ISO 3200 useable ? (with this camera, and these lenses, and with post noisereduction

This is absolutely not a scientific test, but I'm sure someone find it interesting anyway...:-)

All images was shot with my Canon EOS 5D Mark II (full frame), 1/13 secs, F9, 3200 ISO,

5 different lenses are used;
- Peleng 8 mm fisheye
- Sigma EX 15mm f/2.8
- Sigma EX DG 105mmf/2.8 (macro)
- Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 L USM
- Canon EF 70-200mm F/2.8 L IS USM


The RAW-images was imported to PhotoShop 3, via Camera RAW 5.5. Whitebalance then chosen to be Auto, and exposure set to Auto. (I'm a bit lazy, plus "Auto" usually works very well...)

Noise reduction (all auto) was performed on full resolution image (21 mP). Then the image size was reduced to 1200x800 (1.0 mP), where the improvement is far less visible. In other words, noise reduction is much more vital if you're printing a full resolution, large size print. The full resolution images where saved as JPG's with compression rate 8 of 12 ("high quality", apprx. 2-3 mB )

BTW, if anyone wonder; The distance between the closest handle on the exercise bicycle to the sensor was 670 mm (apprx. 26"). Distance from sensor to the wall/painting was 360 cm (12 feet). Tripod was not adjusted or moved.

There has been raised doubt on the if this lens can be used on the 5D Mk II (can colide with the mirror), but as you understand, it works perfectly on my camera (and on on my 20D, 30D and 40D)

Some words about lens quality
I bought my first photograpic gear in 1971 (Ricoh SLR). Bought my first digital in 1998 (AGFA e1280, 1.3 mP). Then went on to a Canon PRO90IS (2.6 mP), 20D, 30D, 40D, and now (10/2009) a 5D Mark II .

When I bought the 20D, I started with a Sigma 18-125 mm lens, Sigma 105 mm macro, a Canon EF 75-300 f3.5-5.6 USM III, the Sigma EX 15 mm f2.8 and the Peleng 8 mm (which I both probably will keep. I love wide angles..)

I  bought my first Canon L lens this month (oct. 2009), and I regret that I didn't appreciated/understood/dicovered the L-quality before now. I also bought my EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS USM this month. The autofocus on both lenses are very fast, quiet ad accurate.
It seems impossible to pass on knowledge/wisdom/experience to the unexperienced and younger generation, but I will try:
Regarding lenses; you get what you pay for. Go for quality, if you can afford it. If you are an enthustiastic amataeur photographer, you will end up with high quality lenses in the long run anyway...
Click on images to view in full size
(Noise reduced above the diagonal line)


Peleng 8 mm fisheye, f9, 1/13s, ISO 3200.
I use this lens for some 360-panoramas, and for fun! This lens is a definite keeper.
(Full resolution here (no noisereduction))


Peleng 8 mm fisheye, f9, 1/13s, ISO 3200, defished in PTGui PRO


- Sigma EX 15mm f/2.8 , f9, 1/13s, ISO 3200
(Full resolution here (no noisereduction))



Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 L @17 mm, f9, 1/13s, ISO 3200
(Full resolution here (no noisereduction))



Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 L @40mm, f9, 1/13s, ISO 3200
(Full resolution here (no noisereduction))


Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS @70mm, f9, 1/13s, ISO 3200
(Full resolution here (no noisereduction))



Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS @200mm, f9, 1/13s, ISO 3200
(Full resolution here (no noisereduction))



Sigma EX DG 105 mm macro, f9, 1/13s, ISO 3200
(Full resolution here (no noisereduction)

I'm not sure what this comparison is good for, but if you're like me, and like all kinds of comparisons, I'm sure you find it interesting.. :-)
 

Updated januar 16, 2011 16:18