informal lens testing
Posted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 12:26 amI just got my first digital SLR (400D) and did some tesing. I always wanted to do this with film but never got around to it and the delay in seeing the results just put me off.
I just set the camera on a tripod and tore a page out of the phone book to keep it flat. Here is my totally subjective order based on resolution and contrast.
1. 50mm 1.8 mkII- way better than the rest- amazing. Always loved it with film.
2. 24mm 2.8- best of the rest, good contrast and resolution. Used to sit on my film cameras almost permanently.
3. 10-22 EF-s- surprisongly good resolution, contrast ok, better than my 28 2.8 when at 22mm
4. 28mm 2.8- good resolution but i was really surprised at the lack of contrast. Never noticed it on film.
5. Tokina 19-35- got it on a camera i bought second hand and never really used it. I might now keep it on my old EOS 600 body (going to sell my 3 body). This was a good performer and much better than I expected.
6. Tokina 12-24- What a dissapointment!! AF would change ever time I pressed the shutter button and not focus according to measuring the distance and transferring in MF on the distance scale. Contrast OK but resolution was bad. I certainlydidnt get a copy capable of producing the MTF figures seen at photozone (http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html) I ended up changing this for the above 10-22.
So what will go in my small camera bag-
The 10-22 and 50mm, I would love to use the 24mm 2.8 but the focal length is too close to the wide end of the zoom and benefit not so noticeable.
My backpack will have the 24mm, as well as 100mm macro and maybe 75-300 although i cant remeber the last time I used it! I will test out my longer lenses and standard zooms soon,
Robert
I just set the camera on a tripod and tore a page out of the phone book to keep it flat. Here is my totally subjective order based on resolution and contrast.
1. 50mm 1.8 mkII- way better than the rest- amazing. Always loved it with film.
2. 24mm 2.8- best of the rest, good contrast and resolution. Used to sit on my film cameras almost permanently.
3. 10-22 EF-s- surprisongly good resolution, contrast ok, better than my 28 2.8 when at 22mm
4. 28mm 2.8- good resolution but i was really surprised at the lack of contrast. Never noticed it on film.
5. Tokina 19-35- got it on a camera i bought second hand and never really used it. I might now keep it on my old EOS 600 body (going to sell my 3 body). This was a good performer and much better than I expected.
6. Tokina 12-24- What a dissapointment!! AF would change ever time I pressed the shutter button and not focus according to measuring the distance and transferring in MF on the distance scale. Contrast OK but resolution was bad. I certainlydidnt get a copy capable of producing the MTF figures seen at photozone (http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html) I ended up changing this for the above 10-22.
So what will go in my small camera bag-
The 10-22 and 50mm, I would love to use the 24mm 2.8 but the focal length is too close to the wide end of the zoom and benefit not so noticeable.
My backpack will have the 24mm, as well as 100mm macro and maybe 75-300 although i cant remeber the last time I used it! I will test out my longer lenses and standard zooms soon,
Robert