Canon shooters: What is your single best lens for sheer IQ?

jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
edited May 12, 2010 in Cameras
I'm not talking versatility, I'm talking pure image quality. Sharpness, color, contrast, bokeh, etc. If it's a zoom, fine, but I'm expecting to see more primes listed here.

I have no primes other than the 300/2.8LIS I'm currently renting, and I would have to put that at the top of my list.

Next would be the 135/2.0L I owned briefly but had to sell to recoup some of the purchase price of my 5DII. I had told myself I would buy it back someday, but now I find myself lusting for a 35/1.4L.

As for lenses I actually own, it's a tossup between my 24-70L and 70-200/4LIS, but I know these aren't the ultimate.

What say you?
-Jack

An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.

Comments

  • PhotoLasVegasPhotoLasVegas Registered Users Posts: 264 Major grins
    edited May 4, 2010
    Of the ones we own.. hands-down, the 50mm F1.4 (Canon). Then, I think it's a tie between the 28mm f1.8 and the 50mm f1.8 (which, for the money is probably the best "prime" lens out there). Followed closely by the 70-200 f2.8L IS, and then a far back 4th, the Tamron 17-50 f2.8
    Las Vegas Wedding, Family, and Special Event Photographers.

    Canon 7d
    2 Canon 40d
    70-200 f2.8L IS, 50mm f1.4, 50mm f1.8, 28mm f1.8, Tamron 17-55 f2.8, ProOptic 8mm Fisheye
    And a bunch of other stuff ;)
  • divamumdivamum Registered Users Posts: 9,021 Major grins
    edited May 4, 2010
    135L. I'm a lousy hanholder so I have to make sure that I keep my shutter speeds high, but as long as I do my job it's... breathtaking. Bokeh, contrast, colour rendition an an indefinable "something" that makes it truly gorgeous.
    facebook | photo site |
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Major grins Rockledge, FL on the Space CoastPosts: 0 Major grins
    edited May 4, 2010
    Probably my only prime, the 500 f/4 IS. I love how it always gives those beautiful OOF backgrounds.

    But the 70-200 f/4L IS is rather fine too and more versatile than the 500, easier to carry too. I've started "borrowing" the 1.4x from the 500 and using it on the 70-200 as a BIF lens (70-200 * 1.4 = 98-280 * 1.6 crop = 157-448). It's a lot easier to handhold than the 100-400.

    The 1-4 has become a shorter range tripod mounted tele otherwise a monopod mounted lens. Still delivers the goods and zooms really quickly.
  • rwellsrwells Registered Users Posts: 6,084 Major grins
    edited May 4, 2010
    For the qualities you listed, I'd have to say the 85 f/1.2 L. It must be made with magic dust sprinkled in. It's a very artistic lens.

    Second choice would be 135L f/2, but doesn't blow me away like the 85L.

    YMMV
    Randy
  • EclipsedEclipsed Registered Users Posts: 360 Major grins
    edited May 4, 2010
    135l and the Canon l TS lenses (17mm and 24mm). Although, I don't own them myself.
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,130 moderator
    edited May 5, 2010
    Canon EF 135mm, f2L USM and Pentax SMC 50mm, f1.4 screwmount (adapted). Both are amazingly sharp.
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited May 5, 2010
    ziggy53 wrote: »
    Canon EF 135mm, f2L USM and Pentax SMC 50mm, f1.4 screwmount (adapted). Both are amazingly sharp.

    Cool, I have a Pentax SMC 50/1.4, although it is the K Bayonet mount. It seems very sharp on film, but I haven't bought the EOS adapter yet. Any difference between the K and the screw?
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • JohnBiggsJohnBiggs Registered Users Posts: 841 Major grins
    edited May 5, 2010
    85 1.2 L II

    It's like magic... I don't know why I waited so long.

    But then again, the question is a little silly. Although I find the IQ to be the best, it's not the best choice for every job and situation.

    I wouldn't use it for landscapes, birds, outdoor sports, etc. Each type of photography would have a hands down winner.
    Canon Gear: 5D MkII, 30D, 85 1.2 L, 70-200 2.8 IS L, 17-40mm f4 L, 50 1.4, 580EX, 2x 580EXII, Canon 1.4x TC, 300 f4 IS L, 100mm 2.8 Macro, 100-400 IS L
    Other Gear: Olympus E-PL1, Pan 20 1.7, Fuji 3D Camera, Lensbaby 2.0, Tamron 28-75 2.8, Alien Bees lighting, CyberSyncs, Domke, HONL, FlipIt.
    ~ Gear Pictures
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,130 moderator
    edited May 5, 2010
    jmphotocraft wrote: »
    Cool, I have a Pentax SMC 50/1.4, although it is the K Bayonet mount. It seems very sharp on film, but I haven't bought the EOS adapter yet. Any difference between the K and the screw?

    I don't have a "K" mount version, so I don't know personally. If you do get the K-to-EOS adapter be aware that some/many K-mount lenses will have to have the aperture "tang" reduced or removed to use the lens safely on a FF or crop 1.3x EOS body.

    Photodo.com rates the Pentax SMC-F 50mm f/1.4 as better than the Pentax SMC-FA 50mm f/1.4, but they did not review the M42 mount that I see. (I believe what I have would be called an M42 SMC-A 50mm, f1.4)
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • lowbonelowbone Registered Users Posts: 35 Big grins
    edited May 5, 2010
    It is a tie between my 300mm f 2.8 and my 500mm f4
  • divamumdivamum Registered Users Posts: 9,021 Major grins
    edited May 5, 2010
    JohnBiggs wrote: »
    85 1.2 L II

    It's like magic... I don't know why I waited so long.

    The fact that you could put a sizeable downpayment on a car for the same price?! :D

    I suspect that lens will be the next lust object for me - so many people rave about it for portraits - but I'll need a sizeable injection of cash before I can jump to it. Maybe by this time next year.....

    For the record, what is it about it that you like so much? I know I've always felt that the 135 has magic dust in it too since it just has an unquantifiable "sparkle" to the images that it captures. Do you find the 85 is similar?
    facebook | photo site |
  • LiquidAirLiquidAir Registered Users Posts: 1,751 Major grins
    edited May 5, 2010
    All of my primes look great stopped down a bit, but the 135/2 is the most consistent performer wide open.
    Liquid Air - Gallery - Blog
  • MarkRMarkR Registered Users Posts: 2,099 Major grins
    edited May 5, 2010
    ziggy53 wrote: »
    (I believe what I have would be called an M42 SMC-A 50mm, f1.4)

    Not to be pedantic or anything :D (and I could easily be wrong!) but the smc-a would designate a bayonet lens that can transfer aperture information to the camera. smc-m would be a fully manual bayonet (K-mount). F and FA are autofocus lenses that work on a full frame camera, smc-da are digital only lenses.

    I believe your lens to be a SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50.

    More information on that lens can be found here.

    I don't have the 1.4, but I do have a smc-m f1.7 50mm and it is insanely sharp, and can be had for <$50 if you are patient.
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 24,130 moderator
    edited May 5, 2010
    Mark, great to know. Yes, that's my lens (I actually have 2 copies).

    Thanks,
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • 20DNoob20DNoob Registered Users Posts: 318 Major grins
    edited May 6, 2010
    It would be a toss up between my 300 2.8L IS and my 135L.

    Although I wouldn't mind giving the ol' 500 L and the 200 f/2L a go.
    Christian.

    5D2/1D MkII N/40D and a couple bits of glass.
  • JohnBiggsJohnBiggs Registered Users Posts: 841 Major grins
    edited May 10, 2010
    divamum wrote: »
    The fact that you could put a sizeable downpayment on a car for the same price?! :D

    I suspect that lens will be the next lust object for me - so many people rave about it for portraits - but I'll need a sizeable injection of cash before I can jump to it. Maybe by this time next year.....

    For the record, what is it about it that you like so much? I know I've always felt that the 135 has magic dust in it too since it just has an unquantifiable "sparkle" to the images that it captures. Do you find the 85 is similar?


    I shoot two cameras and two different lenses at weddings. While flipping through lightroom an image will catch my eye. It will stand out more than others. I'll check the meta data and sure enough its the 85mm at 1.2. I don't know how to justify it. I don't think the lens is sharper, it definitely doesn't focus faster, but the images have something.

    I know the lens costs an outrageous amount. But it won't depreciate like a car. To me I'm just renting the lens and I can get my 'deposit' back anytime, minus a relatively small rental fee :)
    Canon Gear: 5D MkII, 30D, 85 1.2 L, 70-200 2.8 IS L, 17-40mm f4 L, 50 1.4, 580EX, 2x 580EXII, Canon 1.4x TC, 300 f4 IS L, 100mm 2.8 Macro, 100-400 IS L
    Other Gear: Olympus E-PL1, Pan 20 1.7, Fuji 3D Camera, Lensbaby 2.0, Tamron 28-75 2.8, Alien Bees lighting, CyberSyncs, Domke, HONL, FlipIt.
    ~ Gear Pictures
  • GoofBcktGoofBckt Registered Users Posts: 481 Major grins
    edited May 12, 2010
    I would have to agree with John on the 85mm at 1.2. There's just something about the results, that's why I broke down and bought one. :)

    JohnBiggs wrote: »
    I shoot two cameras and two different lenses at weddings. While flipping through lightroom an image will catch my eye. It will stand out more than others. I'll check the meta data and sure enough its the 85mm at 1.2. I don't know how to justify it. I don't think the lens is sharper, it definitely doesn't focus faster, but the images have something.

    I know the lens costs an outrageous amount. But it won't depreciate like a car. To me I'm just renting the lens and I can get my 'deposit' back anytime, minus a relatively small rental fee :)
    www.ghostdancephoto.com
  • ShowMeMyPictureShowMeMyPicture Registered Users Posts: 1 Beginner grinner
    edited May 12, 2010
    Hands down it would have to be the 200mm F1.8L. I usually shoot multiple lenses during a session, and some of them always just pop off the screen. 9 times out of 10 they turn out to be taken with the 200mm.
Sign In or Register to comment.