• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Canon 5D Mark III

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I'd always check MTF Charts... Canon did one thing right: Marketing. They made their "Special lenses" with a red ring around it, making people ask "why does that lens have a red ring?" To which the answer "It's top quality".

50 f/1.2 AF i hear is slow too... But I guess get what you need, not what people tell you to get!
 
50mm f/1.2 is not sharp and it has focusing issues by design.

However, it provides damn unique aesthetics. It's one of my favorite Canon lenses for that matters and I'm glad Canon came up with that lens in this era where people grade lenses based on high frequency sharpness.

 
finbarqs said:
I'd always check MTF Charts... Canon did one thing right: Marketing. They made their "Special lenses" with a red ring around it, making people ask "why does that lens have a red ring?" To which the answer "It's top quality".

50 f/1.2 AF i hear is slow too... But I guess get what you need, not what people tell you to get!
Click to expand...

f/1.2 is obviously a specialty lens. This would be like complaining that the focus speed is slow on a tilt-shift lens IMO.

TBF, most of Canon's L lenses are ridiculously good. The 24-70, the 70-200's, all their long primes, and their wide primes are absolutely stellar.
 
finbarqs said:
I'd always check MTF Charts... Canon did one thing right: Marketing. They made their "Special lenses" with a red ring around it, making people ask "why does that lens have a red ring?" To which the answer "It's top quality".

50 f/1.2 AF i hear is slow too... But I guess get what you need, not what people tell you to get!
Click to expand...

50 f/1.2L slow?? what are you comparing it to? mine certainly had focus issues but it was anything but slow.
 
HugeVeryCat said:
Oh gee! Thanks Random that's pretty interesting! 🙂

I presume then that you'd get a similar effect with certain canon lenses on a full-frame, is that right? Wondering if there's a compatability list of lenses for the 5D. I'll see what google can find.
Click to expand...

Only crop lenses will that issues (ie, the EF-S line).

And all canon EF lenses are compatible with 5d m2/m3. I think the folks here recommend L lenses just cuz they are supposed to be high quality... although how high a quality you need is subjective. i know i'm content with the 50mm f/1.8 that costs a 100 and keep ups with the L glass in sharpness.
 
TanisHalfElven said:
the 50mm f/1.8 that costs a 100 and keep ups with the L glass in sharpness.
Click to expand...


Not really.

mtf50.gif


50L:
mtf.png
 
Ahh fair enough -- wasn't even paying attention to what cam they used. That aside, I still wouldn't give $100 for the 50mm f/1.8 mkII again. Poorly built lens with hideous out-of-focus blur.
 
my 17-40L sucks. It's soft. Good contrast, but not very sharp. But in this case, I want sharpness! my 24-70 out resolves that lens 10 fold!

now I want the zeiss 21mm Distagon T!
 
angry hampster said:
Ahh fair enough -- wasn't even paying attention to what cam they used. That aside, I still wouldn't give $100 for the 50mm f/1.8 mkII again. Poorly built lens with hideous out-of-focus blur.
Click to expand...


What do you expect for $100? Mine was fine and well worth the money, shot wide open the bokeh was OK. it seemed to focus OK (7D, Ma'd). I do prefer the sigma 1.4 though.

Truth is by f4 there isnt many sharper lenses , and not everyone cares for/needs bokeh...
 
The bokeh never bothers me in the 50mm. There's a lot of a lot of other things the shooter can mess up before I begin to even worry about the bokeh.
 
50/1.8 is ultimately sharper than the 50L. The 50L is compromised for its fast aperture.

Sharpness isnt always the only metric though!
 
TanisHalfElven said:
Well i was thinking more in terms of comparing 50mm 1.8 to L zooms. Its extreamly sharp, but yeah L primes will be sharper. Otherwise they aren't gonna fetch the 10x price

my point was, you can get extreamly good quality using a cheap lens.
Click to expand...
mtf.png


mtf.png
 
Last edited:
I had a dream about this camera. I dreamt it had 40MP, 8 FPS, and cost $5700 with an L lens.

In my dream, it was called the Canon 6D X and I think they had a non X version too.

We'll see how close my dream was, although likely not very close.
 
The 50,, f/1.2 is indeed tricky to use. Anything below f/4 starts having a very shallow DOF - at f/1.2, it is about 1/8th of an inch. But, slow? No. Here's a sample of a blossoming barrel cactus with that lens.
barrel.jpg
 
JMapleton said:
I had a dream about this camera. I dreamt it had 40MP, 8 FPS, and cost $5700 with an L lens.

In my dream, it was called the Canon 6D X and I think they had a non X version too.

We'll see how close my dream was, although likely not very close.
Click to expand...

would rather it be 40MP if it was using a Foveon FF sensor (13.3MP)... 40 MP bayer... at that pixel density we'll be diffraction limited @ f/4 using our standard wide angles!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top