looking for a wide angle in the range of 18 to 20 mm

[Asher Kelman]

What's the situation with the 14-24 Nikon zoom? Can't can one just get a simple Nikon to Eos adapter immediately?

Asher

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

What's the situation with the 14-24 Nikon zoom? Can't can one just get a simple Nikon to Eos adapter immediately?

Hi Asher,

The Nikon 14-24 is a so-called G lens, which apparently has an different type of aperture control.

To date there seems to be only one type of adapter (plus a variation) available for mounting it on a Canon body, and be able to adjust the aperture mechanically. One variation requires part of the adapter+lens to be rotated to change the aperture, the other variation has a lever to contol the aperture mechanism (but it requires to remove or cut the weather sealing). That adapter is also chipped to communicate one focal length (I believe 19mm by default) to the camera and EXIF and provide AF confirmation.

Bart

 

[Michael Fontana]

Asher
nope, supply looks still to be short - Nicolas knows the actual status, while I had to wait > 3 monthes, a years ago, when getting one from the first serie - well the 14-24 is rather heavy, 1 kg. Not really a easy carry-with-lens.

In your situation, I would consider stitching - works fine with landscapes.

 

[Michael Fontana]

The Nikon 14-24 is a so-called G lens, which apparently has an different type of aperture control.
Bart

yep, no exterior but lens-interior f-stop-control only .

 

[Gary Ayala]

I have a Sigma 20 F/1.8. It is very sharp, very fast and can focus down to about an inch or so beyond the front element ... you can do a lot of intereting close-focus stuff with it.

Gary

 

[Asher Kelman]

I have a Sigma 20 F/1.8. It is very sharp, very fast and can focus down to about an inch or so beyond the front element ... you can do a lot of intereting close-focus stuff with it.

Gary

I have the Zork for Pentax 7 lenses and it gives a nice wide view about 22 mm equivalent or so. I also have the Gigapan. I have the Epic and now the Epic 100 which I'm testing. I'm going to try it with my 5DII if it will fit on it and a lens that does not put it over 3lb. In each case I need a tripod. I guess I could get a travel version!

The Sigma 20mm seems great for handheld pictures as I will shoot from the train in Switzerland. (I think there are open air cars, but I have not found any booking for them!)

Yes, Michael, stitching is always a possibility but with the many pixels in the 5DII, I'd love to be able to get a scene in one shot.

What about the Sigma 11 mm and the Canon 14mm Mark II? How good are they for landscapes?

Asher

 

[nicolas claris]

Asher
nope, supply looks still to be short - Nicolas knows the actual status, while I had to wait > 3 monthes, a years ago, when getting one from the first serie - well the 14-24 is rather heavy, 1 kg. Not really a easy carry-with-lens.

In your situation, I would consider stitching - works fine with landscapes.

It arrived today!
Payement was made thru Paypal on June 25… not so long after all…

Mounting the adaptor has been very easy. the level to select aperture is handy.

Now I'll have to test and get used to it before my next yacht interior shoot.
Will post my findings!

Michael, any hint or special recomendation based on your experience?

 

[Michael Fontana]

Bonsoir Nicolas

Congrats, 1 month+ thats been very fast.

I wonder what you' re saying about that heavy baby.

If you care about distortion: from about 17 - 18 mm to 24, there's very little, while from 14 - 17 mm, there's some.

If you want to get rid of it, I calibrated it for Lenscorrector and you can have my results.

Most of the time, I use it in the 16 - 21 mm-range, but for interiors, when going orthognal wider is possible.

Do you still have the Canon 14? Can you make a comparison of the microcontrast?

 

[nicolas claris]

Hey Michael

That's a quick reply!
Less than a month actually! 11 days!

The weight? wel the Canon 14 mm is 22.8 oz./645g ! and anyway, after holding the 500 mm, 1kg isn't much heavy on a tripod!

Of course I do care about distortion… that's very nice of you share with me your lenscorrector results, will save me a lot of time and lens corrector is not really expensive.
I guess there will be no difference between your MkII and the MkIII…

Yes I still have the Canon 14, I'll keep it for exterior shots and AF…

So as soon as I can I'll make some comparisons, just need some time that I don't have for now…

 

[Asher Kelman]

Hey Michael

That's a quick reply!
Less than a month actually! 11 days!

Do they answer emails fast? I might get one for my trip to Europe. However, I though of perhaps getting a D700 to go with it instead of my 5DII and sacrifice pixels but get better focus and weather protection!

For now, sticking wth the 5DI, I'd like to know what you would both suggest for landscapes and city architecture as I was thinking of

I. Inexpensive solutions:

a. The Canon 17-40 very lightweight, some Chromatic aberration and barrel distortion at wide end can be corrected. accepts gel filters (are there Polarizing gel filters?) $699 after rebate at B&H.

b. The 20 mm Sigma: inexpensive. Wider shots by stitching.

II Substantial Expense:

a. The new 17mm Canon T/S which can be used handheld or on a tripod for Bart Van Der wolf worthy care in setting up! Stitching would give really ultrawide panoramic views especially with the integral tripod mount on the lens so it's position does not shift just the rear with the camera. It comes in at $2,499.00 from B&H but is "back-ordered"!

b. The Well regarded Nikon 14-24 mm solution with the focus confirm chip. $1799.95 at B&H.

c. The Canon 14 mm: heavy and I have no idea how good it is. With the extra pixels in the 5DII this is an attractive option for wide shots with no stitching generally needed. $1995 at B&H too.

Asher

I found a fascinating and instructive well illustrated review of the Canon ultrawide options here.

 

[Asher Kelman]

Nicolas,

You have used the ultrawide Sigma zoom and also have DXO. What's your opinion on using DXO as part of your solution? People talk well of the similar spec Tokina and Tamron ultrawides.

Asher

 

[Gary Ayala]

How about the Canon 16-35 F/2.8 - fairly fast, very sharp, not cheap.

Gary

 

[nicolas claris]

Nicolas,

You have used the ultrawide Sigma zoom and also have DXO. What's your opinion on using DXO as part of your solution? People talk well of the similar spec Tokina and Tamron ultrawides.

Asher

# Asher and Gary

for the choice of lens, see my post #20 in this thread.
For some comparison that helped me to go the Nikon 14-24 and the adaptor:
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/nikon_14_24mm_1/nikon14_24mm_a.html

Asher if you're scared by the wheight of the Canon 14 (650 grams) the Nikon is 1kg!
But that is a lens to be mainly used on a tripod (manual focus!)

See also here all the arguments from Michael here…
Stitching is a good solution with less wide angles, but it requires much more time in PP and nowadays, clients aren't willing to pay more for time spent in PP…

The zoom availibility is a REAL plus for archi shots… 14 mm is often to wide if you want to keep architects as friends…

@ Asher
Fast email response from Mark? I don't think one can say that… (please reread my email I sent you yesterday) but I got the adaptor 11 days only after ordering… it is the version 1.5 and they now willing to send Version 2 during August… see here down below the page

 

[nicolas claris]

Tested!

I folks
Today I could spend a couple of hours and have made some comparison shots between the Nikkor 12-24 mm and the Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L II USM and the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM (@ 24mm).

At ƒ 2.8 - ƒ 8 - ƒ11 and ƒ22

Wide open, the Nikkor is a killer!

The Canon Lenses aren't that bad! though the Nikkor is slightly better imo maybe except at 14 mm ƒ11 (that may occur because of user’s fault i.e. camera shaked)
All focus on all lenses have been manual on the same target.
Camera is 1Ds Mark III, set on tripod.

The CA is nearly absent in the Nikkor files…
The Nikkor midtones are a little bit more dense…
I find that corners are much sharper in Nikkor files, but the contray for the center of image (which seems to be sharper on the Canons)…

The TTL does functions correctly with the Nikkor (haven’t tried with a flash…)

The Sigma 12-24 and the Canon 17-40 (I had both) are far behind, lost in the mist of unsharpness.

The first conclusion is that for the price of the Canon 14 plus the 24-70 the Nikkor 14-24 is clearly a winner! (if you accept manual focusing and somewhat unprecise ƒ determination with the lever of the adaptor.)

The second conclusion is that I DO have now a pretty good solution for the 14 to 24 mm focal length…

The third conclusion is that I will keep the Canon 14 mm (with it's AF capacity) for outdoor shots from helicopter and chase boats…

 

[Asher Kelman]

Nicolas,

This is a great set of work. When you have time, (in between all your work), we'd appreciate the pics here but take your time.

I'd love you to be able to get hold of the new Canon 24 mm TS, even though it's so outside your range of 18-20. It does however fit in with your interesting review with some fine lenses. This would really be a great independent look at what may be an even better solution using it also as a manual lens but with no need for an adapter. The references Bart has given to suggest that the 24 mm TS II is way ahead in resolution at f4 ateven at the corners! Could you rent one or get it on loan for a day from your local photography store?

Asher

 

[nicolas claris]

I forgot the fourth conclusion!
I could make my final decision of which lens to buy thanks to OPF and it's members!

A particular bunch of thanks to Michael and Bart!

 

[nicolas claris]

I'd love you to be able to get hold of the new Canon 24 mm TS, even though it's so outside your range of 18-20. It does however fit in with your interesting review with some fine lenses. This would really be a great independent look at what may be an even better solution using it also as a manual lens but with no need for an adapter. The references Bart has given to suggest that the 24 mm TS II is way ahead in resolution at f4 ateven at the corners! Could you rent one or get it on loan for a day from your local photography store?

Asher

Well, I thought about it, but as it is not wide enough for my interior archi shots I would have to stitch.
BUT I also bracket all my interior shots, if I have to add stitching to the PP, I'm affraid I can sell the time spent to my clients… Plus the fact that I, as Michael, like the versatilty of a zoom for narrow interiors…

 

[Asher Kelman]

Well, I thought about it, but as it is not wide enough for my interior archi shots I would have to stitch.
BUT I also bracket all my interior shots, if I have to add stitching to the PP, I'm affraid I can sell the time spent to my clients… Plus the fact that I, as Michael, like the versatilty of a zoom for narrow interiors…

Ha! I know this is too long for you but as you have the other lenses tested, looking at this at some time with the same subjects, even without any shift, would be helpful for the rest of us. You are the surrogate tester for a lot of us! Thanks for sharing and happy shooting with the 14-24 Nikon!

Now will you keep the 17-40 Canon?

Asher

 

[nicolas claris]

Now will you keep the 17-40 Canon?

Was sold a long time ago… when I bought the Sigma 12-24 which I sold when I got te Canon 14…
With no regret…

Un clou chasse l'autre!

 

[nicolas claris]

Ha! I know this is too long for you but as you have the other lenses tested, looking at this at some time with the same subjects, even without any shift, would be helpful for the rest of us. You are the surrogate tester for a lot of us! Thanks for sharing and happy shooting with the 14-24 Nikon!

I don't even have enough time to seriously test the arTec!

 

[Michael Fontana]

The second conclusion is that I DO have now a pretty good solution for the 14 to 24 mm focal length…

The third conclusion is that I will keep the Canon 14 mm (with it's AF capacity) for outdoor shots from helicopter and chase boats…

Nicolas, I took your 2nd conclusion as well - and have been for the first time happy with my lens line - a good feeling!

I understand your third conclusion for the fast shots.
You might notice when testing furter the 14 - 24 that you can use it handheld as well - I didn't expected that so easy, but with that lens you have quite a big hyperfocal distance - focusing - while best beeing best precise isn't that crucial.

 

[nicolas claris]

You might notice when testing furter the 14 - 24 that you can use it handheld as well - I didn't expected that so easy, but with that lens you have quite a big hyperfocal distance - focusing - while best beeing best precise isn't that crucial.

Hmmm! will check that soon in Sardignia!

 

[Michael Fontana]

Hmmm! will check that soon in Sardignia!

La Sardegna, been a few times and I like it, in the inner land, its a bit tougher... but you' ll be im the north? The east coast is beautifull, too the entire island for sure very is nice for sailing.

Dofmaster says: 18 mm and f = 8, will have a DOF from 0.93 M to infinity, when you put focus at the hyperfocal distance, which is 1.37 m in that case.

 

[nicolas claris]

La Sardegna, been a few times and I like it, in the inner land, its a bit tougher... but you' ll be im the north? The east coast is beautifull, too the entire island for sure very is nice for sailing.

Dofmaster says: 18 mm and f = 8, will have a DOF from 0.93 M to infinity, when you put focus at the hyperfocal distance, which is 1.37 m in that case.

Gonna be North East (Porto Cervo) and North La Madalena…
I've been there several time… great place to shoot yachts…

Thanks for the DOF info, will use it !

 

[Michael Fontana]

Gonna be North East (Porto Cervo) and North La Madalena…

Big hug to Silvio ;-)

 

[nicolas claris]

Big hug to Silvio ;-)

mmmmm not sure I'l do that!

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Dofmaster says: 18 mm and f = 8, will have a DOF from 0.93 M to infinity, when you put focus at the hyperfocal distance, which is 1.37 m in that case.

That's correct, but Dofmaster then calculates DOF with a rather large Circle of Confusion (approx 30 micron, which is 4.7 pixels wide).

I'm more critical about DOF sharpness, especially when having to allow for large output. When calculating with a COC of only 1.5x the sensel pitch (=9.6 micron for the 1Ds3), the following generic (no compensation for the pupil magnification factor) hyperfocal distances come out:

Hyperfocal distance (= the closest focus distance that renders infinity reasonably sharp):
14 mm @ f/8 = 2.57 m (DOF = 1.28 m to infinity)
15 mm @ f/8 = 2.94 m (DOF = 1.47 m to infinity)
16 mm @ f/8 = 3.35 m (DOF = 1.67 m to infinity)
18 mm @ f/8 = 4.24 m (DOF = 2.12 m to infinity)
20 mm @ f/8 = 5.23 m (DOF = 2.61 m to infinity)
24 mm @ f/8 = 7.52 m (DOF = 3.76 m to infinity)
or
14 mm @ f/11 = 1.87 m (DOF = 0.95 m to infinity)
15 mm @ f/11 = 2.15 m (DOF = 1.07 m to infinity)
16 mm @ f/11 = 2.44 m (DOF = 1.22 m to infinity)
18 mm @ f/11 = 3.09 m (DOF = 1.54 m to infinity)
20 mm @ f/11 = 3.81 m (DOF = 1.90 m to infinity)
24 mm @ f/11 = 5.48 m (DOF = 2.74 m to infinity)

Calculations were made with Paul van Walree's VWDOF application (Windows only).

A similar exercise can be done for e.g. a far DOF distance of say 7 metres (about the largest line of sight distance in many ship interiors ;-) ). One will then only have to set focus from a cheat sheet on a set distance to get maximum DOF.

Bart

 

[nicolas claris]

Ha! Bart
You break my peace of mind!
I had just downloaded the Dofmaster to my Iphone so I have always the calculator with me and then I read your post! grrrrrr!

Then trying to simulate, another a CoC of 0.015mm I get results not so close to yours, i.e.
18 mm @ƒ/8 = 2.72 m (DOF = 1.36 m to Infinite)
18 mm @ƒ11 = 1.93 m (DOF = 0.96 m to Infinite)

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Ha! Bart
You break my peace of mind!
I had just downloaded the Dofmaster to my Iphone so I have always the calculator with me and then I read your post! grrrrrr!

Then trying to simulate, another a CoC of 0.015mm I get results not so close to yours, i.e.
18 mm @ƒ/8 = 2.72 m (DOF = 1.36 m to Infinite)
18 mm @ƒ11 = 1.93 m (DOF = 0.96 m to Infinite)

Hi Nicolas,

Sorry for that, but (for large output magnification) the truth hurts ;-)

At a COC of 15 micron and a lot of sharpening one can get the desired resolution at the boundaries of the DOF zone. Unfortunately, is will oversharpen the better focused parts so it becomes a lot of work.

I don't have an iPhone, but can't you select another COC criterion that's a bit closer to 0.0096 mm?

You can always, for Hyperfocal use, use the DOFMaster Hyperfocal Chart application (Windows only) and print a chart. As far as I know, it allows to specify the COC more exactly. A small card printed and laminated, will last a long time in battle. Or you can just copy and paste the above info, print and laminate.

I do want to stipulate that I use a very tight COC criterion, where the deterioration becomes visible at the pixel level, but that gives some room for relaxing the requirements and know that it will (slowly) become visible.

Paul van Walree suggests another method of approximating the required COC value in the PDF that comes with the abovementioned VWDOF application (on page 3 and 4).

He suggests:

C = V / (1000 * Q * Mp), where
C=COC,
V=viewing distance of the output/print in centimetres,
Q=Quality factor (1=conventional, 2=demanding, or 3=Critical),
Mp=Print size magnification, i.e. the ratio of the print size versus the sensor array format.

His 'Critical' setting is very close to what I suggest (0.010 versus 0.0096).

Bart

 

[nicolas claris]

LoL!
I know dear Bart what drives you! perfection!
And I tend to look forward the same goal (though being far behind technically) and I enjoy learning from you… that's the way to make progress…
My post was ironical, but you know me enough to know that it was with kind and laughing thoughts!
Unfortunately the Iphone app has some presets but not the availibility to choose/select a precise COC.
Of course, I'll print your findings or even a more complete (more ƒ stops), but that was quite smart to get the Iphone and calculate in front of the client! LoL!