Canon lens review site

[Maritimer1]

Maybe this has been posted before, but if not http://www.the-digital-picture.com/C...roduction.aspx has a lot of info about Canon lens (and other brands of lenses and cameras). Scroll down to the bottom of the page for a list reviews etc.

The home page is: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/

Myra

[Colin Southern]

If you're after user reviews then this is hard to beat ...

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/

[Maritimer1]

Thanks, Colin. I had a good read through some forums and articles. It's now in my Favourite's bar.

Myra

[arith]

I like this one most;

http://www.photozone.de/

But also this one;

http://www.photodo.com/

[arith]

Here is a fantastic site; contrary to what I thought that a lens gets sharper the smaller the aperture up to the diffraction limit, I was in fact wrong and there is a maximum sharpness for the equipment where previously it all depended on the film and lens, now there is the 'Nyquist frequency' which corresponds to a theoretical limit of sharpness of the camera. Mine is 1335 LW/PH but I don't know how that is worked out.
My nifty fifty exceeds theoretical limits over the full range at f5.6 would you believe and I was looking for a good anti flare lens and I've already got it.
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/..._n15/page3.asp

[rick55]

Hi, Steve;

The Nyquist limit has to do with sampling a waveform. MTF is a transfer function, a curve in the frequency domain. With a theoretical ideal lens perfectly transmitting light, the camera's sensor will reach a limit. The Nyquist limit is the highest resolving frequency where you can be sure the camera in question is properly sampling the wafeform, and isn't losing information. So as it says in the explanation, it "indicates the maximum theoretical resolution of the camera body used for testing. Whenever the measured numbers exceed this value, this simply indicates that the lens out-resolves the sensor at this point - the calculated MTF values themselves become meaningless."

If your camera has the same sensor as the camera body they use in the test, then you can say that you don't care about MTF values in excess of that Nyquist limit. Here's a piece of an article about sampling by Norman Koren, touching on Nyquist limit.

Cheers,
Rick

[arith]

That's all clever stuff. I know the theoretical limit since somebody already went to the trouble and found it to be 1335 LW/PH and being out resolved looks good to me. Cheers for the link.

This is one of the places I found the Nyquist limit already worked out for my camera.
http://www.imatest.com/docs/sharpness.html

[nycandre]

I also like to check Bob Atkins site - he has been specializing in Canon gear for a decade or so and has good advice regarding different price ranges when choosing a lens. And he does answer emails.

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/reviews/

[Bluessucker]

Hi guys!
I am kind of newbie in photography as I bought my DSLR just one year ago. I own Nikon D5000 and currently are looking for a good tele photo lens. After I did research on different sites (incl. Ken Rockwell,Bob Atkins,All Test Reviews etc.) I stopped on Canon EF 70-200mm F4.0 L IS USM. This one seems to be indeed good one from all aspects - price,performance,weight. BUT- the question is: does this 'marriage' between Canon lens and Nikon camera would be successful? Does anyone have experience by using Canon lenses on Nikon cameras? I would be really glad to get reliable and professional adviser!
Thanks a lot in advance!

[Donald]

BUT- the question is: does this 'marriage' between Canon lens and Nikon camera would be successful?

Ivar
Unless there's something that nobody's told me about then they're never destined to find happiness together. To pursue the marriage analogy further, they can't - er, um - conjoin! They don't fit. If you look at some of the photo sales sites or lens review sites, they talk about 'Canon fit' or 'Nikon 'fit'. So, even the 3rd party manufacturers (e.g. Tokina, Tamron, Sigma), have to make different versions of the same lens to suit the fitting/locking mechanism for the respective camera makes.

I'm sure the technically-minded folks on here will correct me if I'm wrong and/or give you much better explanations. The technical 'bits' are not my strength. I just push the button and something comes up on the screen!

All of which is a great pity, because you started looking at one of the best lenses around. I've got one and love it.

[Colin Southern]

the question is: does this 'marriage' between Canon lens and Nikon camera would be successful?

I wish all questions were this easy to answer.

No - very bad idea. Don't do it. Don't even consider it. Not even debatable. Not even close.

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Ivar,

I agree with Colin and Donald; even if you found a mechanical mount adaptor, the electronics wouldn't work, so there'd be no functional light metering or Auto-Focus
Probably wouldn't focus to infinity either (because very likely it'll be further from sensor than intended, like using extension tubes).

You need to stick to Nikon lenses, or "Nikon mount" third party lenses, e.g. Tokina, Tamron, Sigma - as Donald suggests.

Cheers,

[Colin Southern]

I think it's a bit like buying a brand new Lamborgini and then trying to fit a Ferrari engine into it. There seems to be a popular misconception that one major brand of camera or lens is better than the other - they're not. In practical terms there's no difference what so ever.