ED vs LD
Jun 27, 2012 21:29:46 #
Racmanaz
Loc: Sunny Tucson!
Can anyone please explain to what what are the differences between a "extra low dispersion" and "low dispersion" lenses and which one should I be looking for? I looked online but did not understand which is better to have.
Jun 27, 2012 22:04:58 #
Racmanaz wrote:
Can anyone please explain to what what are the differences between a "extra low dispersion" and "low dispersion" lenses and which one should I be looking for? I looked online but did not understand which is better to have.
They're both intended to reduce chromatic aberration - color fringing. ED is the term Nikon uses, but from what I have read, it's hard to tell if extra or ultra would be better than simple "low dispersion." Is there a standard to be met to use either term? Probably not.
If I were looking to buy a lens, I would look for low dispersion of some kind, but I'm not one to split hairs.
Jun 28, 2012 00:49:18 #
Racmanaz wrote:
Can anyone please explain to what what are the differences between a "extra low dispersion" and "low dispersion" lenses and which one should I be looking for? I looked online but did not understand which is better to have.
Racmanaz, If they are coming from the same manufacturer then the EL should be better. You will have to research the lenses. They might also be referring to the same glass as one may be moulded to shape and the other ground from the same material. The ground is better and more expensive, But that is a possible suggestion as to what to look for without knowing anything about the lenses. Not one of the big two, Canon or Nikon.
Jun 28, 2012 01:34:07 #
Racmanaz
Loc: Sunny Tucson!
SharpShooter wrote:
quote=Racmanaz Can anyone please explain to what ... (show quote)
So you believe that Nikon and Canon manufacture higher quality lenses than lets say....Sigma and Tamron?
Jun 28, 2012 03:22:18 #
Racmanaz wrote:
quote=SharpShooter quote=Racmanaz Can anyone ple... (show quote)
Racmanaz, I shoot Canon and am only saying that they don't use comfusing desiganations. An L lens is better than a non L. And a new L mkll is better than a standard L. Pretty straight forward. As for Nikon I just made the assumtion their nomenclature is just as straight forward. In digital times I have only used Canon lenses and would never pass a judgement on another brand that I have personally not used. I was only suggesting to you a possible nomenclature difference between LD and ELD. The brand you are looking at may have the exact same glass that a Canon L has vs. the new mkll. As long as QC is constant then one only needs to weigh the difference between IQ and cost, in any brand. You will get what you can tolorate paying for. Not knocking any brands(except maybe Nikon!).
Jun 28, 2012 11:32:47 #
Keep in mind that Flourite is the acknowledged best lens material - and only Canon uses it !
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.