mcveed Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)

At this point DXO Mark has tested 96 Nikon lenses and 92 Canon lenses. Not very one sided. The main factor is that they have to test Nikon lenses on Nikon cameras, so it is the combination of the two that determine the score. On the camera sensor ratings the Nikon D810, in first place, scores 97. After a number of Nikons, Sonys, etc the highest rated Canon, the 1Dx, comes in 35th place with a score of 82. So Canon lenses may well be sharper than Nikon lenses but it doesn't matter because they have to be tested on Canon bodies.

JPL

There is a simple explanation for this. Canon lenses are maybe just as good as some other lenses on page 1 or better. But Canon has no camera body to harvest the sharpness from the lenses. The 5Dm3 is the full frame Canon body with the highest resolution and it is only about 22 mpx if I am correct. That is just not in the same league as Nikon and Sony and limits the lens resolution/sharpness to the same 22 mpx. On the other hand Nikon and Sony has cameras with 36 mpx sensors and those body limit the resolution of lenses that fit them to 36 mpx. But if Canon will deliver new 50 mpx cameras as promised their lenses can also be tested up to 50 mpx resolution and then Canon can show for the first time if they really have some good glass or not.

Another thing worth mentioning here is that this also proves that it is a nonsense that lenses are more important than cameras. There is no need to buy super quality big buck lenses if no camera is available to harvest the lens resolution because you do not get a sharper image than the sensor can draw. And this has been the case with Canon. But soon we may see if the bucks invested in good Canon glass was well spent or not when they start delivering Camera bodies that fit the quality glass.

chazz4623 Loc: Prairieville, La

In my very 'newbie' humble opinion, this statement covers things best. Thanks Gene51

chazz4623 Loc: Prairieville, La

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :wink:

chazz4623 Loc: Prairieville, La

I drove a semi-truck OTR for several years. Most are equipped with CB radios. Drivers use these to inform other drivers about road hazards, accidents, and many, many other important subjects. Lots of driving happens at night, and the most difficult task is staying alert. That when the radio comes into it's own. The conversations are not necessarilly civil or mild. Protected by anonymity, drivers will insult each other in any way you can think of. Are they being purposefully assinine? NO!! The result is increased alertness, awareness, and watchfulness. One wouldn't have observed this casually, but I've seen it keep lots of guys from getting sleepy for many many miles. Do these guys find each other and fight at the end of their runs? NO? All seem to understand the purpose of all this chatter, MUCH LIKE THE DEBATES HERE ON UHH. I think it generates many good comments and observations that have few if any other places to be placed. Just my opinion based on my observations of people. And its fun too. lol

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." Henri Cartier-Bresson

Seriously it is overrated. There is far more to photography than sharpness.

Also, most of the time, the best zoom lens is a good prime lens and your feet.

asiafish Loc: Bakersfield, CA

Yes yes yes! One of my favorite images was shot through a dirty window, using an ancient (1937) lens. The image is not sharp, and is all the better for it.

As for feet, USE THEM! You can never play with interesting perspective, angle, and composition by twisting a ring. Pick a focal length you like (I tend to live at 35mm and 50mm) and then MOVE YOUR ASS! You pictures will be better for it.

davidrb Loc: Half way there on the 45th Parallel

I remember when the CB craze was at it's peak, everybody had at least one. I once drove a trip route that covered over 500 miles across interstate highways. It took approximately 8 hrs. and the radios never stopped chattering about anything and everything. Arguments were started and stopped regularly. One particular disagreement escalated into full blown name calling! This went on for a while until one blow-hard took a break from his tirade only to be informed that his opponent had exited miles earlier. When blow-hard exited and re-entered the opposite direction, we were told that he and the other driver were age-old buddies who argued over anything, even the time of day. It was their way of keeping each other off the shoulders and away from the rear end of other rigs. The more they argued the more attentive they remained behind the wheel. They had their own system and they knew how to work it. I think their philosophy works in other areas also.

MW

If DXO had rated a bunch of Canon lenses over Nikons you would have seen some Nikonista claiming DXO was just Canon affiliate.

treadwl Loc: South Florida

The Nikon 24-70mm 2.8 is very, very good!
I've shot it for several years and love it.

For a longer lens the Nikon 70-200mm 2.8 is excellent.

They are both zooms, are expensive, heavy, and built like tanks. They are all metal (except for the glass)

Check them out, they have great reputations.

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

Its not about wall space or print size. Its the ability to crop, with more DR and less noise, which extends the FL of all your lenses.

If you don't use the ability to do large crops, don't waste your money on a 36 MP camera.

There are plenty of lower MP cameras that will serve you just as well at a fraction of the cost.

stan weisleder

I want to thank all of you for responding to my questions, including the guy who got annoyed at me because I failed to say that my question was intended for full frame. Based on all of your responses I am opting for the 24-70 2.8 as my standard lens. I am still considering what to get as my wide angle and extra length zoom.

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

It would be foolish to argue that the 300mm f/2.8 VRII and the 28-300 f/3.5-5.6 are capable of equal sharpness.

Also it is incorrect to say that the latter lens is not sharp. I have both lenses and like them equally well on my D800E and D810.

If you are pixel peeping on a ultra high res monitor the difference is notable. If you are posting images on social networks, internet forums or printing average size prints most people would not notice the difference.

So if you want the sharpest lens, get an Otus.

Maybe your images will be sharper, but then there are so many factors that determine sharpness, maybe it won't.

Grammieb1 Loc: New Orleans

Canon 135 f2, 200 f2, 300f 2.8 & 400 2.8 are some of the sharpest around. If you want zoom lenses, Canon 24-70 f 2.8 & 70-200 2.8is are stellar. DXO tends to judge lenses by the camera that they were shot with & aren't always totally accurate. There are other sites that test lenses & do a good job. Photozone & a few others do a good job. Bab

asiafish Loc: Bakersfield, CA

No real difference between Canon and Nikon. Both outstanding. Zeiss and Leica a little better, but probably not enough to worry about. Sigma and Tamron probably a little worse (with the possible exception of the Sigma ART), but again not enough to worry about.