16-35
Canon and 18mm Nikkor compared on Canon EOS1DsMKII
By Stephen Frink
The Nikkor 18mm lens is one of the more popular housed
wide angles to ever be used underwater. Now, with the
ever-expanding popularity of Canon cameras, there is
nostalgia for that one particular lens, especially since
Canon doesn't offer an 18mm prime. However, there is
a way to use the 18mm lens on the Canon. Both Cameraquest
and Novoflex offer adapters to allow the use of Nikon
lenses on Canon. There are also adapters for using Zeiss
lenses on Canon, but this test will restrict the comparison
between the 18mm Nikkor and the 16-35mm Canon zoom.
I tried to standardize the testing to the best of
my ability. I used a Canon EOS1DsMKII for its full frame
capability and tripod mounted the camera and shot at
1/250th at F-4. The setup was intended to illustrate
a common underwater scenario, rocks and coral near the
camera off to the side (the girls holding the exposure
slates) and something in the center that is the point
of primary focus (the front door of my studio).
18mm Nikkor (142KB, 480 x 320)
16-35 Canon at 16mm (134KB, 480 x 320)
16-35 Canon at 18mm (140KB, 480 x 320)
Identical article at wetpixel.com includes PNG (lossless compression) images
My conclusions:
- 18mm is much better than 16-35 in the corners.
- 16-35 is worse in the corners at 16mm than it is
a 18mm. At 18mm on both lenses the differences are
not so extreme, but the 18mm Nikkor is still clearly
the winner.
- Both lenses have light fall off towards the corners,
but the 18mm seems a bit worse than the 16-35. Neither
is particularly acceptable in that regard.
- 16-35 seems sharper in the center. See detail on
the handicapped sign. Focus was on the door, manually
focused with both lenses to the best of my ability.
Type on door isn't too far different with either lens,
but I think I still give a slight nod to 16-35. I
was surprised the center would be sharper, but gratified
to see that the 16-35 glass resolves well at the center.
- 18mm is a good option for use topside if you already
own the lens. It is not good enough to bother buying
one, buying an adapter, and then using manual focus
and manual aperture. Certainly not worth the hassle
underwater I don't think.
- If you use a 16-35, use F-8 and smaller. Don't
blame me when your corners are lousy with the superdome,
PVL35, and 16-35 shooting at 5.6. The lens displays
definite aberrations at wide apertures. Previous tests
I've done suggest that the 17-40 Canon lens is a better
performer in this regard.
- Ideally, the test should have included brackets
at different apertures to determine the depth of field
that will give adequate corner sharpness. In my practical
experience with the 16-35 underwater, that happens
around F-8 and smaller.
I am still hopeful that time will bring a better wide
angle option for the EOS1DsMKII. Meanwhile, we need
to be aware that shooting wide apertures will display
lens aberrations ... whether the lens is being used
topside or underwater.
[
Top ]
|
Seacam U.S.A. - A division of Stephen Frink Photographic
Exclusive North American and Caribbean distributor for Seacam housings.
PO Box 2720, Mile Marker 102.5 Overseas Highway
Key Largo, FL 33037 USA
800-451-3737 · 305-451-3737 |
|
© 2007 Stephen Frink Photographic, site by bits |
|
|