Traditional Culture Encyclopedia - Photography major - Perfect upgrade - Comparative evaluation of Canon's three standard variable lenses

Perfect upgrade - Comparative evaluation of Canon's three standard variable lenses

IT168 Review To be fair, most people who buy Canon EOS 400D will use its adapter. The kit EF-S 18-55mm lens bundled with this machine has 3X optical zoom, covering focal lengths from wide angle to medium focal length, and is a very good entry lens.

Canon EOS 400D Kit

Although the performance of the EF-S 18-55mm is amazing for the price, you will still feel the need to upgrade to something better. A good lens to use with your 400D. You will prefer a lens with a longer focal length range and an anti-shake function. Such a lens can not only resist the vibration of hand-holding, but also improve the focus success rate and clarity in low light.

We could find plenty of these great zoom lenses to suit everyone's tastes and imaging needs, but in this set of tests we're focusing specifically on three of Canon's most popular lenses, and many times, They are all candidates for people to consider when upgrading their 18-55 set.

"From left to right: Canon EF-S 17-55mm F2.8 IS USM, EF 17-40mm F4L USM, EF-S 17-85mm F4-5.6 IS USM

These three lenses are characterized by fast, quiet focusing, better workmanship, and excellent performance when used with cameras. Two lenses have anti-shake functions, and one of them provides a larger zoom. Range, the other performs very well in portraits and low light. The third lens can be used on full-frame bodies, so it can be used normally if you upgrade the camera in the future. This set of tests uses the EOS 400D body.

The picture below shows from left to right the Canon EF-S 17-55mm, EF 17-40mm, EF-S 17-85mm and EF-S 18-55 lenses at the wide-angle end. The lens diameter is 84mm, and its telephoto end focal length is the shortest among the lenses, equivalent to 88mm on a 35mm camera. Since it uses an F2.8 constant aperture design, this lens is also the largest among the three lenses, and weighs 645g. Becoming the heaviest of the three

"From left to right are Canon EF-S 17-55mm, EF 17-40mm, EF-S 17-85mm and EF-S 18-55 wide-angle lenses. End appearance

The sizes of 17-85mm and 18-55mm are 78?92mm and 69?66mm respectively. The weights are 475g and 190g respectively. The size of 17-40mm is 84~97mm, its diameter is the same as 17-55mm, but its length is 14mm shorter. The EF 17-40mm lens is slightly larger than the EF-S 17-85mm, but it also weighs only 475g.

The picture below shows how several lenses look when zoomed to the telephoto end. Both the 17-55mm and 17-85mm are extended by 26mm, but the former uses a single inner lens barrel, while the latter extends Two-section lens barrel. 18-55mm stretches 9mm. The EF 17-40mm uses an internal zoom design, so its physical size does not change. Obviously, the EF-S 17-55mm is still the largest lens in this group of lenses.

"From left to right are the appearance of Canon EF-S 17-55mm, EF 17-40mm, EF-S 17-85mm and EF-S 18-55 lenses at the telephoto end

So the first thing we noticed is that when upgrading from the 18-55mm to any of the other three lenses, the lens size and weight will increase overall. Compared with the very obvious lightweight of the EF-S 18-55, upgrading to. Any other lens would have the same problem. If you are concerned about size, then you can consider the Sigma 18-200mm lens instead. It is only 70mm, the same diameter as the EF-S 18-55mm, only 12mm longer.

"Workmanship and focus

The external design and workmanship of EF-S 17-55mm and EF-S 17-85mm are very similar, although the former is heavier and feels like better. However, the workmanship of both lenses is higher than that of the EF-S 18-55mm lens, but they are also worse than Canon's standard zoom lens, the EF 17-40mm.

In terms of focusing, EF-S 17-55, EF-S 17-85 and EF 17-40 are all equipped with USM ultrasonic motors, which makes their focusing faster than EF-S 18-55. Much quieter, this is the most obvious benefit of the upgrade. Except for the 18-55, the other three lenses are all internal focusing designs, which means that their front lens elements do not rotate when focusing, which is very good news if you use filters.

So, in terms of design and workmanship, when upgrading from EF-S 18-55, you have to endure the larger and heavier features of these lenses, but you can get better workmanship, faster Quieter focusing and comfortable focusing feel.

"Aperture

In terms of light gathering ability, the EF-S 17-55 is the most impressive lens in this group. It has a constant F2 throughout the focal length. 8. Bright and large aperture, which can provide a very small depth of field and can be used well in low light.

In terms of light transmittance, EF-S 17-55 is at 17mmF2.8. It can transmit twice as much light as the EF 17-40mm or EF-S 17-85 at F4, allowing users to use lower ISOs. At the same time, it is also more transparent than the EF-S 18-55mm at 18mmF3.5. The amount of light is almost twice as bright.

This difference becomes more obvious when their focal length is changed to the telephoto end, thanks to the constant large aperture of F2.8, the 17-55mm lens. The amount of light transmitted at F5.6 is 4 times more than that of the 18-55 or 17-85mm.

The EF 17-40mm also has a constant aperture of F4 at the full focal length, so when it is at the wide-angle end. It is slightly slower than the kit lens, but it is faster at the telephoto end. Because the exposure of a constant aperture lens does not change when the focal length is changed, many photographers pay more attention to whether the lens has a constant aperture.

Finally. , the EF 17-40mm has a unique advantage, it is not an EF-S mode, so it can be used on full-frame bodies like the EOS 5D, so if you upgrade to full-frame in the future, you can still use this lens. . And Canon's EF-S lens cannot be used on full-frame bodies.

The main reason for us to buy a new lens is to seek a wider field of view and optional zoom range. The specifications of EF-S 17-55, EF-S 17-85 and EF 17-40 are slightly wider than the kit EF-S 18-55mm, but the telephoto end of EF-S 17-85 is longer, while the EF 17 has a longer focal length. The -40 telephoto end is obviously a little shorter than the kit lens.

We shot the same scene with each lens to compare their actual shooting range. First, we set them to the wide-angle end. The results are as follows. As shown.

"Left: 18-55mm at the 18mm end (equivalent to 29mm); Right: 17-85mm at the 17mm end (equivalent to 27mm)

All pictures are in Opened in Photoshop, the EF-S 17-55 and EF 17-40 both achieved a wider area than the EF-S 18-55mm as we expected, however interestingly the EF-S 17-85 outperformed either of them It's a bit more, and this can be clearly seen even in the sample that we compressed to a very small size.

Then we took sample photos of each lens at the telephoto end to compare their real coverage in the same scene again. The EF-S 17-85 with a longer focal length can shoot farther objects. This is obvious. The longer focal length has greater versatility at the 55mm end than the 18-55. It is also the EF 17-40mm lens. twice.

"Left: 18-55mm at the 55mm end (equivalent to 88mm); Right: 17-85mm at the 85mm end (equivalent to 136mm)

So, in terms of coverage, Only the EF-S 17-85mm offers more significant benefits than the EF-S 18-55mm. The EF-S 17-55mm has almost the same focal length as the kit, while the EF 17-40mm is shorter.

"Image stabilization

Both EF-S 17-55mm and EF-S 17-85mm have IS anti-shake function, which greatly reduces the risk of camera shake. It allows us to shoot in very low light conditions without the need for a tripod or increased sensitivity at the expense of increased image noise.

Both lenses claim to be able to lower the safety shutter by 3 stops, which means we can shoot at a shutter speed 8 times slower than before. For example, at a certain focal length, if you are confident that the minimum shutter speed you can shoot clearly handheld is 1/60 second, 3 stops of compensation allows you to shoot in 1/8 second (or actually more, such as 1/7.5 second). Can take clear pictures.

Of course, like all other anti-shake systems, the effectiveness of IS varies according to different photographers and special shooting conditions, but its benefits are obvious. Therefore, anti-shake is a very important reason for us to upgrade from the EF-S 18-55mm kit.

Left: 17-55mm at the 17mm end (equivalent to 27mm); Right: 17-40mm at the 17mm end (equivalent to 27mm)

Left: 17-55mm at the 55mm end (equivalent to 27mm) Equivalent to 88mm); Right: 17-40mm at the 40mm end (equivalent to 64mm)

In order to compare the performance of the four lenses in the same outdoor scene, we took this set of comparison pictures. All lenses were shot at 25mm, F8. Each lens is mounted on the EOS 400D body, with a sensitivity of ISO 100 and a maximum JPEG. All pictures were taken within a short period of time.

"Original image

From the pictures taken, we intercepted the upper left corner, center and lower right corner of the 100% original image taken by each lens, see Below. The shooting values ??are F8, 1/250 seconds, ISO 100.

"First group:

Left: 18-55mm; Right: 17-85mm

"Group 2:

Left: 18-55mm; Right: 17-85mm

Left: 17-55mm; Right: 17-40mm

"The third group:

"

Left: 18-55mm; Right: 17-85mm

At first glance, the screenshots of the four lenses seem to be very similar, but if we look closer, we will find that Lots of different places. In the first set of screenshots in the upper left corner, the EF-S 17-55mm is obviously softer than the other lenses, but this is only reflected in the corners. As long as you look slightly toward the center, its performance is very sharp.

What’s interesting is that in the third group of screenshots in the lower right corner, the EF-S 17-85mm lens performs softer than the other three lenses, and the EF-S 17-55mm is no better. How many. At the same time, EF-S 17-85mm also showed more obvious dispersion in other areas that we did not display.

In the middle group of central screenshots, all lenses have similar performance in terms of details, and the contrast of EF-S 17-55mm and EF 17-40mm seems to be a little higher. Obviously, the EF 17-40mm performed very well in all three sets of comparison pictures. The vignetting of this lens is also more obvious, but can you expect that there will be no difference when using a lens for full-frame bodies on APS-C? In addition, we have also seen that the performance of the kit EF-S 18-55mm is indeed admirable. This is just their performance at F8. If you want to know how they perform under other conditions and other aspects, please continue to read the comments below.

Left: 17-55mm; right: 17-40mm

In order to compare these four lenses with For resolution when paired with 400D, we shot a digital camera resolution benchmark. All lenses use 35mm focal length, aperture F8, 400D set to aperture priority, maximum JPEG, standard picture style, ISO 100.

"Original image

The following screenshots are taken from the 100% original image, saved as high-quality JPEG in Photoshop CS2, and now displayed at 100% size. Each number represents 100Lpph, So 20 means 2000Lpph.

"Horizontal resolution:

"18-55mm, 2000lpph

"17-85mm, 2150lpph

The cheap kit EF-S 18-55mm lens has the lowest resolution of the four with a horizontal resolution of 2000Lpph and a vertical resolution of 2100Lpph, which is not surprising. Interestingly, it is closely followed by the most expensive one, the latest EF-S 17-55 F2.8 lens, which has a horizontal resolution of only 2050Lpph and a vertical resolution of 2100Lpph.

Left: 17-55mm, 2050lpph; Right: 17-40mm, 2150lpph

"Vertical resolution:

"18-55mm, 2100lpph

"17-85mm, 2150lpph

"17-55mm, 2100lpph

"17-40mm, 2150lpph

The best resolution is EF -S 17-85 and EF 17-40, their horizontal and vertical resolutions are 2150lpph. It is really impressive that the 17-85mm can achieve such performance, because the 17-40mm is an "L" class, and it is for all-round use. For a lens with a frame design, this performance is not surprising.

We noticed that interestingly, in the test, the lens with higher resolution also showed higher contrast and sharpness.

The sharpness and contrast of the 17-55mm and especially the 18-55mm are lower, and we reiterate that several lenses were tested in the same scene, with the same light source and camera settings.

In order to compare the edge sharpness of these four lenses when paired with the 400D, we shot a digital camera resolution benchmark.

"Original picture

All lenses were shot using the wide-angle end and the telephoto end. The 400D was set to aperture priority, maximum JPEG, and standard picture style. The following screenshots are taken from 100 %The lower left corner of the original image was captured, saved as a high-quality JPEG in Photoshop CS2, and now displayed at 100% size.

"Wide-angle end:

Zoom to the wide-angle end of each lens. , when the aperture is fully opened, the EF-S 18-55mm once again has the worst edge sharpness among the four. After closing the aperture, its performance improves to a more satisfactory state. The EF-S 17-85mm also appears soft at the wide-angle end when the aperture is fully opened, and there are obvious purple fringing, optical distortion and vignetting. When the EF-S 17-55mm is fully opened at the wide-angle end, there is some vignetting, but you must know that it is at a large aperture such as F2.8. If you close the aperture to F4, this phenomenon no longer exists, and Lens performance is sharper and edges are well improved. The EF 17-40mm also performs very well.

F16

"Telephoto end:

When zoomed to their telephoto end, the edge performance of the four lenses is almost the same. But the EF-S The 18-55mm is still significantly softer than the other lenses. There is almost no difference between the EF-S 17-55mm and the EF-S 17-85mm, but the former is more impressive because it is shot at F2.8. Disappointingly, the EF 17-40mm is slightly softer at the edges at 40mm F4. It would perform better on a full-frame camera. In other tests, the EF 17-40mm performs better at the telephoto end.

F16

"Purple fringing

In order to compare the purple fringing of these four lenses when paired with the 400D, we took a high-contrast index plate. All All lenses were shot at full aperture, using the wide-angle end and telephoto end. The 400D was set to aperture priority, maximum JPEG, and standard picture style.

"Original image

The following screenshots are taken from the upper left corner of the 100% original image, saved as high-quality JPEG in Photoshop CS2, and now displayed at 100% size.

The performance of the four lenses is very similar. The dispersion is more obvious at the wide-angle end, while the purple fringing is almost invisible at the telephoto end.

" Close-up capabilities

In order to compare the close-up capabilities of these four lenses, we shot the target at the closest focal length and distance possible for each lens, and the interval between the black lines was 5mm.

Judging from the shooting results, no lens can be used for macro photography. The one with the strongest close-up capability is the cheap kit lens EF-S 18-55mm, which covers a maximum area of ??33 to 22mm. Next is the EF 17-40mm, then the EF-S 17-85mm, and finally the EF-S 17-55mm. Interestingly, the kit lens covers 4 times less area than the EF-S 17-55mm at the closest focusing distance.

"Distortion

In order to compare the distortion of these four lenses at the wide-angle end, we shot a standard board composed of a grid. All lenses used the wide-angle end and the aperture was F8. The images were analyzed by Imatest software to quantify their distortion.

The lens with the lowest optical distortion at full aperture at wide angle is the EF 17-40mm, which is not surprising at all since it is for full frame. Designed specifically for the body. The EF-S 17-55mm scored about the same as the EF 17-40mm, which is impressive, followed closely by the EF-S 18-55mm kit, and worst of all, the EF-S. S 17-85mm, which shows quite obvious optical distortion at the wide-angle end.

In order to test the distortion at their telephoto range, we still shot this grid target, and each lens was set to them. At the telephoto end, the aperture value is F8, and the shooting results were analyzed by Imatest. The distortion is still quantified in percentage.

The performance of the EF 17-40mm really lived up to expectations, and it once again became the best distortion control among the four. A good one. What's interesting is that the cheap lens's distortion control jumped to second place, and its distortion at the telephoto end is lower than the other two EF-S lenses.

"Light loss at the corners

In order to test the four-corner light loss phenomenon of the four lenses, we photographed a white plate illuminated evenly by light. Each lens was shot using the wide-angle end, with the aperture set to its maximum. The shooting results are processed by Imatest software. The processing results are expressed as the percentage of the average light transmission at the edge of the screen to the original light amount. The higher the percentage, the better.

Similar to the previous distortion results, EF 17-40mm has the best performance in terms of loss of light in the four corners. The next best performer was the EF-S 18-55mm, followed closely by the EF-S 17-85mm and EF-S 17-55mm. The light loss of EF-S 17-55mm is almost more than half of the original corners. To be fair, the EF-S 17-55mm has the advantage of providing a large aperture of F2.8 at the full focal length, but if the loss of light in the four corners bothers you, the EF-S 18-55mm and EF-S 17- 85mm avoids this problem very well at the wide-angle end.

Using the same method, we tested the loss of light at the four corners of the four lenses at the telephoto end. Final testing showed that our cheapest kit lens, the EF-S 18-55mm, performed best, although the EF-S 17-40mm was only slightly behind it. But because the 17-40 is an L-rated lens, Therefore, the performance of 18-55 can be said to be a complete victory. The same as the test results at the wide-angle end above, the third place is still EF-S 17-85mm, and the last place is still EF-S 17-55mm. However, we have to consider again the large aperture of F2.8 of this last lens, and no matter what, the pictures taken by these lenses have obvious vignetting.

"EF-S 17-85mm F4-5.6 IS USM

The most popular upgrade lens for Canon 400D users is undoubtedly the EF-S 17-85mm. This lens has more advantages than the kit lens It has a longer and more practical zoom range, as well as IS anti-shake function and fast and quiet USM focusing motor. From an optical performance point of view, it also has higher resolution and contrast than the kit lens, but its vignetting and distortion are also worse. Quite serious. When shooting blue skies, light loss in the four corners is particularly noticeable, which is also the biggest drawback of this lens, especially considering its zoom ratio. We also think its price is a bit high.

"Canon EF-S 17-85mm F4-5.6 IS USM

Overall, EF-S 17-85mm is still the best choice for Canon 400D upgrade lens. The biggest advantage is that it is EF-S 18-55mm has a larger zoom ratio, effective IS anti-shake, higher image quality performance and focusing capabilities.

Advantages:

1. Flexible 5X optical zoom

2. Effective IS anti-shake

3. Fast and quiet USM Ultrasonic motor focusing

4. Convenient and easy-to-use internal focusing design

Disadvantages:

1. Obvious vignetting and low edge imaging sharpness

2. The price is slightly expensive compared to its specifications

3. No lens hood is provided

4. Only suitable for APS-C format bodies

Total score: 79%

"EF-S 17-55mm F2.8 IS USM

Canon EE-S 17-55mm is for those who want to do portraits and low-light environments The focal length range of the lens is very attractive, but the constant large aperture of F2.8 can let through more light, allowing users to work in darker environments, while it can also Offers the kind of tight depth of field people want. Upgrading from a kit lens gives you effective IS stabilization and fast and quiet USM focusing.

"The Canon EF-S 17-55mm F2.8. IS USM

In terms of imaging performance, although it is not as good as EF-S 17-85 and EF 17-40, its resolution is still slightly better than that of kit lenses. Corner loss is the worst of the four lenses, although this is not surprising considering its large F2.8 aperture. This lens has very low distortion even at wide open aperture, and the edge sharpness is impressive.

In short, the EF-S 17-55 is a professional lens that is fully capable of daily photography. Those who do do portrait and low-light photography work will defend its higher price. As long as you are passionate about either type of photography, the EF-S 17-55mm is an excellent choice. But for a price that most people can afford, the EF-S 17-85mm is still a more realistic choice.

Advantages:

1. Constant bright F2.8 aperture throughout the entire focal length

2. Effective IS anti-shake

3 , fast and quiet USM ultrasonic motor focusing

4. Very practical in dark light

Disadvantages:

1. Relatively expensive

2. Although the price is L-level, the workmanship does not meet the standards of L-level lenses

3. The focal length range is shorter than the cheaper 17-85mm

4. No hood included

Total score: 77%

"EF 17-40 F4L USM

The EF 17-40 is a unique choice for 400D users because It is the only lens designed for full-frame bodies. It is also the lens with the best mechanical feel and workmanship among this group of test lenses. Its maximum aperture is constant F4. It is a first-class lens, but Canon provides it with a lens hood and a lens bag? This is the trouble with other EF-S lenses, and users have to match them separately.

"Canon EF 17- 40 F4L USM

In terms of optical performance, it has the characteristics of high resolution, sharp imaging and high contrast when paired with 400D and EF-S 17-85. Because it is a lens suitable for full-frame bodies, on the 400D with a smaller sensor, it is no surprise that this lens has good edge sharpness, smaller optical distortion and four-corner light loss.

So upgrading to EF 17-40mm will give you better optical performance, fast and quiet USM internal focusing, constant F4 maximum aperture, L-level workmanship, and in the future you will upgrade to It can still be used in full frame. The disadvantage is that the zoom range of this head is obviously shorter than that of the kit head, and it does not have IS anti-shake, but for a lens with a short focal length, anti-shake is not particularly important.

The EF 17-40 performs as an L lens should, but its shorter focal length means that it will be insufficient when upgrading from the 18-55 kit lens. Therefore, we only recommend this lens to those 400D users who have at least one other lens and very much hope to upgrade to a full-frame body in the future. Otherwise, several other EF-S lenses will be more flexible upgrade options.

Advantages:

1. Good workmanship and optical quality of Canon L-class lenses

2. Constant F4 aperture throughout the entire focal length

3. Fast and quiet USM ultrasonic motor focusing

4. Can also be used normally on full-frame bodies

Disadvantages:

1. Compared with kit lenses The focal length range is shorter

2. There is no IS anti-shake

3. If you don’t consider upgrading to a full-frame body in the future, using it is a bit luxurious

Overall score: 77%

Previous article:Excellent female photographer
Next article:How about Liang Jing Mi Si Mi Catering Management (Tianjin) Co., Ltd.?