Nitnaros Posted May 16, 2007 Share #1 Posted May 16, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hello People, I am looking for a high-quality wide-angle zoom to put on a Canon 5D (maybe sometimes a 1D-II also) for shooting interiors (tripod, strobe lighting etc.). I does not need to go terribly wide. Does the Leica 21-35 Vario zoom fit on a Canon 5D as is? No problems with mirror? Can it also go on a 1D-II? Alternatives? Since a lot of people here shoot Leica and Canon (so do I), related question: Anybody has experience with the updated Canon 16-35mm/f2.8? The older version had a reputation for only mediocre sharpness and quite a lot of distortation. The one other option would be the Sigma 12-24mm, but sharpness seems not to be great, and I don't need most of its wide-angle reach. Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 16, 2007 Posted May 16, 2007 Hi Nitnaros, Take a look here Leica 21-35mm on Canon 5D?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
reven Posted May 16, 2007 Share #2 Posted May 16, 2007 Yes really interesting question, I would be interested in the 21-35 for my 1DsMk2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
psquared Posted May 16, 2007 Share #3 Posted May 16, 2007 The 21-35 should work on a 5D or 1DsII if you take off the plastic rear shroud. I believe there are 3 small screws that hold it into place. On a 1DII, it should work without modification. I've heard that Canon 16-35 L II is better than the first version in terms of resolution across the frame, but I don't have any direct experience with it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbstitt Posted May 17, 2007 Share #4 Posted May 17, 2007 I had the 21 to 35 and used it on my 5D as well as R8+DMR. I have since sold the DMR and the 21 to 35 but Peter is right. You have to take off the back shield (3 screws) and of course have the adapter. It is good on the 5D but of course very manual and stop down metering, which can be an issue doing interiors. Frankly, I now have a 17-40L and find this a fantastic lens for the 5D (I know, this is not a Canon forum) and for interiors. Tack sharp, but with the Canon color instead of Leica Look. About the only reasons I can think of to use the 21-35 ont the 5D are 1) you already have one 2) you want the Leica Look. Otherwise go for the 17 to 40L. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cindy Flood Posted May 17, 2007 Share #5 Posted May 17, 2007 I did interior shooting with my 5D and 17-40L. I also had a 24 TSE that I used some. The 24 TSE has a lot of sample variation and some copies are not as sharp as others. The 5D and 17-40L gave me very good results. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
regista Posted January 6, 2009 Share #6 Posted January 6, 2009 FYI... even after removing the shroud, the Leica R 21-35mm lens still clips the mirror on the return trip down when the lens is set to its widest 21mm setting (goes up, but not down). As a result, I always shoot short of its widest setting, as I don't wish to shave the mirror while the camera is still in-warranty. BTW... this is on a Canon 5D MKII. Cheers! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted January 6, 2009 Share #7 Posted January 6, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'll say it again........Leica should offer a selection of R lenses in Canon and Nikon mounts, coupled to metering (but MF of course). I've been shot down in the past for suggesting this - it will damage the R sales, no one will buy them, it's not possible......... It could bring them additional income whilst the current R system is in run off, and who knows, it might lead to more people lining up to buy an eventual R10 system. Awaits incoming....... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted January 6, 2009 Share #8 Posted January 6, 2009 Agree of course but Leica behaves as if they do not need money. Hopeless i'm afraid. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ns_ng Posted January 7, 2009 Share #9 Posted January 7, 2009 FYI... even after removing the shroud, the Leica R 21-35mm lens still clips the mirror on the return trip down when the lens is set to its widest 21mm setting (goes up, but not down). As a result, I always shoot short of its widest setting, as I don't wish to shave the mirror while the camera is still in-warranty. BTW... this is on a Canon 5D MKII. Cheers! Hi, Since the 5D MKII has Live View mode, isn't it possible to lock up the mirror and mount the 21-35mm lens? How accurate is focusing in Live View mode? I am interested in the 5D MKII, but my 19mm R, will interfer with the mirror. The Live View mode might be the way to use this lens without resorting to shaving the mirror. Thanks, N.S. Ng Zenfolio | N.S. Ng Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruhayat Posted January 7, 2009 Share #10 Posted January 7, 2009 I suggested elsewhere some time ago that offering R lenses in alternative mounts might be complementary to their strategy of collaborating on "low end" compacts. Surely R&D costs to convert existing R lenses to C and N mounts won't be so high. The compacts would bring the Leica brand within the orbit of new users (in terms of affordability and brand recognition), and the lenses would serve these users if/when some of them upgrade to SLRs. But there was a rather convincing argument about why Leica couldn't make C or N mount auto-focusing lenses. Hence Leica, like Zeiss, would be confined to making manual lenses, which would have limited appeal, particularly to newbies. So perhaps the market size potential of the manual focusing lenses is not attractive enough to Leica. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 7, 2009 Share #11 Posted January 7, 2009 I suggested elsewhere some time ago that offering R lenses in alternative mounts might be complementary to their strategy of collaborating on "low end" compacts. Surely R&D costs to convert existing R lenses to C and N mounts won't be so high. The compacts would bring the Leica brand within the orbit of new users (in terms of affordability and brand recognition), and the lenses would serve these users if/when some of them upgrade to SLRs. But there was a rather convincing argument about why Leica couldn't make C or N mount auto-focusing lenses. Hence Leica, like Zeiss, would be confined to making manual lenses, which would have limited appeal, particularly to newbies. So perhaps the market size potential of the manual focusing lenses is not attractive enough to Leica. But would Canon and Nikon let them do it?. Afaik the patents on those mounts, unlike the Leica M mount, have not expired yet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted January 7, 2009 Share #12 Posted January 7, 2009 But would Canon and Nikon let them do it?. Afaik the patents on those mounts, unlike the Leica M mount, have not expired yet. You can buy adaptors that allow Nikon lenses to be used on EOS cameras, so I'd guess Nikon wouldn't be a problem. Quite why you'd spend so much money on a body and then use cheap lenses with an adaptor having no electrical, or mechanical, linkages is another question. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruhayat Posted January 8, 2009 Share #13 Posted January 8, 2009 But would Canon and Nikon let them do it?. Afaik the patents on those mounts, unlike the Leica M mount, have not expired yet. Yes, the copyright was part of that argument I mentioned. Basically, C and N would allow lens makers to offer products in their mounts, as long as those lenses and/or makers are deemed to be inferior to their own best lines. In the case where the lenses or maker is seen as threatening to the top line optics, then they won't get access to the auto-focusing system. So like Zeiss, Leica would be restricted to manual lenses only. Leica could choose to reverse engineer the auto-focus system, but there's no telling if C or N could easily break such implementations by simply updating the firmware. The net effect is that (a) the market would be quite small and specialised for Leica to enter (how many manual lenses does Zeiss manage to sell each year?), and ( the risk of coming out with their own reverse-engineered AF lenses for C and N mounts is not worth the investment if the cameras keep breaking the links with each new update. Good for the camera makers, bad for the lens makers and consumers. But really, look at the battery situation -- it's not as if camera makers have user convenience as a top priority. Which is why, to me, the 4/3 and m4/3 systems deserve our support. To the original poster: sorry for the out of topic comment! Hope you don't mind too much. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ihw Posted January 13, 2009 Share #14 Posted January 13, 2009 A couple of responses on this thread have suggested removing the plastic shroud on the lens and I wonder if anyone has practical experience of doing this? My lens has indeed three screws holding the shroud to the lens body but it also has two more screws holding the rom contacts to the body. Presumably I have to undo all five screws but then does the rom contact board mount back on the body OK? Two more questions. i) What is the shroud for? ii) An earlier response said that the mirror still fouls the rear element on the 5D Mk2. Does it foul on the Mk1? Any advice from someone who has actually done this sucessfully on the 5D would be most welcome. Kind regards Ian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.