| Introduction | Measurement | Comparisons | Conclusion |
In terms of outright performance, the EF300mm f/2.8L IS USM lens from Canon is right at the top of the tree. Along with the Mark II version, it ranks as the best performing long focal length lens ever tested by DxOMark. When mated to an EOS 5D Mark II, it ranks as one of the top five sharpest lenses, only beaten by its Mark II version and much shorter focal length lenses.
In terms of resolution across the frame, the lens is very homogenous. In other words there is no real drop off from the centre to the edges of the frame. No matter what aperture you choose to shoot at, be it wide-open at f/2.8 or stopped down to f/11 the lens performs almost identically. It’s only when the aperture is really closed down, beyond f/11, that the quality can start to drop of. Even so, by f/32, although the quality has fallen, the sharpness is still even right across the frame.
Lens vignetting, while not perfect, is also well controlled. At the maximum aperture there is a slight tendency to vignette at the edges, showing a drop of 0.3EV 40% out from the centre and -1EV at the very edges. At f/4, the vignetting is reduced further still, showing a drop of -0.3EV 84% of the way from the centre and -0.5EV at the very edges. From f/5.6 onwards, there is no measurable vignetting anywhere across the frame.
The other major areas of lens performance also produce very good results. At every aperture, Chromatic aberration is very well controlled leading to almost completely homogenous field maps right across the frame – put simply, there is none that is appreciably measurable or that would be strongly visible in a final image.
Equally, the distortion is also very well controlled. Long lenses are usually susceptible to pin cushion distortion where straight lines will appear to curve inwards slightly. However, there is no such distortion here, even out to the very edges of the frame.
|
|
Added by Toshik |
January 16
incorrections
There are several incorrections in the review. For example sharpness (P-Mpix) score is confused with overall DXomark Score.
For example: Attached to the APS-C sensored EOS 7D, the EF300mm f/2.8L IS USM once again puts in a strong performance, scoring 16.7P-Mpix, relative to the EOS 7D’s resolution of 18megapixels. Equally, the Pentax lens scores very well, managing 15.0P-Mpix compared to the 16.3megapixels available on the K-5. Overall, this shows the EF300mm f/2.8L IS USM is as good as it’s made out to be, but in this comparison, the Pentax on a K-5 is not that far behind. EF300mm f/2.8L IS USM + 7D =11P-Mpix not 16.7P-Mpix as mentioned. DA Star 300mm f/4 ED (IF) SDM + Pentax K-5=only 7P-Mpix not 15. Reply | Read all replies for this comment |
|
|
Added by Nicolas |
January 18
Re: incorrections
Hello,
There was indeed a mistake. This part was only talking about DxOMark score. Thanks a lot for letting us know, it should now be corrected. Best regards, Reply |
|
|
Added by Toshik |
January 19
Re: incorrections
Furthermore in the [url=http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/With-new-STM-technology-does-Canon-s-updated-18-135mm-still-deliver/Comparisons]review[/url] of Canon EF-S 18-135mm f3.5-f5.6 IS STM lens
In comparison section: Quote: Tested on the flagship APS-C DSLRs from Canon and Nikon, the 7D and D7000, these two Super Zooms achieve remarkably similar results. Overall we can say they’re the same optically although the Nikon version hits a DxOMark Score of 13 just nudging out the Canon with 12. The screenshot shows us not D7000 but D300 with the score 10 not 13 as mentioned. [img]http://www.dxomark.com/itext/review/lens/canon-18-135mm/12.jpg[/img] Reply |
|
|
Added by Toshik |
February 15
Re: incorrections
Error in screenshot
What does it mean "Not available"? [img]http://cdn.dxomark.com/itext/review/camera/nikkon-1-j3/06.jpg[/img] Reply |
To provide photographers with a broader perspective about mobiles, lenses and cameras, here are links to articles, reviews, and analyses of photographic equipment produced by DxOMark, renown websites, magazines or blogs.