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.
Two years after the launch of the first lens in its highly-respected Art line, Sigma has finally added a 85mm f/1.4 model. In case you’re unfamiliar with Sigma’s Global Vision, the Art primes are the company’s high-speed f/1.4 models that have have been developed to compete in image quality with the very best lenses from Canon and Nikon, and can even give legendary lens maker Zeiss a run for its money.
Announced in February 2016, the $2598 Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS (Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8) is a short-to-mid telephoto zoom lens for such Sony full-frame a7 series cameras as the a7R II. The “GM” in the full lens name signifies that the Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 belongs to Sony’s “G Master” lineup of pro-grade optics.
Announced in February 2016, the $749 Tamron SP 85mm f/1.8 Di VC USD (Tamron 85mm f/1.8) is a fast, short telephoto prime lens available in Canon, Nikon, and Sony lens mounts. This review considers the performance of the Canon version.
Announced in February 2016, the $749 Tamron SP 85mm f/1.8 Di VC USD (Tamron 85mm f/1.8) is a fast, short telephoto prime lens available in Canon, Nikon, and Sony lens mounts. This review considers the performance of the Nikon version.
Following its intriguing 24-70mm f2.8 stabilized model, Tamron has added a high-speed ultra-wide 15-30mm f/2.8 version, also with stabilization. Read on to find out how well the Canon-mount model performs.
Canon has launched the 3rd iteration of its popular EF 16-35mm f/2.8L wide-angle zoom lens, predominantly for full frame press, sport and action photographers. Significant improvements to outer field sharpness on the new $2199 EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III also make it a viable option for landscape or astrophotography on the 50Mp EOS 5DS R, as well as wedding or event photography on the EOS 5D Mark IV. Although headline specifications are basically the same as its predecessor, improvements to the new lens’s durability, including water and dust resistance, equip the new lens better for the hammer of pro shooting in fast-paced, all-weather environments. Despite being specifically intended for use on full frame Canon DSLRs, the new EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III also remains compatible with Canon APS-C sensor cameras, such as the 7D Mark II, where it offers a less wide-angle and less useful 26-52mm equivalent focal range.
With this G2 model, Tamron has updated its popular 150-600mm introduced in late 2013. During its short life span, the Tamron 150-600mm has become a classic of its kind. At around $1400, the new G2 version has faster AF and enhanced stabilization over its predecessor, quoted as the equivalent to 4.5 stops.
The Sony SLT A99 II is the Japanese electronic giant’s latest full-frame, DSLR-style, interchangeable-lens camera. Packing a 42Mp backside-illuminated (BSI) CMOS sensor, the A99 II offers a significant jump in resolution over its predecessor and achieves an impressive overall DxOMark score of 92 points. Benefiting from a pixel arrangement that increases the volume and quality of light captured by its imaging elements, a BSI sensor improves low-light image quality.
Towards the end of last year, Zeiss relaunched what the company now calls the Classic range of DSLR lenses for Canon and Nikon as the new Milvus line, in some cases completely redesigning the models and in other cases just changing the shell. This lens is a re-shelled version of the Makro Planar T* 2/100, however Zeiss claim that, with a new and enhanced T* coating, the lens has improved imaging characteristics.
It's not always obvious how the final 'total' is determined, but for the most part the individual data is available for inspection. So I guess if you disagree with how the totals are aggregated you probably have enough information to make your own decision on what fits your needs and budget.
I depend in part on the DxO figures for making lens purchase decisions. I appreciate the relative transparency and consistency. Since taking into account the DxO data I have not regretted any lens purchases. Reality is pretty much matching my expectations.
Best lenses for the Canon EOS 5DS R: Optics for travel, wildlife & portrait photography
Your choice of the 70-300mm L over the 100-400mm II zoom is incredulous for at least two reasons. First, for wild life the extra 100mm of the 400mm zoom is a huge advantage. Secondly, you can't read your own scores measured on the 5DS R
Re: Best lenses for the Canon EOS 5DS R: Optics for travel, wildlife & portrait photography
When DXO does a side by side, they present the data they have at the time and do not update it even if a newer high-res body comes out.
In the side by sides comparisons, I understand why they do this -- there is accompanying text/perspective that is based upon the tests in hand at that time. To update the numbers but leave the accompanying writeup as is would not make sense. In fact, in some cases where Lens A outperformed Lens B on the 5D3, we see the reverse on the 5DS R. That would change the accompanying writeup just a bit! ;)
What I don't get is that we can't see the 5DS R lens testing aggregated with all the other testing on the 'Lens' page. That all needs to be together, and presently, it's like that data doesn't exist.
Lenses tested on 5DS R not aggregated with rest of lens data?
Any reason why (on the main Lens page) I cannot see 5DS R data on your 'all lenses tested' tables?
If I simply sort for Sharpness, the highest value is a 36, when 5DS R values are in the 40s. All you show are test results from other cameras.
If I filter for Canon, no 5DS R data shows up in the table.
If I filter for EF mount, no 5DS R data shows up in the table.
Only if I *specifically pick the camera as the 5DS R* can I see the data. But that precludes me from comparing lenses on different sensors. I'd love to compare the same lenses from the 5D3 to the 5DS R in one table, and that's not currently possible. Can this please be rectified?
The longer the more I think dxo is really unserious. I just compared the samyang 14mm 2.8 and the zeiss distagon 15mm 2.8 on a Canon 5dsr. How is it even possible that the samyang wins with an overall Score von 31 vs. 30? This is ridiculous!!! The samyang loses in every single category (sharpness 18p-mpix vs. 26 p-mpix, Transmission 3.3 TStop vs. 3.1 TStop, Distortion 1.6% vs. 0.5%, Vignetting -2.9 EV vs. -2.1 EV, Chr. Aberration 10 nm vs. 7 nm). Pls explain...
<div id="linkdxomark">This a comment for <a href="http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Canon/EOS-5DS-R">this page on the website</a></div>
How on earth do the [i][b]same[/b][/i] Sigma Art and Zeiss Otus lenses considerably outresolve on the 5DS R yet get a lower score than a 36 MP Nikon camera?
It would appear that differences in the T-stop and vignetting values are the reason. But for identical lenses like the Otuses and Arts, that seems awfully far fetched. Are you really punishing a lens's score for [i]sensor stack[/i] reasons?
Amen. It's really getting obvious that dxo promotes Nikon. There is no other explanation I could think of, why dxo should otherwise rate third party lensens (like Sigma Art, Zeiss Otus etc.) higher on a 36mp Nikon Body, eventhough these lenses resolve much higer on the 5ds/r!
When will the first lens test results be published? We're eagerly awaiting some lens scores. I don't really undestand why you guys don't publish lens scores for the 5ds/r when testing a totally new lens, like the 35L II.