Previous news story Next news story

DxOMark investigates lenses for the Canon EOS 700D / Rebel T5i

Jun 17, 2013 at 11:43:00 GMT

Print view

Our friends and collaborators over at DxOMark have been looking into how lenses score on specific cameras, and most recently they've been examining Canon's latest SLR, the EOS 700D / Rebel T5i. In an ongoing article they investigate how 130 lenses from Canon, Carl Zeiss, Samyang, Sigma, Tamron and Tokina measure up on the 700D's 18MP sensor. As this is essentially a variant of the sensor used in every Canon APS-C camera since the EOS 7D in 2009, the article could be of interest to a lot of Canon users. Click the links below to read each part.

DxOMark Review: The best lenses for your Canon EOS 700D Part 1: Introduction

DxOMark Review: The best lenses for the Canon EOS 700D Part 2: Best lenses (prime and zoom)

DxOMark Review: The best lenses for the Canon EOS 700D Part 3: Standard Zooms, Primes and Moderate Telephoto lenses

Click here for our in-depth review of the Canon EOS 700D / Rebel T5i

Our lens reviews are produced using DxOMark data: click here to see our latest reviews

OTHER NEWS 700D DXOMARK NIKON

Canon EOS 700D (EOS Rebel T5i)

Add to: Login to add this item to your gear lists.

GearShop

Canon EOS Rebel T5i DSLR Camera, Body Only●	$749.00	Buy on GearShop
Canon EOS Rebel T5i DSLR Camera Kit with 18-135mm EF-S IS STM Lens●	$1,049.00	Buy on GearShop
Canon EOS Rebel T5i DSLR Camera Kit with 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 EF-S IS STM Lens●	$849.00	Buy on GearShop

Canon EOS Rebel T5i 18.0 MP CMOS Digital SLR with 18-135mm EF-S IS STM Lens	Too low to display
Canon EOS Rebel T5i 18.0 MP CMOS Digital SLR with 18-55mm EF-S IS STM Lens	Too low to display
Canon EOS Rebel T5i 18.0 MP CMOS Digital SLR with 18-135mm EF-S IS STM Lens	Too low to display
Focus Camera Canon EOS Rebel T5i 18.0 MP CMOS Digital Camera with EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Zoom Lens + EF-S 55-250mm f/4.0-5.6 IS Telephoto Zoom Lens + Telephoto & Wide Angle Lenses + 12pc Bundle 32GB Deluxe Accessory Kit	$979.00
Canon EOS Rebel T5i 18.0 MP CMOS Digital Camera with 3-inch Touchscreen and Full HD Movie Mode (Body Only)	$699.00
Canon EOS Rebel T3i 18 MP CMOS Digital SLR Camera with EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II Zoom Lens & EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III Telephoto Zoom Lens + 11pc Bundle 16GB Deluxe Accessory Kit	Too low to display
Focus Camera Canon EOS Rebel T5i 18.0 MP CMOS Digital Camera with EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Zoom Lens + EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III Telephoto Zoom Lens + Telephoto & Wide Angle Lenses + 12pc Bundle 32GB Deluxe Accessory Kit	$1,037.95
Canon EOS Rebel T5i Digital SLR Camera & EF-S 18-135mm IS STM Lens with EF-S 55-250mm IS Lens + 64GB Card + Battery + Case + Flash + 3 UV/CPL/ND8 Filters Kit	$1,214.95
Canon EOS REBEL T4i 18.0 MP CMOS Digital Camera with 3-inch Touchscreen and Full HD Movie Mode (Body Only)	$670.99
Canon EOS Rebel T5i Digital SLR Camera & EF-S 18-135mm IS STM Lens with 64GB Card + Battery + Case + Flash + 3 UV/FLD/CPL Filters + Tripod + Accessory Kit	$1,084.95
Canon EOS Rebel T5i Digital SLR Camera & EF-S 18-135mm IS STM Lens with 32GB Card + Battery & Charger + Backpack + Filter + HDMI Cable + Accessory Kit	$1,049.95

Show all listings (11) ...

Get more prices from Amazon

Comments

Total comments: 43

free wikipedia of lens database
;)

0 upvotes

Their measurements are so badly screwed - the 100mm f/2 USM lens better than the 100mm f/2.8L IS USM - there is something fishy going on here, and it stinks mighty badly!
I can only see one reason in their published data: They seem to take all aperture settings into account which a lens offers - and at f/22 (the maximum the 100mm f/2 can close it's aperture to) the diffraction of the sensor isn't as bad as on the 100mm f/2.8L IS USM where the lens can close to f/32.
So these guys basically are morons who have no clue what they do and should be barred from further producing this overload of measurement garbage! Please DPreview - do yourself a favor and drop them from your portfolio of partners, you're better off without them!

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting

3 upvotes

Haha, tell it like it is!! :)

I have been manually looking at some of the lens and looking at the sharpness maps (at apertures appropriate to the lens), doing it this way would you consider their results usably accurate?

0 upvotes

I'm quite sure they know what they're doing.
The problem is, they 'compress' all their findings into one figure and this makes it actually harder to choose between two similar lenses.
A cross table with selectable points of measurement is better i.m.o.

1 upvote

A warmed over camera with cheezy lenses. Ho-hum.

2 upvotes

But where are the results for the 6D ? It was issued six months earlier than the 700D and there are barely more than ten lenses tested with that body, while there about 130 lenses tested for the 700D and 96 tested for the 5D Mark III.

This is unfair !

0 upvotes

So, all you need is a D800 and a cheap Samyang 85mm f/1.4 and you're in i.q.-heaven? Interesting.

Anyone here, who has this combination?

0 upvotes

I've used it. The bokeh, IMO, is better than Nikon's $2000 85mm f/1.4 because the OOF highlights are round, not oval, which avoids that "spinning" look the periphery gets with distorted highlights. Some like the effect.

Comment edited 17 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

Why didn't they test the EF-S 15-85mm lens?

Also, is it exactly the same sensor and LPOF arrangement as that found in the 650D? Be good if these results translated directly across.

0 upvotes

I f I read the scores correctly, some Samyang lenses perform better than expensive Zeiss and Canon L primes?

1 upvote

Look like DxO does not have anything to write.

1 upvote

How is it possible that the Tamron 17-50 VC and non-VC ended up with the same score? I have used both personally (albeit Nikon mount), shooting both real-world images and brick walls, and the VC version is distinctly inferior. I can't believe there will not be a difference on the denser 18MP sensor.

2 upvotes

I also have both 17-50 VC and non VC - on my 650D, it's clear the non-VC is much better since wide open. It tells more about the so-called review :)

2 upvotes

do they give points for the VC ?

0 upvotes

They should not - it's a test of optical quality test, not features.

0 upvotes

DXO lens scores as useless and ridiculous as their "sensor" scores.
I own a number of the lenses "tested" here and many findings are just ridiculous.

6 upvotes

they are useless for those who cant understand the numbers/tests.

3 upvotes

I've generally found my own lens tests don't always agree with the numbers & have been disappointed on several occasions when buying new lenses. Maybe because when shooting real subjects, the distances involved are generally much greater than a test chart, so the results are different. I often wonder if the manufacturers bias their lens designs towards test charts rather than real life, to get good reviews.

1 upvote

I'm no Canon owner, but if I was I would be a bit surprised that Canon makes literally zero zoom lenses of 'somewhat better than kit quality'. Or am I missing something?

There are three cheap zooms, the 18-55mm range, costing from 149 to 250 USD (at launch), then the next one up is over 1000 USD (the 17-55mm 2.8), more than four-fold more expensive.

Aren't they forgetting their own 'enthusiast amateur' market here, leaving all the fun to Sigma, Tamron et al?

At least Sony have the CZ 16-80mm, which for some reason seems to be a 'love it or hate it' lens (I love it), as well as the new 16-50mm 2.8 (now 750 USD ish, not sure how that compares to Canon's 17-55mm 2.8 price wise, but the wide angle sounds more useful than Canon's longer reach plus it's weather sealed).

What's the situation with Nikon here?

4 upvotes

I have the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM. It's about $650 and I've found it to be a very good lens on my former 350D and current 650D. The only complaint I have with it is the slight lens creep when pointed down. I'm sure Canon would "tighten" it up if I sent it in though.

0 upvotes

Most Micro Four Thirds standaard lenses are pretty sharp and decent quality given their price! Why it seems so hard for Nikon/Canon to produce fair priced, but still nice quality standard kit-lenses?

I've been since my first compact camera a Canon guy. Just happens so. Compacts, pro-dslr ect. Invest a lot of money in that. Lately I'm more and more surprised by MFT, especially their lenses.

And what is the point! of having lenses with a certain max aperture!, if you have to stop them down by one or two stops to get decent quality????

It seems mirrorless is a somehow better at max aperture. Hear good things also about the Nikon 1 system in this respect.

0 upvotes

mFT for cheap lenses? Did you just lended last night in a New Mexico desert? DSLR lenses are considerably cheaper when you take f-number into account. And their price don't drop like stone as well.

5 upvotes

the only m4/3 kit standard lens that I know good is the Panny 14-45... besides, there are much more options for the DSLR users other than the kit lenses.

0 upvotes

most MFT lenses are overpriced and average at best, wake up.

2 upvotes

I shoot DSLR full frame, APS-C, compact and micro 4/3. kewlguy is right. The only good (above average) micro 4/3 standard zoom lens is the 14-45mm f/3.5-5.6 which came with the GF1. Soon after, they replaced it with the 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 which has a plastic mount and optically inferior. All the subsequent kit lenses are mediocre. Those that came with the Olympus cameras are also not better. I am disappointed but I suppose the manufacturers are trying to keep them cheap for the "entry level" who are not so bothered about quality or willing to pay higher prices. That's why until today, micro 4/3 are targeted at "consumer level" customers. Professional photographers like us are frustrated. Micro 4/3 has potential as a professional backup camera for certain type of photography but for now we can rely on only some good prime lenses.

0 upvotes

I actually did wake-up last year! Most gear, whatever brand has high quality equipment, especially if you are not on a budget. And yes the high grade mtf lenses aren't cheap in any way!, but still just a bit cheaper. Using L-lenses for several years I know what I'm talking about. Actually I do make a living out of photography. Mft isn't the perfect solution for everything of course. Sometime you just need the big gear. But that system, lenses + sensor are developed from scratch and even the more budget mft lenses are quit sharp wide open and soft corners are less of a problem. Using a affordable prime 20mm/1.7(=40mm) and 45mm/1.8(=90mm)on a Olympus OM-D body gave me better results as a 50mm/1.4 Canon with a 7D body. And the 100-300mm/f4-5.6(=200-600) is light, reasonable small and sharp!, especially give its price. It is not a 70-200mm/2.8 Canon for sports. But for me mft surprised me often. Yes there are more options for any brand/system. But the article is about kit-lenses mostly.

0 upvotes

Right so, Wacon. Don't listen to them and simply rely on your own experience. ;-)

0 upvotes

Best lens?

Most likely new Sigma. :D

1 upvote

So the lenses most people are going to use - 18-55, 18-135 - are the worst ones for the camera?

That makes it a tough sell, why can't we have a top performing standard zoom without having to carry around something heavy like the fast L series options?

Just once would be nice.....

0 upvotes

Top performing standard lenses would cost a lot more: kit lenses are made to keep the price low and the camera as accessible as possible to novice buyers (and, crucially, competitive with their peers in terms of price). You can then pay for a more expensive lens at your leisure.

A couple of companies have attempted to go for premium kit zooms. The original Panasonic Micro Four Thirds 14-45mm was superb, but quickly switched for a much cheaper, plastic 14-42mm. The current Fujifilm 18-55mm is excellent but expensive, making the X-E1 kit higher priced than (for example) the Sony NEX-6.

2 upvotes

Actually from what i read, except the top three standard zoom, 18-55 and 18-135 are not so far from other faster and more expensive alternatives, speaking about quality and definition.

0 upvotes

the 18-55 and 18-135 ARE good-performing lenses if you stop them down about 2 stops or so. Don't use them wide-open.

So they already serve your purpose - light, slower, but performs well.

Comment edited 39 seconds after posting

2 upvotes

Why?
Reason 1:
Because most people don't want to pay 1.000€ or more for an entry level SLR.
Reason 2:
Because most people who buy entry level SLRs do not have the need for better lenses.

3 upvotes

I agree with you Andy, but I would happily pay a bit more without needing a really fast lens. I guess they have to balance out the cost effectiveness somehow.

I actually thought the standard 18-55mm that came with my Nikon was excellent.

0 upvotes

Andy is right. Manufacturers have to keep the "entry level" lenses cheap to be competitive. Not everybody are willing to pay for quality. Anyway, the new 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 STM kit lens is actually quite good. Sharp, contrasty and silent. For the price, I think one can't complaint.

For those who really appreciate and expect top quality, they should go for prime lenses but they must be prepared to pay top prices as well. Quality things are never cheap.

For me, I prefer Zeiss for its neutral colours, 3D "pop" (or better micro-contrast), great manual focus capability (not everbody's need), better built quality (made of all metal), handles very well and sharp. If that's what you want go for it but be prepared to pay the higher price.

For those who do not appreciate the difference, they can just continue using the kit lens.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Interesting, basically, if sticking with Canon lenses then to get best IQ expect to spend double the cost of the body on your main lens or spend about the same as the body cost on Sigma. I guess that's why I was never entirely happy with Canon 18-135 though it was a very convenient. Loved the wideangle Sigma. Realized I had to depend much more on glass or sell all dSLR gear. So, I now use LX5, FZ150 and FZ50 :-) Nothing wrong with spending 1,000s on kit if that's your choice but you have to go all the way!

0 upvotes

They lost me at the line where they said:
"Canon EF 24mm f/2.8 IS USM (equivalent to a 40mm f/2.8)"
(followed by many other lines of similar, ahem, data).

They really should know better. 40/2.8 on FF is _NOT_ the equivalent of 24 f/2.8 on crop. If it was, both systems would have the same DoF and blurring capabilities, but they don't.

Different images = no equivalence.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting

4 upvotes

Or, to play devil's advocate, 24mm x 1.6 ~ 40mm, and an f/2.8 lens stays f/2.8 when you put it on an APS-C camera. So what's the problem?

It shouldn't be too hard to understand that there are different ways of approaching this, so dismissing DxOMark because that writer doesn't conform to your personal point of view may be an over-reaction.

12 upvotes

Well, that didn't take long. First comment and we're already into the "equivalency" garbage.

7 upvotes

This image equivalence you're talking about only is only relevant for someone cross-shopping between the 2 different formats.

DXOMark should skip even mentioning it - just mention the format the lens is for should be sufficient. Anything more, it sparks off-topic discussions and becomes a distraction.

0 upvotes

Focal length equivalents are pretty deeply embedded in the language of digital photography - to the extent that they're part of the CIPA standards for describing compacts. They're a convenient and widely-understood shorthand for comparing angle of view across formats, so it makes sense to use them.

Aperture equivalence is useful in certain ways, but it's nowhere near as widely used/accepted/understood. And good writers should always aim to write using concepts their audience can realistically be expected to understand.

1 upvote

"And good writers should always aim to write using concepts their audience can realistically be expected to understand."

Duh, does that mean dumbed down? ;-)

2 upvotes

interesting that the same lens is sharper on the new 700D than on the 7D.

Oh and don't buy the kit version, but buy a 700D body and a Sigma 17-70 OS HSM DG.

1 upvote

Total comments: 43

Editorial content

Product database

Community


Canon EOS 700D / EOS Rebel T5i review updated with lens data Jun 14, 2013	Just Posted: Canon EOS 700D / EOS Rebel T5i review Jun 10, 2013	Just posted: Hands-on preview of the Canon EOS 700D / Rebel T5i Mar 21, 2013	Canon announces EOS 700D / Rebel T5i 18MP and 18-55mm STM lens Mar 21, 2013

	Nikon 1 AW1 Sep 19, 2013
	Fujifilm X-A1 Sep 17, 2013
	Olympus OM-D E-M1 Sep 10, 2013
	Leica C (Typ112) Sep 8, 2013
	Nikon Coolpix P7800 Sep 5, 2013
	Nikon Coolpix S02 Sep 5, 2013
	Sony Cyber-shot DSC-QX10 Sep 4, 2013
	Sony Cyber-shot DSC-QX100 Sep 4, 2013
	Sony Alpha A3000 Aug 27, 2013
	Sony Alpha NEX-5T Aug 27, 2013

Here is the K3	131
Okay Fuji, so now that the experiment is over....	107
D610 to be announced within 48 hours (as of 10/5)	101
How many shots do you take to get a shot?	86
More leaks about K3 specifications	84
While everyone ooohs and aaaahs over the ...	79
After 3 weeks & thousands of shots: NEX-6 + ...	74
Anyone for Sunday Scapes (2013-10-06) ?	60
E-M1 Trouble focusing on moving objects	55
The Sunday BIRD Volume 9, Issue 15 October 6, 2013	53
E-M1 as E-5 successor - first week experience	49
Counterfeit lens caps from Amazon	49
GX7: Extended ISO125 Image Degradation?	48
X-pro1 vs x-a1 (or is it X-A1 vs X-pro1) using ...	44
Worth selling my Canon DSLR to move to Olympus ...	43
Shutter shock verdict is not present here. ...	38
Camera For Landscape Photography....NEED ...	34
I'm going broke buying E-M5 Eyecups!	32
Sensor Technology (The Software Engineer Way)	31
Five Worst Clichés About Photography	29

Your email address:
Your name: