DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

Blind test: 18-155 vs 32mm

Started Dec 23, 2018 | Polls
abruzzopat Regular Member • Posts: 281
Blind test: 18-155 vs 32mm

I liked the poll nnowak did in this post so decided to add a similar test with the 18-155 and the 32. There should be a clear IQ difference between the two.

Nothing scientific, but this is what I did:

1) Placed the camera on a tripod.

2) Set the camera to f8, ISO 200 and AV mode.

3) Shot some test shots with the 32mm

4) Changed lenses to the 18-155

5) Set the focal length to 32mm (this took a couple tries so the scene changed slightly) and fired test shots

6) Uploaded these SOOC JPGs with no post processing whatsoever.

Image A

Image B

POLL
Image A is the 32mm F1.4 (and image B is the 18-155)
78.6% 22  votes
Image B is the 32mm F1.4 (and image A is the 18-155)
21.4% 6  votes
  Show results
Scott Milso Senior Member • Posts: 1,099
Re: Blind test: 18-155 vs 32mm

Cool idea.

Maybe try some 100% center crops.

These are too resolution limited, they both seem to fall apart as I zoom in.

The 2nd seems darker, maybe more contrasty, or maybe a cloud?

OP abruzzopat Regular Member • Posts: 281
Re: Blind test: 18-155 vs 32mm

Scott Milso wrote:

Cool idea.

Maybe try some 100% center crops.

These are too resolution limited, they both seem to fall apart as I zoom in.

The 2nd seems darker, maybe more contrasty, or maybe a cloud?

Hi Scott. On a PC or Mac, if you click "original size" you can see the 100% image. To see it on a phone, I would have to make some crops. I'll try to do that later tonight.

Back2M Regular Member • Posts: 367
Re: Blind test: 18-155 vs 32mm
1

The metadata is attached so it isn't blind; you can use DPP4 or another post processor to remove it?

Also, might be wise to use spot metering (and meter the same spot on both) as there is some exposure drift between the two even though your metadata does show you used the same exposure settings. Evaluative metering appears to be causing a cloud or otherwise to change the actual exposure (which you can tell with the 1/2000 vs 1/1000 exposure of the two).

 Back2M's gear list:Back2M's gear list
Canon G1 X III Canon EOS R Canon EF 16-35mm F4L IS USM Canon 70-300 F4-5.6 IS II Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro
Dareshooter Veteran Member • Posts: 5,842
Re: Blind test: 18-155 vs 32mm
1

I voted A as I'd checked the Exif beforehand 

Andy01 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,188
Re: Blind test: 18-155 vs 32mm
1

Not blind as pointed out above.

I was a bit confused with your repeated typo - was it 18-55mm or 18-150mm (not 18-155mm). The exif data showed my that it was 18-150mm.

The fact that the images are shot at different exposures as well makes it hard to truly compare - the 32mm photo is brighter and had twice the exposure (1/1000th) of the 18-150mm (1/2000th). This makes the roof look brighter and show more detail.

Colin

 Andy01's gear list:Andy01's gear list
Canon EOS M5 Canon 6D Mark II Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM Canon EF 35mm F2 IS USM +5 more
OP abruzzopat Regular Member • Posts: 281
Re: Blind test: 18-155 vs 32mm

Andy01 wrote:

Not blind as pointed out above.

I was a bit confused with your repeated typo - was it 18-55mm or 18-150mm (not 18-155mm). The exif data showed my that it was 18-150mm.

The fact that the images are shot at different exposures as well makes it hard to truly compare - the 32mm photo is brighter and had twice the exposure (1/1000th) of the 18-150mm (1/2000th). This makes the roof look brighter and show more detail.

Colin

Yeah, ok, not blind since you can cheat and look at the EXIF. And not sure why I typed 18-155 which of course should have been 18-150. Sorry for the confusion.

Anyway, point was mostly about comparing the sharpness of the two lenses, and I was not surprised at the gap between the two... I wish the zoom was sharper, but the new prime is MUCH better. Doesn't really need pixel peeping to see the difference. I've seen an obvious difference in the 11X14 prints I have done using both lenses.

BUT: about that difference with the shutter speed... I noticed and wondered why that happened. The camera was on a tripod on a full sunny day. These pics were 3 min apart because it took me some time to get the zoom lens to exactly 32mm. But I switched back and forth over 15 min with a couple different angles and every shot with the 32mm the camera chose 1/1000, and every shot with the 18-150 the camera chose 1/2000.

These are the two possibilities I think:

1) Some slight change in cloudiness happened just as I changed lenses (several times) which was enough to cause the camera to alter shutter speed

2) These lenses don't actually let in the same amount of light at their stated settings.

plantdoc Veteran Member • Posts: 4,339
Re: Blind test: 18-155 vs 32mm
3

No comment about the 32mm. However, I took several hundred pics on a recent trip with 18-150mm at usually f8 or f11 if near 150mm. With sharpening in Lightroom, 13 x19 in. prints are very good to excellent. I imagine if printed larger or not sharpened, difference would be more apparent. However, for my needs, I was surprised by the results. Yes, straight RAW files from the camera look soft overall, but they sharpen nicely without artifacts. Quite satisfactory for a small, light lens.

Greg

Ben Herrmann
Ben Herrmann Forum Pro • Posts: 21,163
OK - if you're going to do something like this...

...you've got to erase the EXIF data which clearly shows that the first photo is the 32 MM and the 2nd photo is the 18-150 - sigh.

But having said that, the 32 MM is clearly sharper, in particular in the corners.  Those all-in-one longer zooms have optical tradeoffs, that's for sure.  But for the genre, the 18-150 is mighty nice!

-- hide signature --

Life can be good - if you allow it!
Bernd ("Ben") Herrmann
Fuquay Varina, North Carolina USA

 Ben Herrmann's gear list:Ben Herrmann's gear list
Canon EOS M Fujifilm X-E2S Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm X-T20 Canon EOS M6 +4 more
carpandean Forum Member • Posts: 66
Re: Blind test: 18-155 vs 32mm

abruzzopat wrote:

Andy01 wrote:

Not blind as pointed out above.

I was a bit confused with your repeated typo - was it 18-55mm or 18-150mm (not 18-155mm). The exif data showed my that it was 18-150mm.

The fact that the images are shot at different exposures as well makes it hard to truly compare - the 32mm photo is brighter and had twice the exposure (1/1000th) of the 18-150mm (1/2000th). This makes the roof look brighter and show more detail.

Colin

Yeah, ok, not blind since you can cheat and look at the EXIF. And not sure why I typed 18-155 which of course should have been 18-150. Sorry for the confusion.

Anyway, point was mostly about comparing the sharpness of the two lenses, and I was not surprised at the gap between the two... I wish the zoom was sharper, but the new prime is MUCH better. Doesn't really need pixel peeping to see the difference. I've seen an obvious difference in the 11X14 prints I have done using both lenses.

BUT: about that difference with the shutter speed... I noticed and wondered why that happened. The camera was on a tripod on a full sunny day. These pics were 3 min apart because it took me some time to get the zoom lens to exactly 32mm. But I switched back and forth over 15 min with a couple different angles and every shot with the 32mm the camera chose 1/1000, and every shot with the 18-150 the camera chose 1/2000.

These are the two possibilities I think:

1) Some slight change in cloudiness happened just as I changed lenses (several times) which was enough to cause the camera to alter shutter speed

2) These lenses don't actually let in the same amount of light at their stated settings.

Actually, #2 probably has some truth to it, but if anything, it would actually cause the opposite choice of shutter speeds.  Primes usually have notably better light transmission (T-stop) than zoom lenses at the same f-number.  Therefore, the zoom lens would require a longer exposure (slower shutter speed) than the prime at the same f-number to achieve the same brightness in the image.  However, as noted, the opposite choices occurred (zoom had half of the exposure), which is why the second image is so much darker.  This must be an issue with the metering algorithm.

In the future, for a fairer test, use manual mode to control the aperture, shutter speed and ISO.  Again, you may notice a slightly brighter image with the prime, which you could manually adjust the shutter speed to compensate.

 carpandean's gear list:carpandean's gear list
Canon EOS M5 Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM Canon EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM Canon EF-M 32mm F1.4
Praefos
Praefos Regular Member • Posts: 234
Re: Blind test: 18-155 vs 32mm

abruzzopat wrote:

BUT: about that difference with the shutter speed... I noticed and wondered why that happened. The camera was on a tripod on a full sunny day. These pics were 3 min apart because it took me some time to get the zoom lens to exactly 32mm. But I switched back and forth over 15 min with a couple different angles and every shot with the 32mm the camera chose 1/1000, and every shot with the 18-150 the camera chose 1/2000.

These are the two possibilities I think:

1) Some slight change in cloudiness happened just as I changed lenses (several times) which was enough to cause the camera to alter shutter speed

2) These lenses don't actually let in the same amount of light at their stated settings.

Hi,

have you checked wether the focus point is exactly on the same spot?

You should add or change the steps!

a) Use M-Mode in order to control the exposure!

b) Use Manual Focus to always focus on the same point!

(c) Always use the EF-M 18-150mm first for framing, focusing and taking the first shot. Than switch to the EF-M 32mm.)

Additionally, mark the spot where the EF-M18-150mm is zoomed in to 32mm.

I gonna try to do the same for the same lenses and maybe other lenses Cool Idea!

 Praefos's gear list:Praefos's gear list
Canon EOS M3 Canon EOS M6 Canon EOS M6 II Canon EOS R5 Canon EF 135mm F2L USM +24 more
RedFox88 Forum Pro • Posts: 30,738
Re: Blind test: 18-155 vs 32mm

abruzzopat wrote:

I liked the poll nnowak did in this post so decided to add a similar test with the 18-155 and the 32. There should be a clear IQ difference between the two.

Nothing scientific, but this is what I did:

1) Placed the camera on a tripod.

2) Set the camera to f8, ISO 200 and AV mode.

Yet the exposure was different. One pic is darker. Did you not look at the histogram?

3) Shot some test shots with the 32mm

4) Changed lenses to the 18-155

5) Set the focal length to 32mm (this took a couple tries so the scene changed slightly) and fired test shots

6) Uploaded these SOOC JPGs with no post processing whatsoever.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads