« on: July 16, 2012, 01:16:28 AM »
Why is the aperture's position not marked, as in other patents?
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Really hope this means that a new 135mm f2 L comes out, I have been dying to get one but can't afford it, hopefully they will come out with a new one and I can pick up an old one on ebay on the cheap!
Can't find the source at the moment, but the original claim was that the additional light coming through hits the sensor at such an oblique angle, that it doesn't go into the pixel wells.This explanation applies only to the corner and the edge of the sensor. Does not apply to the middle of the sensor. Therefore you can end up with a highly vignetted at the corners. Canon user with f 1.4 lens does not really complaining about serious vignetting. Therefore your reasoning is questionable.
With current Canon cameras (up to the 7D at least), reports put the fastest aperture that increases light to the sensor at f/2. If you shoot at f/1.4, the ISO is "invisibly" bumped (it still reports as say ISO 100 but the files are noisier than they should be).
I'm sorry but this is simply not true in any way shape or form. The f stop is a ratio that describes the light transmission (I know T-stops are the real deal but we are working in the vernacular here) of the lens. Saying that an f1.4 lens doesn't pass any more light than an f2 lens is nonsense. To suggest that a camera would "know" that an f1.4 lens or faster was mounted and would choose to "throw a way the extra light is also ludicrous.
- 1.4 not 1.8
- USM ring
- round aperture
- sharp wide open
- IS (sure why not)
- great build quality, weather sealed (new 1.4 50L? not likely)
- reasonable price
Yeah, I know, I'm dreaming.
A few years ago I used to have a Carl Zeiss macro lens lens for my Contax camera, a 100mm f4 S Planar bellows lens. This lens produced a much larger image circle than 35mm. It had to be attached to the camera via automatic bellows, which had a swing and shift mechanism built in. Photographing small objects like boxes require converging vertical correction like buildings.
Does anybody think Canon would introduce a 100mm f2.8L TSE macro lens, it would be a worlds first for digital.
I keep saying APS-H is just too good to shelve. It doesn't give up very much to the 5DIII sensor as it is. I wouldn't hesitate to add a 1.3 7D to my stable.
Could this be the 120mps monster they showed a couple of years ago - that would wipe the smirk of the D800 fanboys
Just type 'tc-80n3' into ebay, you'll get a few hundred results.
You forgot to post the obligatory $1900 price tag
This sounds like a very good FF lens and a wicked crop-body lens . . . seriously though, if we're super lucky it'll be $1400
Couldn't Canon make a mirrorless camera with EF mount and a shorter flange distance?But why make it EF mount at all then, since an EF adapter is basically just an extension tube. I mean, look at the patent, it's an extension tube with electrical contacts
Lenses for the mirrorless camera would not focus on other cameras with EF mount, so some special designation like EF-ML would be required, but regular EF & EF-S lenses would mount using an extension tube with contacts.
The only reason to make it EF mount would be so people could use EF lenses right away with no adapter...once you add anything between the lens and the camera, you might as well optimize it for the target market (in this case, small camera with small flange distance). If the EF-ML lenses don't work on DSLR's anyway, there is no reason to build them around an existing idea, especially if something completely new is simpler and smaller