June 18, 2013, 11:06:34 PM
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic: Would a 14-28mm f/1.8 be possible?  (Read 5230 times)

pdirestajr

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 568
    • View Profile
    • flickr
Re: Would a 14-28mm f/1.8 be possible?
« Reply #15 on: February 15, 2013, 12:17:22 PM »
With high ISO image quality constantly being improved, why a need/ want for an UWA lens with an f/1.8 aperture? I don't understand the point besides tech-spec lust.
Logged
7D | 5DII | EOS-3 | Nikon F3 | Mamiya 645 Pro-TL

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Would a 14-28mm f/1.8 be possible?
« Reply #15 on: February 15, 2013, 12:17:22 PM »

K-amps

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1438
  • Whatever looks great !
    • View Profile
Re: Would a 14-28mm f/1.8 be possible?
« Reply #16 on: February 15, 2013, 12:59:37 PM »
Quote from: pdirestajr on February 15, 2013, 12:17:22 PM
With high ISO image quality constantly being improved, why a need/ want for an UWA lens with an f/1.8 aperture? I don't understand the point besides tech-spec lust.

Hi-ISO won't get him the Bokehlisciousness.... !
Logged
EOS-5D Mk.iii 
EF 17-40mm F/4L; EF 70-200 F/2.8L Mk.II; EF 100mm L F/2.8 IS Macro, 50mm F/1.8ii;  85mm f/1.8;  TC's 2x Mk.iii; 1.4x Mk.iii

macrodust

  • PowerShot G1 X
  • ***
  • Posts: 53
    • View Profile
Re: Would a 14-28mm f/1.8 be possible?
« Reply #17 on: February 15, 2013, 01:10:10 PM »
Nor will a UWA  ;D
Logged
EOS 5D Mark III | EOS 7D | EFS 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 | EF 17-40mm f/4L | EF 24-105mm f/4L IS | EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS | EF 135mm f/2L | EF 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro | EF 85mm f/1.8 | EF 50mm f/1.4 | EF 40mm f/2.8 Pancake | Sigma 35mm f/1.4 | EF 28mm f/1.8

brad goda

  • Rebel T4i
  • ****
  • Posts: 109
    • View Profile
Re: Would a 14-28mm f/1.8 be possible?
« Reply #18 on: February 15, 2013, 02:28:18 PM »
the want for a lens with large aperture:
bright for viewing
bright for focus... manual or AF
shallow depth of field is image tool for photography.
Logged

aroo

  • PowerShot G1 X
  • ***
  • Posts: 55
    • View Profile
Re: Would a 14-28mm f/1.8 be possible?
« Reply #19 on: February 15, 2013, 05:50:53 PM »
Yes, all three of these last posts. I've been thinking of photographs I'd like to make that would only become possible on an UWA with really shallow depth. 14-28mm is kind of arbitrary, but hey, I'm just wondering aloud here.

What's this jump from $2k (24mm f/1.4) to $50k or $100k for a fast zoom everyone's mentioning? The superzooms make me wonder if there's a niche for an outstanding $10k wide zoom.
Logged

brad goda

  • Rebel T4i
  • ****
  • Posts: 109
    • View Profile
Re: Would a 14-28mm f/1.8 be possible?
« Reply #20 on: February 15, 2013, 08:55:27 PM »
I guess in "theory" prices were just humorously speculative... but mechanically a wide zoom 1.8 built right would be a massive piece of glass and very hard to hand hold... for long periods of time... or to even have around your neck... LOL
ok even on a tripod this would be a massive weight addition... without its own support...
as longer lenses have collars to balance weight and provide H&V rotation... Id think a lens of this design would need the same... not for reasons like the schnider TS super rotators 50 90 and 120...
but like that...
and then all would be grumbling "who would in their right mind want to carry this 8lb piece of glass"
lol its quite amusing to think of this... as my 24 f3.5L TSE II has gotten massive can you imagine an 85 1.0 or then back to a 1.8 zoom... wow...
Logged

funkboy

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 354
  • 6D & a bunch of crazy primes
    • View Profile
Re: Would a 14-28mm f/1.8 be possible?
« Reply #21 on: February 16, 2013, 05:58:08 AM »
Not possible enough for Canon's marketing dept. to be able to pitch such a huge heavy expensive thing.  If we're talking FF then f/2.8 is the max practical aperture for an ultrawide zoom.

But something closer would be forseeable:  a ~18mm wide angle with a very large aperture.  For the EOS M system.

EOS M's flange focal distance is 18mm, so anything this wide or longer doesn't need to be a retrofocus design.  I would go so far as to suggest that the ~18mm distance of APS-C mirrorless systems was specifically selected because they wanted the FF equiv of a 28mm wide angle without requiring retrofocus lens designs.

This is why Fuji's XF 35mm f/1.4 is small & light & costs 500 bucks, and their 18mm f/2 is a pancake.  They've got a stabilized 18-55 f/2.8-4 standard zoom the size of the EF-S 18-55 kit zoom as well.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2013, 06:07:39 AM by funkboy »
Logged

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Would a 14-28mm f/1.8 be possible?
« Reply #21 on: February 16, 2013, 05:58:08 AM »

Radiating

  • EOS M
  • ****
  • Posts: 230
    • View Profile
Re: Would a 14-28mm f/1.8 be possible?
« Reply #22 on: February 16, 2013, 06:37:06 PM »
Quote from: aroo on February 09, 2013, 09:20:11 PM
Canon has super lenses at the telephoto end, could they do crazy things with UWA too?


This lens would have a 152mm diameter and cost over $7,000 at launch assuming the same optical design as Nikon's was used and Canon's standard mark-up on the cost of ultra large lens elements was used.

In short, there is no way this would ever make it to market.

Canon could sell 10 times as many f/2.8 UWA lenses as they could f/1.8 ones.

In fact to make up the smaller market for the lens Canon would have to charge close to $17,000 for this lens, if not more.
Logged

aroo

  • PowerShot G1 X
  • ***
  • Posts: 55
    • View Profile
Re: Would a 14-28mm f/1.8 be possible?
« Reply #23 on: February 17, 2013, 12:37:51 AM »
Whoa 152mm? That explains a lot  :o
Logged

brad goda

  • Rebel T4i
  • ****
  • Posts: 109
    • View Profile
Re: Would a 14-28mm f/1.8 be possible?
« Reply #24 on: February 17, 2013, 03:20:20 AM »
Uh wait a...

8-15 fish zoom
17mm TSE and 24 TSE with massive image circle and very low distortion...

whats not crazy UWA about these canon lenses... that exist...! :o
Logged

Ellen Schmidtee

  • EOS M
  • ****
  • Posts: 318
    • View Profile
Re: Would a 14-28mm f/1.8 be possible?
« Reply #25 on: February 17, 2013, 05:46:53 AM »
Quote from: brad goda on February 15, 2013, 02:28:18 PM
the want for a lens with large aperture:
bright for viewing
bright for focus... manual or AF
shallow depth of field is image tool for photography.

Wide aperture is useful, but

A & B. How wide does it really have to be (f/1.8? f/1.4? f/1.0? f/0.7?) and at what point it would become too expensive and/or heavy?

C. I don't see the benefit of shallow DOF for ultrawide. Could you enlighten me?
Logged

aroo

  • PowerShot G1 X
  • ***
  • Posts: 55
    • View Profile
Re: Would a 14-28mm f/1.8 be possible?
« Reply #26 on: February 17, 2013, 02:20:19 PM »
Quote from: Ellen Schmidtee on February 17, 2013, 05:46:53 AM
C. I don't see the benefit of shallow DOF for ultrawide. Could you enlighten me?


Shallow DOF helps isolate the subject, no matter the focal length. I notice a big difference between f1.8 and f2.8 @ 50mm. I imagine such a difference would exist also at 15mm.
Logged

brad goda

  • Rebel T4i
  • ****
  • Posts: 109
    • View Profile
Re: Would a 14-28mm f/1.8 be possible?
« Reply #27 on: February 17, 2013, 02:42:30 PM »
Logged

aroo

  • PowerShot G1 X
  • ***
  • Posts: 55
    • View Profile
Re: Would a 14-28mm f/1.8 be possible?
« Reply #28 on: February 17, 2013, 02:47:24 PM »
Quote from: brad goda on February 17, 2013, 03:20:20 AM
Uh wait a...

8-15 fish zoom
17mm TSE and 24 TSE with massive image circle and very low distortion...

whats not crazy UWA about these canon lenses... that exist...! :o

I haven't had the chance to try any TS-E lenses, the 17mm might take my mind off thoughts of a fast aperture!
Logged

aroo

  • PowerShot G1 X
  • ***
  • Posts: 55
    • View Profile
Re: Would a 14-28mm f/1.8 be possible?
« Reply #29 on: February 17, 2013, 02:52:07 PM »
Logged

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Would a 14-28mm f/1.8 be possible?
« Reply #29 on: February 17, 2013, 02:52:07 PM »
Pages: 1 [2] 3
« previous next »