December 11, 2017, 06:15:34 PM

Author Topic: Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS & Three More Lenses Coming at the End of August [CR2]  (Read 35373 times)

Act444

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 776
If this new 85 does appear as promised, if the quality holds up I'd be interested in one. I'd like to free up the 100 Macro again to do actual macro work with - and to gain two extra stops would be very nice as well.

I just wish it would be available in late Aug instead of simply being announced that date - I would really like to have it for my fall shooting season. I guess we'd be looking at late Sept/early Oct. for the first batches.

canon rumors FORUM


ahsanford

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5831
  • USM > STM
Are all Ls sealed?  I thought the 50L and 85L weren't, at least.

No, you are right, some are not.

The 17 and 24 TS-E's have no weathersealing at all.

After that it depends on the model, the 50mm requires a front filter to be sealed, as do several generations of the wide angle zooms both f2.8 and f4.

The 85 f1.2 L MkII is not weather sealed.

...and the majority of L lenses with front filter threads are not sealed around the front element unless you front-filter them, if I recall. 

- A

ahsanford

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5831
  • USM > STM
Two part question: 

1) Will this new 85L be focus by wire like the 85 f/1.2L II is?

2) If it is, think they might go with Nano USM here for the film folks?

- A

privatebydesign

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 6588
  • Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Are all Ls sealed?  I thought the 50L and 85L weren't, at least.

No, you are right, some are not.

The 17 and 24 TS-E's have no weathersealing at all.

After that it depends on the model, the 50mm requires a front filter to be sealed, as do several generations of the wide angle zooms both f2.8 and f4.

The 85 f1.2 L MkII is not weather sealed.

...and the majority of L lenses with front filter threads are not sealed around the front element unless you front-filter them, if I recall. 

- A

No that's not true. The various 70-200's and 24-70's, the 100 macro and 35 f1.4 etc etc all have front filter threads but don't need a filter to complete the sealing.

I believe it is just the 50L and the various 16/20-35/40 zooms that need a front filter to complete weather sealing of those that are considered weather sealed. The other L's like the 85 MkII and the TS-E's are not considered as weather sealed.

I'm sur eNeuro will add to the list if I missed one or two  ;)
Too often we lose sight of the fact that photography is about capturing light, if we have the ability to take control of that light then we grow exponentially as photographers. More often than not the image is not about lens speed, sensor size, DR, MP's or AF, it is about the light.

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 21818
50L is sealed. But 35L (first version) is not as well as 24L (first version), 135L, 200L and 70-200/4L (non IS) are also not sealed. So some older L lenses are not weather sealed, all the new one are.

The 11-24/4L is rather new, and not sealed (well, Canon does state that it is, except for that massive front element.  Kinda like saying all the doors and windows on a car are weather sealed...but the convertible top is not.   


...and the majority of L lenses with front filter threads are not sealed around the front element unless you front-filter them, if I recall. 

Nope.  The majority of lenses with front filter threads are sealed around the front element, even though some (e.g. Canon tech-mouthpice Chuck Westfall) recommend using a filter anyway).  The only lenses with front filter threads that require a front filter to complete the sealing (at least, if you go by the lens' instruction manuals) are those with a front element that moves within the barrel 'behind' the plane of the filter – currently, that's the 50/1.2L (which moves with focusing) and the filterable UWA zooms (17-40, and the several 16-35's, which move with zooming).
EOS 1D X, EOS M2, lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

ahsanford

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5831
  • USM > STM
Nope.  The majority of lenses with front filter threads are sealed around the front element, even though some (e.g. Canon tech-mouthpice Chuck Westfall) recommend using a filter anyway). 

To Neuro and TBD, phrases like 'if I recall' and 'if memory serves' is a fun way of saying 'please correct me'.

Thanks for taking the hint.   :)

The only lenses with front filter threads that require a front filter to complete the sealing (at least, if you go by the lens' instruction manuals) are those with a front element that moves within the barrel 'behind' the plane of the filter – currently, that's the 50/1.2L (which moves with focusing) and the filterable UWA zooms (17-40, and the several 16-35's, which move with zooming).

Ah, right, the lenses that are 'geometrically internally focusing' (their innards never push past the end of the outer barrel) but are not truly internally focusing* because there isn't a set front element at the end of that outer barrel. 

(*even though TDP claims they are internally focusing in their database for some reason, which doesn't seem right)


Right.  That makes sense.  That's a nasty sliding internal bit to seal -- gasketing that would be a hot mess, so a front filter makes sense to seal off that point of ingress.

- A

Khalai

  • EOS 5D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 708
  • In the absence of light, darknoise prevails...
Nope.  The majority of lenses with front filter threads are sealed around the front element, even though some (e.g. Canon tech-mouthpice Chuck Westfall) recommend using a filter anyway). 

To Neuro and TBD, phrases like 'if I recall' and 'if memory serves' is a fun way of saying 'please correct me'.

Thanks for taking the hint.   :)

The only lenses with front filter threads that require a front filter to complete the sealing (at least, if you go by the lens' instruction manuals) are those with a front element that moves within the barrel 'behind' the plane of the filter – currently, that's the 50/1.2L (which moves with focusing) and the filterable UWA zooms (17-40, and the several 16-35's, which move with zooming).

Ah, right, the lenses that are 'geometrically internally focusing' (their innards never push past the end of the outer barrel) but are not truly internally focusing* because there isn't a set front element at the end of that outer barrel. 

(*even though TDP claims they are internally focusing in their database for some reason, which doesn't seem right)


Right.  That makes sense.  That's a nasty sliding internal bit to seal -- gasketing that would be a hot mess, so a front filter makes sense to seal off that point of ingress.

- A

They are internally focusing. They focus using rear group, which is observable, if you demount the lens and look through the back of the lens while focusing. However they are not truly internally zooming (as do 70-200), I think that's what you meant, right? :)
6D | Zeiss 21/2.8 ZE | 24-70/2.8L II | 35/1.4L | 50/1.2L | Zeiss 50/2 ZE Makro | Zeiss 85/1.4 ZE | 70-200/2.8L II

canon rumors FORUM


neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 21818
Nope.  The majority of lenses with front filter threads are sealed around the front element, even though some (e.g. Canon tech-mouthpice Chuck Westfall) recommend using a filter anyway). 

To Neuro and TBD, phrases like 'if I recall' and 'if memory serves' is a fun way of saying 'please correct me'.

Thanks for taking the hint.   :)

The only lenses with front filter threads that require a front filter to complete the sealing (at least, if you go by the lens' instruction manuals) are those with a front element that moves within the barrel 'behind' the plane of the filter – currently, that's the 50/1.2L (which moves with focusing) and the filterable UWA zooms (17-40, and the several 16-35's, which move with zooming).

Ah, right, the lenses that are 'geometrically internally focusing' (their innards never push past the end of the outer barrel) but are not truly internally focusing* because there isn't a set front element at the end of that outer barrel. 

(*even though TDP claims they are internally focusing in their database for some reason, which doesn't seem right)


Right.  That makes sense.  That's a nasty sliding internal bit to seal -- gasketing that would be a hot mess, so a front filter makes sense to seal off that point of ingress.

- A

They are internally focusing. They focus using rear group, which is observable, if you demount the lens and look through the back of the lens while focusing. However they are not truly internally zooming (as do 70-200), I think that's what you meant, right? :)

Just to clarify...the UWA zooms are internally focusing, but the zoom mechanism shifts the front element forward/backward within the barrel.  The 50/1.2L is front-focusing, changing focus moves the front element (just like the 85/1.2L, but the with former all of the movement is behind the plane of the filter threads).  However, TDP's database shows the 50/1.2L as internal focusing, and the 16-35/2.8 III as not internal focusing, both of which are incorrect.

You can see the movements of them here:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Product-Images.aspx?Lens=403&LensComp2=0&LensComp=1073

(Hover your pointer over the MFD vs. ∞ without the hood.)
EOS 1D X, EOS M2, lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

ahsanford

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5831
  • USM > STM

Gotcha. TDP's a good go-to I use for what does/doesn't move with focus/zooming if I don't own the lens myself.

- A

ahsanford

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5831
  • USM > STM
Two part question: 

1) Will this new 85L be focus by wire like the 85 f/1.2L II is?

2) If it is, think they might go with Nano USM here for the film folks?

- A

Back to this, please -- thoughts?

- A

Khalai

  • EOS 5D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 708
  • In the absence of light, darknoise prevails...
1) Will this new 85L be focus by wire like the 85 f/1.2L II is?

Back to this, please -- thoughts?

- A

I hope not. I hate that OTW focusing on 85/1.2L II. Lens itself is fine, bit front-heavy but that's expected. However that freely spinning focusing ring was driving me nuts.
6D | Zeiss 21/2.8 ZE | 24-70/2.8L II | 35/1.4L | 50/1.2L | Zeiss 50/2 ZE Makro | Zeiss 85/1.4 ZE | 70-200/2.8L II

Jopa

  • EOS 5DS R
  • ******
  • Posts: 1056
My personal votes for the three lenses:

  • EF 50mm f/1.4L IS USM

  • EF 50mm f/1.4 IS USM

  • EF 50mm f/1.4 USM II

- A

And why not EF 50mm f/1.4 IS USM DO Macro 1.4TC while we're at it :-D

How about EF 50mm f/1.0 IS?

Jokes aside, I'd pay a lot of dollars for a 50mm that is really good wide open.. and it's not going to happen, again.

There has been 50/1.0L. Cost was about the same as Zeiss 55/1.4 Otus  >:(

I was more thinking of something like this
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/586190-REG/Leica_11_602_50mm_f_0_95_Noctilux_M_Aspherical.html
for under $1k and, of course, with 4K :)

It's awesome if you have patient subjects while shooting this lens wide open :)

mnclayshooter

  • EOS 80D
  • ****
  • Posts: 306
  • I love shooting - clay pigeons and photos!
My personal votes for the three lenses:

  • EF 50mm f/1.4L IS USM
  • EF 50mm f/1.4 IS USM
  • EF 50mm f/1.4 USM II
- A


Metal or plastic mounts?
Pull!... click... crap!  Lemme try it again...
Pull!  click... boom... crap! Lemme try it again...
Definition of insanity?

canon rumors FORUM


ahsanford

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5831
  • USM > STM
1) Will this new 85L be focus by wire like the 85 f/1.2L II is?

I hope not. I hate that OTW focusing on 85/1.2L II. Lens itself is fine, bit front-heavy but that's expected. However that freely spinning focusing ring was driving me nuts.

It's not an easy call:

1) IS says video as much as stills --> that says Nano USM, which is (as I understand) only available in FBW, right?

2) Portraiture cares less about pure focusing speed (like a sports lens might) and more about really long throw for accurate manual focusing.  That's somewhat neutral to Nano USM vs. Ring USM, right?

3) Stills folks in general (or folks that don't shoot video at all) want 'mechanical' ring USM for faster focusing speed and a true full-time manual mechanical focusing override.

One would think that unless Group 2 above has skin in the game towards one or the other focusing setup (please pipe up if they do), Group 3 should win the argument and this will be principally a stills portraiture lens.  But the predecessor was FBW...  I could see this go either way.

- A

ahsanford

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • **********
  • Posts: 5831
  • USM > STM
My personal votes for the three lenses:

  • EF 50mm f/1.4L IS USM
  • EF 50mm f/1.4 IS USM
  • EF 50mm f/1.4 USM II
- A


Metal or plastic mounts?

If the budget 50 f/1.8 STM is now metal, any of those above would be metal.

- A

canon rumors FORUM