Patent: Canon EF 35 f/1.4L II

[koolman]

How exactly do you read these patents when they come out? I see the aperture and the film plane, but what about the focal length? Is it apurture-FP? Is it the same basic concept in all modern lenses?

Focal length is the distance between is rear nodal point with the lens at infinity focus and the sensor/film plane.  Note that the rear nodal point is an optical point which depends on lens design, may not fall within the physical dimension of the lens.  Most telephoto lenses have the rear nodal point right behind the front element.

Can you please explain this in more detail - possibly with a chart or diagram ? What is the "nodal point" ? How does its position affect the distortion of the lens?

[Act444]

As for improvements, two I can think of- weather sealing and better performance "wide open".

But from 1.8 onward, the current one is amazing. Probably the sharpest lens I have- well, that and the 100L I guess!

If they do come out with version II soon, it likely won't be an easy decision whether to spring for the upgrade or not. I suppose it ultimately depends on how much the inevitable price increase will be.

[drjlo]

If they do come out with version II soon, it likely won't be an easy decision whether to spring for the upgrade or not. I suppose it ultimately depends on how much the inevitable price increase will be.

Oh, who are we kidding.  After 24-70 II, 24 f/2.8 IS, etc, I think we all know by now the price increase will not be incremental 

[Trix]

Just to clarify what this may or may not mean -- this relates to a patent application that was filed December 2010 (not an issued patent).  Patent applications generally get published 18 months after filing.  So, that's what this is.  The takeaway is that about 18 months ago engineers at Canon thought up this design, and someone made the decision that it was worth pursuing patent protection for.  Whether that will translate to a new lens, and when, we can only hope. By the way, to put things in perspective, since 2001, Canon appears to have filed over 25,000 US patent applications.

[Bosman]

Sigh, not everyone shoots every 35mm shot at f1.4, if one's only purpose for purchasing this lens is to obliterate the background on every shot, that's certainly your prerogative but myself and many others want to the use the lens in more than that 1 limited scenario.  Corner sharpness is important to many, myself included but I won't discount those that find it unimportant as "using it wrong".  In addition to those "artistic" shots, I would use this lens to shoot low light street scenes where I would in many cases want corner to corner sharpness.  One eyelash in focus is not the be all end all of artistic composition....

I agree that "artistic" doesn't mean shallow DOF. I am kinda sayin that to be serious about corner sharpness no one should expect it below F2.8 on any lens, well i don't anyway. I actually rarely shoot below F2.2 personally. I don't think it lends to great photos unless your subject is enhanced by the composition. For me single person portraits & Detail shots usually fit into the shallow DOF category for me. If the surroundings lend to the image and tell a story they are more useful somewhat in focus. F1.4 is good for astro photog and for corner sharpness i'd guess not many landscape photographers shoot larger apertures than F5.6, thus making this mute point imo as this lens is excellent stopped down.

[tron]

dammit I was just about to buy a 35L this week! now I dont know what to do

maybe I should get the shorty 40 and the siggy 120-300 while i wait for this to come out

They same could be said a few years earlier!
You could be forever waiting...

PS Or wait and be lucky and Canon announces it. Who knows...
PS2 Why 40? Your camera is not that small anyway and you seem to need 1.4 ....

[tron]

Sigh, not everyone shoots every 35mm shot at f1.4, if one's only purpose for purchasing this lens is to obliterate the background on every shot, that's certainly your prerogative but myself and many others want to the use the lens in more than that 1 limited scenario.  Corner sharpness is important to many, myself included but I won't discount those that find it unimportant as "using it wrong".  In addition to those "artistic" shots, I would use this lens to shoot low light street scenes where I would in many cases want corner to corner sharpness.  One eyelash in focus is not the be all end all of artistic composition....

I agree that "artistic" doesn't mean shallow DOF. I am kinda sayin that to be serious about corner sharpness no one should expect it below F2.8 on any lens, well i don't anyway. I actually rarely shoot below F2.2 personally. I don't think it lends to great photos unless your subject is enhanced by the composition. For me single person portraits & Detail shots usually fit into the shallow DOF category for me. If the surroundings lend to the image and tell a story they are more useful somewhat in focus. F1.4 is good for astro photog and for corner sharpness i'd guess not many landscape photographers shoot larger apertures than F5.6, thus making this mute point imo as this lens is excellent stopped down.

Hello,

I have 35mm 1.4 and 1.4 is not even good for astro photos!  Stars that are not close to the center look more like ... seagulls due to coma! You have to close it at least to 2.8 to get rid of most of the coma 
Still, I am not really complaining because the 16-35mm 2.8 had again extreme coma at 2.8 ...

[chito]

It's a bit weird, but I feel as if the 35L focuses slower on the 5D3 than on the 5D2... and I'm talking about single point centre focus..  I've read the lense rental articles about AF and a newer faster and more precise focusing 35L is definitely something for me to consider, aside from the other more obvious improvements.

[Bosman]

Sigh, not everyone shoots every 35mm shot at f1.4, if one's only purpose for purchasing this lens is to obliterate the background on every shot, that's certainly your prerogative but myself and many others want to the use the lens in more than that 1 limited scenario.  Corner sharpness is important to many, myself included but I won't discount those that find it unimportant as "using it wrong".  In addition to those "artistic" shots, I would use this lens to shoot low light street scenes where I would in many cases want corner to corner sharpness.  One eyelash in focus is not the be all end all of artistic composition....

I agree that "artistic" doesn't mean shallow DOF. I am kinda sayin that to be serious about corner sharpness no one should expect it below F2.8 on any lens, well i don't anyway. I actually rarely shoot below F2.2 personally. I don't think it lends to great photos unless your subject is enhanced by the composition. For me single person portraits & Detail shots usually fit into the shallow DOF category for me. If the surroundings lend to the image and tell a story they are more useful somewhat in focus. F1.4 is good for astro photog and for corner sharpness i'd guess not many landscape photographers shoot larger apertures than F5.6, thus making this mute point imo as this lens is excellent stopped down.

Hello,

I have 35mm 1.4 and 1.4 is not even good for astro photos!  Stars that are not close to the center look more like ... seagulls due to coma! You have to close it at least to 2.8 to get rid of most of the coma 
Still, I am not really complaining because the 16-35mm 2.8 had again extreme coma at 2.8 ...

I read an article about it and when you consider dof, its not a prob. I haven't read about using the 35L for stars.