April 16, 2014, 06:33:51 AM

Author Topic: A Random Roadmap: Lenses & Bodies [CR1]  (Read 20778 times)

Justin

  • Guest
Re: A Random Roadmap: Lenses & Bodies [CR1]
« Reply #45 on: April 28, 2011, 04:54:16 PM »
IMHO, the lenses would still significantly differ, e.g.

* The f/1.2 has metal body with weather sealing, where the f/1.4 has plastic body with no weather sealing.

* The f/1.2 has 8 circular aperture blades, while the f/1.4 has 7 straight blades.

* The f/1.2 has an aspherical element, the f/1.4 has none.


You know the sad thing is that even the new nikon 50 f1.8 has an aspherical element. And its 200$ not 1600$...
Canon screwed this when they released the new 50 f1.2, because its became the worst L prime in the lineup, its so weak that even the 1.4 can match it. So canon can't (and won't) upgrade the 1.4 until the 1.2 is not getting its refresh. And its not coming soon...

Yeah sad. Buy sigma and bring it back to the store five times before you get a good copy.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: A Random Roadmap: Lenses & Bodies [CR1]
« Reply #45 on: April 28, 2011, 04:54:16 PM »

Justin

  • Guest
Re: A Random Roadmap: Lenses & Bodies [CR1]
« Reply #46 on: April 28, 2011, 04:55:26 PM »

24-70 f/2.8L II

Apparently 5 versions of this lens exist. A few even have IS. It is slated for a 2011 announcement. The patent we’ve seen says no IS.


Is it normal for manufacturers to produce 5 different, fully functional prototypes of different designs for a new lens? Surely in this age of computer design and modelling, lens manufacturers can just settle on one design and tweak it? Is anyone else a touch suspicious about this?

Apple does the same thing, though to obscure announcements.  Guess what I spend my days doing besides waiting for Canon to release things? :D

Me too brotha. Oh that and working and having fun and eating and stuff. But lots of mac and canon and photography rumors.

pgabor

  • Guest
Re: A Random Roadmap: Lenses & Bodies [CR1]
« Reply #47 on: April 28, 2011, 06:17:03 PM »
You know the sad thing is that even the new nikon 50 f1.8 has an aspherical element. And its 200$ not 1600$...
Canon screwed this when they released the new 50 f1.2, because its became the worst L prime in the lineup, its so weak that even the 1.4 can match it. So canon can't (and won't) upgrade the 1.4 until the 1.2 is not getting its refresh. And its not coming soon...
Yeah sad. Buy sigma and bring it back to the store five times before you get a good copy.
Thats the problem. I don't want to buy sigma, or any other 3rd party lens, i want to buy a GOOD canon 50mm, but they don't offer one : ( I have the 1.4, but it has it's limitations (and it's AF started dying nowadays)
(btw i don't know with what i deserved this attitude... i don't know why you have to be offensive)

dilbert

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 2351
    • View Profile
Re: A Random Roadmap: Lenses & Bodies [CR1]
« Reply #48 on: April 28, 2011, 06:39:01 PM »
There are two main reasons for the APS-H format.  One is that it's substantially cheaper to produce than FF (APS-H is the largest size that can be imaged in one shot onto the silicon wafer during production, FF sensors require multiple passes).

That was true of older steppers as I believe that in more recent years R&D has led to the production of steppers that can image an entire 35mm sensor in a single pass, thus reducing the cost.

The reason for multiple passes increasing cost is due to a substantial increase in imperfections, thus lowering the yield even further from a single wafer.

Justin

  • Guest
Re: A Random Roadmap: Lenses & Bodies [CR1]
« Reply #49 on: April 29, 2011, 11:36:55 AM »
You know the sad thing is that even the new nikon 50 f1.8 has an aspherical element. And its 200$ not 1600$...
Canon screwed this when they released the new 50 f1.2, because its became the worst L prime in the lineup, its so weak that even the 1.4 can match it. So canon can't (and won't) upgrade the 1.4 until the 1.2 is not getting its refresh. And its not coming soon...
Yeah sad. Buy sigma and bring it back to the store five times before you get a good copy.
Thats the problem. I don't want to buy sigma, or any other 3rd party lens, i want to buy a GOOD canon 50mm, but they don't offer one : ( I have the 1.4, but it has it's limitations (and it's AF started dying nowadays)
(btw i don't know with what i deserved this attitude... i don't know why you have to be offensive)

I was agreeing with you. What attitude?

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • *******
  • Posts: 12721
    • View Profile
Re: A Random Roadmap: Lenses & Bodies [CR1]
« Reply #50 on: April 29, 2011, 12:21:17 PM »
Canon screwed this when they released the new 50 f1.2, because its became the worst L prime in the lineup, its so weak that even the 1.4 can match it. So canon can't (and won't) upgrade the 1.4 until the 1.2 is not getting its refresh. And its not coming soon...

What, specifically, is 'weak' about the 50mm f/1.2L?
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

lol

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 477
    • View Profile
    • My dA
Re: A Random Roadmap: Lenses & Bodies [CR1]
« Reply #51 on: April 29, 2011, 12:41:51 PM »
What, specifically, is 'weak' about the 50mm f/1.2L?
I'm guessing it is the relative lack of sharpness in border regions on full frame, from a quick glance at Photozone results. Seems to fall off significantly there. Not an issue on crop sensors. It doesn't sound like an issue in real world shooting, since if you're getting the f/1.2, you're wanting the current shallowest DoF at that length and unlikely to get everything sharp in frame anyway. There is the even older f/1.0 it replaced that's even softer.
Canon 1D, 300D IR, 450D full spectrum, 600D, 5D2, 7D, EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 70-300L, 100-400L
EF-S 15-85, TS-E 24, MP-E 65, Zeiss 50/2 macro, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8 OS, Samyang 8mm fisheye

canon rumors FORUM

Re: A Random Roadmap: Lenses & Bodies [CR1]
« Reply #51 on: April 29, 2011, 12:41:51 PM »

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • *******
  • Posts: 12721
    • View Profile
Re: A Random Roadmap: Lenses & Bodies [CR1]
« Reply #52 on: April 29, 2011, 12:50:28 PM »
What, specifically, is 'weak' about the 50mm f/1.2L?
I'm guessing it is the relative lack of sharpness in border regions on full frame, from a quick glance at Photozone results. Seems to fall off significantly there. Not an issue on crop sensors. It doesn't sound like an issue in real world shooting, since if you're getting the f/1.2, you're wanting the current shallowest DoF at that length and unlikely to get everything sharp in frame anyway. There is the even older f/1.0 it replaced that's even softer.

I suspected that might be the perceived issue.  Everything in photography involves tradeoffs and compromise.  Want a faster shutter speed in low light?  Fine, open the aperture and sacrifice DoF, or raise the ISO and add noise.  Tradeoffs.  In the case of the 50/1.2, Canon's designers chose to produce a lens with superior bokeh.  The way to do that is to intentionally undercorrect speherical aberration, meaning sharpness is reduced a bit.  But the lens is intended for portrait work ("Taking advantage of shallow depth of field allows the photographer to capture subjects with impact, such as for wedding portraits," from Lens Work III) - as such, especially with such a wide aperture, bokeh is critical - and in most portraits, it's ok for the resulting image to lack razor sharpness (all the portrait picture styles, from Canon and in 3rd party software, have the sharpness set lower than for general shooting for a reason).
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

Lawliet

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 317
    • View Profile
Re: A Random Roadmap: Lenses & Bodies [CR1]
« Reply #53 on: April 29, 2011, 01:07:08 PM »
What, specifically, is 'weak' about the 50mm f/1.2L?

The focus shift is an annoyance. Raw performance doesn't matter if systematic errors spoil the game. That puts both the 50/1,2L and the Sigma 50/1,4 rather low on my list.
For example the difference between a 50/1,2 and the Nikkor 50/1,4 is for the connoisseur, but flawed focussing ruins the picture for everybody.

epsiloneri

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 344
    • View Profile
Re: A Random Roadmap: Lenses & Bodies [CR1]
« Reply #54 on: April 29, 2011, 06:08:12 PM »
The focus shift is an annoyance.

Sounds like the solution is to not step down this lens. The argument can be made that if you're stepping it down anyway, you might just as well use the 50/1.8 or 50/1.4 (or a zoom at f/8). Of course it would be nice if you had the flexibility to use the 50/1.2L for smaller apertures as well. It shouldn't really be so difficult for Canon to calibrate the focus shift in software, I think. I wonder why it's not done.


Lawliet

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 317
    • View Profile
Re: A Random Roadmap: Lenses & Bodies [CR1]
« Reply #55 on: April 29, 2011, 07:22:47 PM »
F/1,2 only would be a bit to constrained for my taste. :)
At least its less severe with the more peripheral sensors of the 1D(s), but with the 5D(II) you just replace systematic error with randomness.

Well so much for why it is the weakest of the fast prime Ls - the others don't have such real life weaknesses.

epsiloneri

  • 7D
  • *****
  • Posts: 344
    • View Profile
Re: A Random Roadmap: Lenses & Bodies [CR1]
« Reply #56 on: April 30, 2011, 03:48:11 AM »
At least its less severe with the more peripheral sensors of the 1D(s), but with the 5D(II) you just replace systematic error with randomness.

I assumed the focus shift was due to the intentional spherical aberration (to get a nicer bokeh). That should give you a systematic shift as you step the lens down, because the focus distance for different radii from the central optical axis of the parallel beam will be different, and when closing the aperture you are selectively ignoring the outer parts of the beam.

But you seem to imply that the focus shift is random (for the 5D2 anyway), which doesn't make sense if the focus is still always retrieved at the same aperture. Can you explain what you mean by the sensors being more peripheral on the 1Ds?

lol

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 477
    • View Profile
    • My dA
Re: A Random Roadmap: Lenses & Bodies [CR1]
« Reply #57 on: April 30, 2011, 05:17:27 AM »
It shouldn't really be so difficult for Canon to calibrate the focus shift in software, I think. I wonder why it's not done.
I'd love that. For my style of fast prime shooting, focus shift is a significant hindrance.

As to why... I'd guess the technology wasn't in place when the lens came out. When did AF micro adjust come in? Assuming it wont be retro-fitted into lenses, a body could do it using a built in lookup table in a similar way to peripheral illumination correction.
Canon 1D, 300D IR, 450D full spectrum, 600D, 5D2, 7D, EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 70-300L, 100-400L
EF-S 15-85, TS-E 24, MP-E 65, Zeiss 50/2 macro, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8 OS, Samyang 8mm fisheye

canon rumors FORUM

Re: A Random Roadmap: Lenses & Bodies [CR1]
« Reply #57 on: April 30, 2011, 05:17:27 AM »

Lawliet

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 317
    • View Profile
Re: A Random Roadmap: Lenses & Bodies [CR1]
« Reply #58 on: April 30, 2011, 12:08:01 PM »
But you seem to imply that the focus shift is random (for the 5D2 anyway), which doesn't make sense if the focus is still always retrieved at the same aperture. Can you explain what you mean by the sensors being more peripheral on the 1Ds?

I suspect that field curvature and focus shift cancel each other out.
With the 5D2 that effect applies at well, but the focus points are not accurate enough to nail the focus.

skitron

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 501
    • View Profile
Re: A Random Roadmap: Lenses & Bodies [CR1]
« Reply #59 on: April 30, 2011, 02:27:34 PM »
The focus shift is an annoyance. Raw performance doesn't matter if systematic errors spoil the game. That puts both the 50/1,2L and the Sigma 50/1,4 rather low on my list.

The newer "smooth finish" Sigma 50 is apparently much better in this regard. I have not tried the old one but took a chance on the new one when I saw good reports on it...tested it and found it has very little shift at all. My 50 tested to look virtually identical to the focus charts for the Sigma 85 at photozone.de.
5D3, 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, 100L, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4, Canon TC 1.4x III

canon rumors FORUM

Re: A Random Roadmap: Lenses & Bodies [CR1]
« Reply #59 on: April 30, 2011, 02:27:34 PM »