Canon explains the defocus smoothing in the new Canon RF 85mm f/1.2L USM DS lens

vjlex · Oct 24, 2019

Too bad these aren't filters you can screw on and off. I personally prefer the non-DS bokeh, but it would be nice to have the option to smooth them out from time to time.

Kit. · Oct 24, 2019

shunsai said:
Too bad these aren't filters you can screw on and off. I personally prefer the non-DS bokeh, but it would be nice to have the option to smooth them out from time to time.

Technically they are, they just cost $3k.

CanonFanBoy · Oct 24, 2019

A little off topic, but with a projected cost of $2,699 for the RF 70-200 f/2.8L I'd imagine the rumored RF 70-135mm f/2L to be upwards of $3,500+. OUCH! It'll be a bitter pill, but I'll just have to swallow it.

Maximilian · Oct 24, 2019

shunsai said:
... I personally prefer the non-DS bokeh...

It is quite funny that my wife - non photog - prefers the non-DS bokeh, too.
Showed the comparison to a photog friend of mine (Nikon) and he was in love with the DS bokeh.

I am so-so. I'm used to the "classical" bokeh and I suppose that's why I like it, too.
But I also see the DS bokeh as really good, esp. if in-fokus sharpness stays close to the non-DS lens.

But as the prices of both are far from what I'd be willing to pay for such a lens, I can stay relaxed

Maximilian · Oct 24, 2019

CanonFanBoy said:
... the rumored RF 70-135mm f/2L to be upwards of $3,500+. OUCH! ...

I'd say north of 4k - if it ever becomes real.

CanonFanBoy · Oct 24, 2019

Maximilian said:
I'd say north of 4k - if it ever becomes real.

True, but I didn’t want to get too depressed. Thanks a lot.

LSXPhotog · Oct 25, 2019

This is definitely a "rent before you buy" kind of lens. Losing all the light gathering advantage of an f/1.2 lens for a smoother background might be worth it...if the rendering is truly unique. We all buy lenses for the aesthetic they provide, so I will be renting this to see how it works. Might add something special for the RF mount, but I don't believe this could actually be a practical replacement for my needs of an 85mm prime. But maybe a standalone portrait lens with controlled light?

Maximilian · Oct 25, 2019

LSXPhotog said:
...Losing all the light gathering advantage of an f/1.2 lens for a smoother background might be worth it...
...But maybe a standalone portrait lens with controlled light?

I've read about the lower transmission here in the forum. But I didn't see the source for this.
Is this lower transmission compared to the non-DS or how does that perform?

If so, then your last statement seems to be fully correct.

SecureGSM · Oct 25, 2019

Maximilian said:
I've read about the lower transmission here in the forum. But I didn't see the source for this.
Is this lower transmission compared to the non-DS or how does that perform?

If so, then your last statement seems to be fully correct.

Yeah, the 1.5 stops difference and a deeper DoF statement is on Canon website. So valid.

Maximilian · Oct 25, 2019

SecureGSM said:
Yeah, the 1.5 stops difference and a deeper DoF statement is on Canon website. So valid.

WOW!

Thanks for clearing that up.

So that and the price gap would lead me directly to the non-DS version - if I was in the market for a 85/1.2.
But I'd be more in a market for a non-L, non-DS 85/1.8.

And as long as Canon does not start to build more consumer/amateur focused RF lenses I'll stay happy with all my EFs

Viggo · Oct 25, 2019

I want to see more examples of what the background looks like when there aren’t any bokeh balls. I saw one or two samples with an evenly blurred background and suddenly “huh, hm, that’s interesting”. It looked REALLY good compared to the examples where they just show the effect with round lights.

YuengLinger · Oct 25, 2019

Looks like a GREAT opportunity for a 3rd party filter-set that would be, say, 80% as nice for about $100.

koenkooi · Oct 25, 2019

YuengLinger said:
Looks like a GREAT opportunity for a 3rd party filter-set that would be, say, 80% as nice for about $100.

Filters that apply to not one, but two internal lens elements?

Kit. · Oct 25, 2019

koenkooi said:
Filters that apply to not one, but two internal lens elements?

Maybe Photoshop filters?

YuengLinger · Oct 25, 2019

koenkooi said:
Filters that apply to not one, but two internal lens elements?

In a way. Front element and rear. Two filters.

koenkooi · Oct 25, 2019

YuengLinger said:
In a way. Front element and rear. Two filters.

The way I understood it is that apodization filters need to be really close of the aperture, so a front or back filter won't do much.

YuengLinger · Oct 25, 2019

koenkooi said:
The way I understood it is that apodization filters need to be really close of the aperture, so a front or back filter won't do much.

Like I said, it could be worthwhile if it were about 80% appealing as the real thing. Especially for those who already own the normal 1.2.

Personally normal looks just spectacular.

M. D. Vaden of Oregon · Oct 25, 2019

The shown examples are much nicer than anticipated. Although I'd be satisfied with photos from both versions. I think the size of final print would matter quite a bit. Around 16 inches and bigger, the DF files should become more apparent.

RunAndGun · Oct 25, 2019

In a way, sounds similar to what is going on in the motion/“Cine” world right now, with a lot of lens manufacturers releasing “soft” versions of their lenses, where they’re essentially messing with(even removing) the lens coatings, but they’re going for the whole image, not just the bokeh. Sigma’s ‘Classic’ Cine Primes just announced in the last several months are the same f-stop as their existing high-speed Cine Primes(most* are f/1.4 / T1.5) but because of the coating manipulation/differences, they are slower in actual light transmission, going from T1.5 to T2.5.

*14mm & 135 are slower at f/1.8 / T2 in standard high-speed version and go to f/1.8 / T3.2 in the soft versions.

20, 24, 28, 35, 40, 50, 85, 105 are all f/1.4 / T1.5 in standard versions