m4ndr4ke said:

…and, potentially, peak sharpness.

Click to expand...

Oh, just so I make myself clear: I didn't mean to refer to the loss of detail due to image stretching that occurs on software-corrected lenses, as that is obvious.
I actually meant the opposite: the more optical corrections a lens includes, via the addition of extra elements, the more detail is prone to be lost.

Software vignetting corrections sometimes bother me, specially as Adobe tends to over-correct them, but they're not new and were present on EF lenses already.

A few examples for vignetting:



As for software distortion corrections....I'm currently at the point where as long as I don't notice image degradation, I'll look the other way, because in my line of work real usefulness is having a lens that delivers results, not one that takes a perfect image of the wrong composition.
Of course, such thinking may not be suitable for all genres of photography.

P-visie said:

Yes, Texel is a bird photographers paradise during the breading season, with lots of birds and accessible locations. And are there dragonflies as well. Let me know if you need more information.

Click to expand...

I am also interested in Texel as a place to go. How do you get around out there ?

m4ndr4ke said:

…and, potentially, peak sharpness.

Personally, I don’t have a definitive preference but, this method has been giving us some very useful and innovative lenses designs.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I think so.

I found this by Nando Harmsen, which seems relevant to the software-as-a-lens-component discussion:


I think that in the context of the “best of 2025” theme, neuroanatomist’s point about the expense of optically ideal lenses is a very valid measure.

I also think that your point stands in the same context. I don’t think they’re taking an OG innovative approach, but the effort to help people buy into the game is good for the rest of the community.

I also don’t think an emphasis on software over physical design is a thing to be celebrated as a trend, but I do think that bringing a competent overall solution at a tolerable price point merits a best of the year consideration.

In fact, really I have kept much of my EF L stable (and 20mm USM) because physically they are good (not the best, but corner to corner full of data and identifiable detail that can be made sharp/er with f-stop use) and the DLO application by camera or computer makes the camera-exiting image great — and in some cases stunning. More than acceptable enough (to me) to save $1k per lens by not upgrading the glass for hobby work (ignoring other issues like lack of full-time override).

Canon is simply now milking this approach to the nth-degree with their modern VCM, 10-24mm, etc. work. So I recognize that I’m accepting / doing conceptually the same practice —but with what I feel is better overall raw source data for the software part of the chain. No black corners or need for imputed data given the image that hits the sensor with my lenses; I could use the raw photo imprint pre-DLO in all cases.

I think it would be nice to see some of those EF L designs be re-introduced for the mid-tier lens market with the same modern RF computational assist via DLO or like mechanism. This would help keep cost down, wow factor up for typical image review use cases, and not leave people with multi-thousand dollar corners with inflated noise or imputed data. The 75-300 RF edition surely deserves its worst of laugh. But I think the idea of classic L designs being used in this recycling of glass manner is the right way to go for many cases.

Failing that, and coming back to the reality of today, I think the awarded lens is a valid proposal. But in the context of EF on an RF mount using DLO to save some serious bucks for a solid final output before artistic editing takes place kind of way. Put another way, it might as well have been an EF lens with a splash of DLO.

Richard CR said:

I thought much of it was as well.

Click to expand...

I guess that labor costs still matter, highly skilled machine operators and maintenance staff are well paid.
Besides, logistics, packaging, testing cannot be fully automated.

I don't mind, as long as the production of high-end cameras (R5 II, R 1 & R 100) stays in Japan.

P-visie said:

The thread is still active: https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/threads/is-a-canon-rf-35mm-f-1-2l-usm-on-the-horizon.44909/page-3

Maybe you couldn’t stand it any longer and clicked the “Ignore” button .

Click to expand...

Is there also a "I want this lens quick" button?

roby17269 said:

What happened to the latest 35 1.2 thread?
I am traveling so I haven’t logged in for a few days

Click to expand...

The thread is still active: https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/threads/is-a-canon-rf-35mm-f-1-2l-usm-on-the-horizon.44909/page-3

Maybe you couldn’t stand it any longer and clicked the “Ignore” button .

Asobinet has posted patent applications for a 70-200mm F2.8-4 lens and a 70-200mm F3.5 lens. The objective: “To provide a zoom lens that is small and lightweight, capable of focusing, has little aberration fluctuation during zooming, and provides high optical performance over the entire object distance range”.

Google translated link.

Does anybody know what the R2 and R4 are supposed to be at some time in the future? Is my suggestion to make one of those a flagship APS-C camera ridiculous or would there be some benefit in that?

neuroanatomist said:

I get the preference. But ‘better source material’ isn’t free, the cost is usually size, weight, and actual cost

Click to expand...

…and, potentially, peak sharpness.

Personally, I don’t have a definitive preference but, this method has been giving us some very useful and innovative lenses designs.

EricN said:

I think it's hard to scare a bird that looks like it's covered with blood! I wouldn't want it coming closer to me! Nightmare before Christmas?
I hope there was a monkey nearby to give her some poop for Christmas, but nobody is this lucky. Maybe, she'll get drunk at a holiday party, fall down and knock some sense into her head.

Click to expand...

@ISv took appropriate action after “That women passed in front of my lens” so all the corrective measures you propose are no longer applicable.

In 2022 Canon shutdown it’s Zhuhai factory in China where it manufactured compact camera’s. With hindsight …..

See: https://www.dpreview.com/news/1370528730/canon-shutting-down-zhuhai-factory-in-south-china
and

John Wilde said:

I thought Canon's camera assembly was so robotic/automated that labor costs weren't an issue.

Click to expand...

I thought much of it was as well.

neuroanatomist said:

Small biotech in Boston.

Click to expand...

Cool! Boston is where a lot of it is at!

DocInfoSci said:

Big pharma in Boston or Redwood?

Click to expand...

Small biotech in Boston.

neuroanatomist said:

We don’t capture images in the lab with MILC lenses, we use microscope objectives. Our automated cell-based high-throughout screening system for small molecule libraries captures ~64,500 images per day. Each of those images has digital corrections applied before being processed by ML-driven algorithms to quantify the effects of the compounds on the cells.

Click to expand...

Sounds like some of our work overlaps.

Agreed for many kinds of work, but not all work is this refined. Pathology takes into account other perspectives as well. Big pharma in Boston or Redwood? Sure, what you said. Some lab operations in Africa? Better work with “inferior tools” than you’d think.

But better source is better source, no matter the size of the lens and spectra’s of light or radio waves. My teams help out with some of those libraries and pipelines at various places, and not all hardware is the same grade. Another discussion for another forum.

Thanks for the insight into the RF 50mm!

Lovely shot. Amazing details of the bird. Beautiful pose in a clear background. Nicely done, ISv.

ISv said:

"A small number of mushrooms are in the ‘edible and tasty’ category, and an even smaller number are in the ‘deadly if ingested’ category."
I agree with that but what is "tasty" for some is kind of "mediocre" or "not tasty" for others!
In most cases it actually deepens on how you prepare it: you don't make chicken, pork, beef e.t.c the same way, no?
Grifola frondosa (aka "hen-of-the-woods") has a flavor similar of some Amanitas (yes! there are edible Amanitas like the most known A. rubescens and even the highly prized A. cesarea) and some other mushrooms (like Leucopaxillus giganteus that is by far more meaty!) with the similar flavor. You may like or dislike it but it's just a different flavor!
I could be an exception but for example I don't like the flavor of any Truffles! Or may be I just haven't tried some prepared by a good chef?!
And a case from Sweden: I went out to look for Boletus edulis but instead found +/- 2 pounds of Cantharellis cibarius. Met a family with two small children and when they saw my basked they were like "where did you find these? We are looking for these!!!"
I gave them my C. cibarius because I'm not realy fan of it.
For my big surprize they gave me their collection of B. edulis!!! I asked few times "are you sure?!!!" but they were so happy with the Cantharelle!
It was more Boletus than I was expecting to find and lately gave half to a friend!

Click to expand...

Because I can't resist going off topic, does anyone know the evolutionary advantages of various properties of mushrooms?

AlanF said:

Now you know how Franz Liebkind felt. We have a Maximilian posting (not Bialystsock, fortunately) and we need more of the cast.

Click to expand...

"... this land is happy and gayyyy!"

DocInfoSci said:

Wait, are you saying that Canon’s digitally corrected lenses are already corrected in the raw file itself and digital optimizer isn’t needed? And therefore any third party editor gets the same benefit of Canon’s software corrections before their own third party corrections are applied? i.e., I could theoretically put the RF lens on a Nikon or Sony body with an adapter and get the same image for the same shooting situation like I could with an EF lens?

Click to expand...

Answered by others already, I think. But I did enjoy watching The Nutcracker performed by the Boston Ballet while those answers were provided.

DocInfoSci said:

Is the RF performance equal or better without correction? Or did Canon just try harder with the software? Not being facetious, I don’t know the answer and you might.

Click to expand...

It’s the lens optics. The EF 50/1.2 is the standard double Gauss design that’s been around almost as long as lenses, the RF 50/1.2 is a modern design that delivers much better performance.

The RF version has 15 elements (including 3 aspherical lenses and a UD lens) vs. 8 in the EF (with just one aspherical lens), and as a result the former is 400 g heavier and 40 mm longer…but optically far superior before the (almost unnecessary) digital corrections.

DocInfoSci said:

Uh, huh — I didn’t say that I don’t use corrective software, the opposite. I just prefer to start with better source material and apply software as an option and not a necessity for missing corner data, etc.

Click to expand...

I get the preference. But ‘better source material’ isn’t free, the cost is usually size, weight, and actual cost (for example, the RF 50/1.2 lists for over $1000 more than the EF).

OTOH, the 10-20/4 is optically as good (after correction) as the EF 11-24/4, and the former is smaller, lighter and much cheaper…and it goes past 11 (RIP, Rob ).

DocInfoSci said:

For personal work I’m OK with optional correction that I tend to do all the time anyhow. For lab image capture and processing by AI pipelines I’ll hope the labs stick with EF or third party for now.

Click to expand...

We don’t capture images in the lab with MILC lenses, we use microscope objectives. Our automated cell-based high-throughout screening system for small molecule libraries captures ~64,500 images per day. Each of those images has digital corrections applied before being processed by ML-driven algorithms to quantify the effects of the compounds on the cells.

ISv said:

Only this from today! And for this one I was scolded: "you got so close to the bird!" - you scared it!!! Well, I was actually "zooming" back because the bird was coming closer and closer to me! That women passed in front of my lens and the bird was still there!!!
Some people are ignorant or just a morons?! Any way, only the bird from today...

Click to expand...

I think it's hard to scare a bird that looks like it's covered with blood! I wouldn't want it coming closer to me! Nightmare before Christmas?
I hope there was a monkey nearby to give her some poop for Christmas, but nobody is this lucky. Maybe, she'll get drunk at a holiday party, fall down and knock some sense into her head.

Today's catch!

Only this from today! And for this one I was scolded: "you got so close to the bird!" - you scared it!!! Well, I was actually "zooming" back because the bird was coming closer and closer to me! That women passed in front of my lens and the bird was still there!!!
Some people are ignorant or just a morons?! Any way, only the bird from today...

neuroanatomist said:

No idea about the specific mushroom, but the overwhelming majority of mushrooms fall into the category of ‘edible but not tasty and will probably cause some GI discomfort’. A small number of mushrooms are in the ‘edible and tasty’ category, and an even smaller number are in the ‘deadly if ingested’ category.

The hen-of-the-woods falls into the large edible but not tasty group.

View attachment 227204

Click to expand...

"A small number of mushrooms are in the ‘edible and tasty’ category, and an even smaller number are in the ‘deadly if ingested’ category."
I agree with that but what is "tasty" for some is kind of "mediocre" or "not tasty" for others!
In most cases it actually deepens on how you prepare it: you don't make chicken, pork, beef e.t.c the same way, no?
Grifola frondosa (aka "hen-of-the-woods") has a flavor similar of some Amanitas (yes! there are edible Amanitas like the most known A. rubescens and even the highly prized A. cesarea) and some other mushrooms (like Leucopaxillus giganteus that is by far more meaty!) with the similar flavor. You may like or dislike it but it's just a different flavor!
I could be an exception but for example I don't like the flavor of any Truffles! Or may be I just haven't tried some prepared by a good chef?!
And a case from Sweden: I went out to look for Boletus edulis but instead found +/- 2 pounds of Cantharellis cibarius. Met a family with two small children and when they saw my basked they were like "where did you find these? We are looking for these!!!"
I gave them my C. cibarius because I'm not realy fan of it.
For my big surprize they gave me their collection of B. edulis!!! I asked few times "are you sure?!!!" but they were so happy with the Cantharelle!
It was more Boletus than I was expecting to find and lately gave half to a friend!

Click said:

This is the first time I've seen this mushroom. They're very pretty with their white stripes. Are they edible?

Click to expand...

I don't think the edibility is known but judging by some other features they should be in section Xanthodermatei. It means they should be +/- mildly to moderate toxic (as all others from that section of the genus). In the literature you may find that "some people can eat" specifically A. xanthodermus. I don't think it's about the person who eats it. I had an experience in Bulgaria when one of my colleagues came with a jar of marinated A. xanthodermus. She was insisting that "many people" of that place are collecting the mushrooms without ill effects. We (5-6 people) tried it and nothing happen (symptoms are coming rather fast with that kind of toxins). I think it's a case of where you are collecting such a mushrooms!
The bottom line: I wouldn't eat Agaricus of that section even in survival mode (huh - especially in that mode!)!!!!
And BTW that mushrooms were with metallic taste. No reason to collect them even if you know they are not toxic!