mimbu said:

That Sony 50-150/2GM is a staggeringly good lens, and just 1340g. The 16-28/2GM is coming soon to complete the trio, hopefully it matches up to the other two f2GM zooms.

The Sigma 200/2 with it's hyper-fast AF, incredible image quality, and excellent stabilization is worth a mention. If only Sony didn't cripple 3rd party glass with that 15fps limit, or if Panasonic had AF that was able to track fast moving subjects. Or if Canon & Nikon weren't terrified of Sigma. This lens deserves better cameras to be mounted on.

Laowa's incredible T/S lenses are another highlight of the year. Superb performance at bargain (for T/S glass!) prices. Being MF only, they are available for RF, too.

Click to expand...

mangobutter said:

I've seen drips and drabs of MTF, or bookshelf charts, the optical limits thing, the christopher frost thing, or the TDP thing -- sure. Decent resources.

But my 20 years of digital Canon large sensor experience (day 1 5D shooter here too) tells me charts don't tell the whole story, due to field curvature, etc.

So to those who have used this lens for distance @ infinity both wide open and stopped down, how does this lens resolve throughout its focal range?

From what I've seen and gathered (thus far), this lens doesn't shoot well on charts due to field curvature, but shoots very sharp edge to edge in real world distance scenarios but i've only seen a few focal lengths, more so at the wide end. And still, i don't know what processing was done, etc. All Flickr.

So to those picky pixel peepers here, how does this lens shoot real world?

I'm the type to go in at 1:1 edge to edge in LR, and examine each pixel when doing landscapes.

And I get it I get it, art doesn't require pixels, no ones looking at pixels, no ones looking in the corner, etc etc. I am, and I do. And it's how I like to shoot. =)

Click to expand...

AlanF said:

Happy Boxing Day from my wife and me at Latrigg Viewpoint late this afternoon.

View attachment 227239

Click to expand...

IRB Kirk said:

A Canon Christmas
Beneath the tree with lights aglow,
A gift awaits in ribboned bow.
Not toys, nor sweets, nor winter wear—
But lenses gleaming, beyond compare.
A Canon rests in silent grace,
Ready to capture each smiling face.
From frosty mornings to twinkling nights,
It frames the season in pure delights.
Snowflakes dance in crystal streams,
Preserved forever in holiday dreams.
Each shutter click, a carol sung,
A timeless story for old and young.
So raise your glass and cheer with glee,
For Canon keeps our memories free.
This Christmas joy, both near and far,
Lives in the magic of your DSLR.

Click to expand...

Richard CR said:

I recall when I did testing, I had a difficult time seeing the diffraction correction effects. They were quite subtle. The aberration correction, especially at the time the Canon EF 85mm F1.8 USM, which had the worst PF known to the modern photography universe, would clean up amazingly well.

That was what impressed me the most - since PF was troublesome to correct in post.

Click to expand...

neuroanatomist said:

They’re all 85mm lenses (or close enough with rounding). The likely patent for the RF 85/1.4 VCM has it as an 82.6 or 82.9mm f/1.45 lens, but similarly the likely patent for the RF 85/1.2 is 82.3mm f/1.24. The explanation is not a difference in real focal length.

I eschew YT videos (DIY home repairs notwithstanding) but I did scrub to the ~7 min mark to see it was a noted in a focusing speed comparison with objects arranged in a table and in a portrait comparison. The reviewer failed to provide the proper technical explanation, which is unfortunate but unsurprising.

What’s really going on is that the focal length of a lens is specified as the distance from the rear nodal point to the sensor with the lens focused at infinity. When a lens appears to have a wider FoV (shorter FL) with closer subjects (as in the YT reviewer’s examples), that’s due to focus breathing. That’s why, for example, the EF 100/2.8L Macro has the FoV of a ~68mm lens at 1:1 magnification.

Canon touts the 85 VCM as having minimal focus breathing, which is desirable in a lens intended for hybrid use (lack of focus breathing is one of the reasons cine lenses are so expensive). Focus breathing is not necessarily linear with subject distance, and I suspect what’s happening with the 85 VCM is that Canon’s design puts most of the breathing closer to infinity, so there’s relatively little change in FoV with subjects at different ‘normal’ (for people) distances. Doing so is facilitated with modern focus-by-wire lenses where a microchip instead of gearing is controlling focus motor movement.

Click to expand...

Exploreshootshare said:

Thx Richard!
I too wish y´all a merry Christmas and happy new gear...ups, I meant a happy new year of course

Click to expand...

el peso said:

Are you sure the compared lens is strictly 85 mm? Maybe its FL is longer than 85mm?

Click to expand...