Upvote
0
Patent: Canon RF 135mm f/1.4L DS USM optical formula
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
I appreciate that Canon is "swinging for the fences" with a 135mm f/1.4L....but, being realistic, that lens is going to be way too large and expensive to be something I'm going to consider. It's already over 7-inches long, according to the patent, and the math for the front element is 96mm...I think I'll pass. I really want a new f/1.8 or f/2 variation with fast autofocus for sports like what made the original 135L such a legend. It wasn't the aperture and focal length - it was the size/weight/price/performance/AF Speed.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
If they do make the 50mm f/1.4 DS I hope they make the front element big enough to eliminate the oval vignetting of out of focus point sources. It's silly to lose all that light to get nice soft gaussian spots but still get a harder cutoff away from the center of the frame. On non-DS lenses you can stop down to reduce the cats eye bokeh, but on DS lenses they really need to address it wide open.
It's still pretty limiting that the the DS part of the lens is effectively fixed aperture. It would be nice if they achieved the apodization with something like a filter wheel, so you could stop down a bit and preserve the full effect.
It's still pretty limiting that the the DS part of the lens is effectively fixed aperture. It would be nice if they achieved the apodization with something like a filter wheel, so you could stop down a bit and preserve the full effect.
Upvote
0
It will be massive and it will be uber expensive, but it will also make images that can't be duplicated. I just hope that it isn't a DS only lens. The look is fine, but the light-loss is too much to bear. Buying a 1.4 to shoot with light levels of a 2.2+ just doesn't seem to make sense. However, I do think it will be an unmatched portrait lens when the scene allows for a 135mm.
Curiously, I wonder if this optical formula would lend itself well to a DO design. The marginal loss of sharpness wouldn't be slammed by the portrait bunch, but the lighter overall construction would undoubtedly be loved.
Curiously, I wonder if this optical formula would lend itself well to a DO design. The marginal loss of sharpness wouldn't be slammed by the portrait bunch, but the lighter overall construction would undoubtedly be loved.
Upvote
0
I'm not sure a 135mm f/1.4 makes sense.
With Mitakon making an EF 135mm f/1.4, an RF 135mm f/1.4 isn't going to be a halo lens. Its also going to be expensive, big and heavy, making it less attractive, especially to carry around. In a studio, I doubt it would make a big difference. As noted above, with a 2x TC it would compete with the 200mm f/2 and 300mm f/2.8
Seems to me an f/1.8 or f/2 would make more sense.
With Mitakon making an EF 135mm f/1.4, an RF 135mm f/1.4 isn't going to be a halo lens. Its also going to be expensive, big and heavy, making it less attractive, especially to carry around. In a studio, I doubt it would make a big difference. As noted above, with a 2x TC it would compete with the 200mm f/2 and 300mm f/2.8
Seems to me an f/1.8 or f/2 would make more sense.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
I have a feeling Canon will come out with a 135mm f1.4 to try and 1 up the 135mm f1.8 GM which is not only one of the sharpest lenses on any system but also has AF performance that makes it usable for sport and wildlife too. Be interesting to see what approach Canon takes.
As a side note many of us suspect Canon’s RF 35mm L prime will be an f1.2, if this happens I wonder what the price will be as Sigma have the 35mm f1.2 Art DG DN available for E and L mount which while is largely irrelevant to RF shooters but if its significantly more expensive I wonder how RF shooters would feel about that?
Upvote
0
ashmadux
Art Director, Visual Artist, Freelance Photography
What a shame. Canon has been scared of making a good 50 1.4 non-L for about 30 years or so.. whatever happened to the 50 mm IS EF? Talk about trying to protect the L lenses from a design thats 'good enough'. Bet that would make a nice story.
I'm glad my 35 f2is will serve me for many years to come, but the 50 mm situation for canon has been nonsense for a long time.
I'm glad my 35 f2is will serve me for many years to come, but the 50 mm situation for canon has been nonsense for a long time.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
