Announcement: Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II

[ashmadux]

I hate to rain on the parade, but let's dial back the excitement several notches and look at things more objectively. There have been a number of questions asked and speculations made that I think need to be carefully addressed.

First, the comparison of MTF curves. The published curves are not comparable to any other curves (especially those actually produced from measurements of production lenses of other manufacturers) except for Canon's other published curves. That is to say, you can compare the 35/1.4L against the 35/1.4L II curves when they come from Canon, but you should not compare the Sigma curves against the Canon.

The curves that Canon produces are theoretical (as we should all know by now) in the sense that they are based on ray tracing simulated lenses and calculating the resulting spot diagrams. The most important thing to keep in mind is that these are a (reasonably good) guideline but not what you will necessarily achieve with a production lens.

Second, the BR element/technology. This is very promising. I do not think there will be longevity issues--that it is made of organic material doesn't necessarily mean it will degrade over time, but here we can only trust that Canon has tested the technology and decided it is stable enough for use in a camera system over the lifetime of the lens.

Third, your best indicator of performance at this time is the sample images. Don't look at the MTF curves for now: wait until measured MTF curves are made. Right now, sample images are the proof of performance that we should look for. The ones I've seen look very impressive. Chromatic aberration is much better controlled than in the previous design, without a doubt. It is not entirely absent, however. We are still lacking in the following types of samples: (1) shots taken at f/1.4 with low subject magnification: this is to reveal the bokeh at intermediate, non-macro scales; (2) shots taken at f/1.4 at infinity focus, of stars: this is to reveal the existence of coma wide open; (3) series of shots taken at f/1.4 to f/2 in high contrast situations: this is to reveal any spherical aberration, residual chromatic aberration, and focus shift. I can only assume that with the level of excitement over this lens, these samples will be coming VERY soon.

I'm excited but I'm not dropping $1800 on a lens that I can't yet quantify how much improvement exists.

This guy. ^^ Smart stuff there, thanks for that

 

[Etienne]

sample images:

http://www.cameraegg.org/ef-35mm-f1-4l-ii-usm-lens-sample-images/

(before looking at them .. )

They are OOC JPG with sharpness at 0, however CA and vignetting enabled.

Creamy bokeh too. Looks like they have a home run here ...

.... I'm not a huge fan of 35 mm focal length, I already have the 35 f/2 IS and would prefer a 24mm f/1.4 mrk III, ... but this lens may make a believer out of me. Waiting for full reviews, but have a feeling that I'm soon to lose $1800.

 

[PureClassA]

$1799 is great. Bit more than I figured but still in line. The subsequent post from CR with the comparison MTF charts between the Mark I and Mark II is just jaw dropping. Looks like Canon really knocked this one out the park. I won't be a 35mm buyer because I already have the Sig Art and rarely use it now, but I DO the heck outta my Sig 50 ART. This news bodes extremely well for the new Canon 50mm L Mk II on the horizon, and I will sell both ART lenses in a heartbeat to buy the new 50mm when it shows up if it looks like this new 35.

 

[neuroanatomist]

So this the outdoor version of the previous version. Takes away the blue color around tree branches and is fully bad weather resistant.

+1

Looks wonderful, except that the 24-70/2.8L II has pretty much relegated my 35L to indoor ambient light shooting, and even for that I often use the 24-70. Most likely I'll sell my 35L and put the proceeds toward the 11-24L.

 

[Etienne]

So this the outdoor version of the previous version. Takes away the blue color around tree branches and is fully bad weather resistant.

+1

Looks wonderful, except that the 24-70/2.8L II has pretty much relegated my 35L to indoor ambient light shooting, and even for that I often use the 24-70. Most likely I'll sell my 35L and put the proceeds toward the 11-24L.

I have been convincing myself that I don't want/need the 11-24L, but my resistance is weakening by the day. Canon has been knocking off amazing lenses these past few years. If they hit a home run with the 5D4 I will have to take a second mortgage for more lenses and camera

 

[memoriaphoto]

Here we go again...

2x5DS, 35L Mark 2, 50L Mark 2, 85L Mark 3

Dear oh dear...I know I've said this a zillion times, but that is ALL I need EVEEERRR (until something better shows up)

 

[dolina]

Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM


EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM ship's by October 2015 @ $1,799 ( Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 35mm f/1.4G Lens $1,796.95)

https://www.flickr.com/groups/ef_35mm_f14l_ii_usm/

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Just to put things in context, for people questioning the price of this lens here are the Lensrental MTF curves for the Otus 85/1.4 and 55/1.4:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/MTF.aspx?Lens=481&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=917&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0&CT=AVG

If the Canon theoretical MTF 30 curves are reasonably close to being true then the new Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM is truly on another level. It is sharper wide open in centre of frame than both the 85 and 55 Otus lenses. It is slightly sharper than the 85 and 55 Otus in midframe and significantly sharper than the 85 towards the corners. (And lets not forget that it autofocuses toooooo.)

It also appears to be at about 10% sharper than the Sigma anywhere in the frame. So while it is more expensive that the current lens and the Sigma option, I'm quite confident it is on another level of performance.

The actual curves are always lower than the theoritical curves, so they will likely be the same or very close. The CA reduction and edge sharpness may be the difference.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

So this the outdoor version of the previous version. Takes away the blue color around tree branches and is fully bad weather resistant.

+1

Looks wonderful, except that the 24-70/2.8L II has pretty much relegated my 35L to indoor ambient light shooting, and even for that I often use the 24-70. Most likely I'll sell my 35L and put the proceeds toward the 11-24L.

I actually sold my 35mm L after it fell into disuse. I want the lens, of course, but It will not get enough use to justify it.

 

[ahsanford]

Good. First it was the White Unicorn 100-400 II and now it's this. Two of the longest rumored lenses in this forum's illustrious history are real and up for sale.

Now, moving on to the NEXT topic... 8)

- A

 

[rrcphoto]

Good. First it was the White Unicorn 100-400 II and now it's this. Two of the longest rumored lenses in this forum's illustrious history are real and up for sale.

I could be wrong, but even the rumors over the last few years have stated this lens was going to come out in conjunction with a high resolution body .. which if that was the case, looks like it was pretty accurate.

 

[PureClassA]

True. And I expect to see a bounce in line with what Canon produced on the 16-35 f4 vs the f2.8. In this case however, having that same bounce while retaining f1.4. That being said, I also expect that after 20 years we get a new prime that also has a notably sharper center, particularly wide open. I'd suspect by f4- f8 the two generations would be mostly indistinguishable save perhaps for the CA and edge sharpness as you mentioned.

Just to put things in context, for people questioning the price of this lens here are the Lensrental MTF curves for the Otus 85/1.4 and 55/1.4:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/MTF.aspx?Lens=481&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=917&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0&CT=AVG

If the Canon theoretical MTF 30 curves are reasonably close to being true then the new Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM is truly on another level. It is sharper wide open in centre of frame than both the 85 and 55 Otus lenses. It is slightly sharper than the 85 and 55 Otus in midframe and significantly sharper than the 85 towards the corners. (And lets not forget that it autofocuses toooooo.)

It also appears to be at about 10% sharper than the Sigma anywhere in the frame. So while it is more expensive that the current lens and the Sigma option, I'm quite confident it is on another level of performance.

The actual curves are always lower than the theoritical curves, so they will likely be the same or very close. The CA reduction and edge sharpness may be the difference.

 

[ahsanford]

Good. First it was the White Unicorn 100-400 II and now it's this. Two of the longest rumored lenses in this forum's illustrious history are real and up for sale.

I could be wrong, but even the rumors over the last few years have stated this lens was going to come out in conjunction with a high resolution body .. which if that was the case, looks like it was pretty accurate.

I am not knocking the validity of the rumors so much as the lifespan of them. The 35L II has to be one of the top 2-3 most rumored / longest rumored lenses on this site.

- A

 

[rrcphoto]

Good. First it was the White Unicorn 100-400 II and now it's this. Two of the longest rumored lenses in this forum's illustrious history are real and up for sale.

I could be wrong, but even the rumors over the last few years have stated this lens was going to come out in conjunction with a high resolution body .. which if that was the case, looks like it was pretty accurate.

I am not knocking the validity of the rumors so much as the lifespan of them. The 35L II has to be one of the top 2-3 most rumored / longest rumored lenses on this site.

- A

yes. however consider that the last time that I saw any mention of this was from Nikon - and they claimed it took 7 years to fully develop a lens from conception.

I think at times we forget that these things may be whispered that yes, they are working on it- however it's a fairly long process to get it out the door.

what's next on the unicorn list though? I'm trying to remember another lens that was rumored for a while and hasn't appeared yet.

 

[PureClassA]

Yeah. We can go ahead and start the rumor mill for the 35L Mk III right now to be consistent. I mean, it WILL happen at some point.... in the next 20 years... :

Good. First it was the White Unicorn 100-400 II and now it's this. Two of the longest rumored lenses in this forum's illustrious history are real and up for sale.

I could be wrong, but even the rumors over the last few years have stated this lens was going to come out in conjunction with a high resolution body .. which if that was the case, looks like it was pretty accurate.

I am not knocking the validity of the rumors so much as the lifespan of them. The 35L II has to be one of the top 2-3 most rumored / longest rumored lenses on this site.

- A

 

[raptor3x]

Am I blind or did the 50mm 1.2 just get yanked off of Canon's site?
Ohh this could be a great year!

I LOVED my 35mm mki but sold it for the 50mm 1.2 becasue of the CA. Now with this lens announced I may go back to another 35mm Woo Hoo! I think the price is Very fair considering this looks like it may be one of the sharpest lenses made yet.

You gave up the 35mm mk I for the 50mm 1.2 becuase of CA. That's strange, cause the 50mm 1.2 has a much worse CA, at least according to a number of accredited websites, such as dxomark and photozone.de

I think you're confusing LOCA and LACA. DxO doesn't even measure LOCA as far as I know.

 

[ahsanford]

what's next on the unicorn list though? I'm trying to remember another lens that was rumored for a while and hasn't appeared yet.

I know this will sound biased, a replacement for the 50 f/1.4 USM has to be high on the list. Sure, we can conjure up obscure low-runners like the 100mm f/2 USM, 20mm f/2.8 USM, 180mm f/3.5L Macro, 200mm f/2.8L, etc. but I believe the workhorse non-L 50mm is a pretty wanted item from the forum traffic each of those threads generates.

- A

 

[rrcphoto]

what's next on the unicorn list though? I'm trying to remember another lens that was rumored for a while and hasn't appeared yet.

I know this will sound biased, a replacement for the 50 f/1.4 USM has to be high on the list. Sure, we can conjure up obscure low-runners like the 100mm f/2 USM, 20mm f/2.8 USM, 180mm f/3.5L Macro, 200mm f/2.8L, etc. but I believe the workhorse non-L 50mm is a pretty wanted item from the forum traffic each of those threads generates.

- A

yeah there's the second tier of "prosumer" primes that need some love for sure. 50/1.4, 85/1.8, 100/2 while all "good" they are really starting to show their age.

 

[ahsanford]

Poll time, people:

Poll #1: MTF Chart response

Poll #2: Price

Poll #3: What's next

Please vote, thanks. I'm curious to where everyone's heads are on this announcement today.

- A

 

[meywd]

Poll time, people:

Poll #1: MTF Chart response

Poll #2: Price

Poll #3: What's next

Please vote, thanks. I'm curious to where everyone's heads are on this announcement today.

- A

Pollaholic? ;D