A New 85L is on the Way [CR2]

[privatebydesign]

;D

I used to travel in and out of the USA very regularly, there was a customs form I filled in that had month, day, year on one side of the form and on the other, where you had to fill out the same information, it was formatted day, month, year.

 

[vscd]

Drugs have made more for the metric system than any university or science in the states

 

[LonelyBoy]

;D

I will grant you that we do dates in the wrong order, but so does the rest of the world - only YYYY-MM-DD makes sense for sorting, so that's the way it should be done.

Why does 0* make sense as the starting point for temperature? Because water freezes there? It's not the base - living in the cold regions teaches you that in a hurry! If we're talking about "sense" it should be Kelvin.

And, if base 10 is so clearly awesome, why does everyone in the world use 24 hours in a day, then base-60 from there? Clearly we ought to base-10 that as well. Oh, it'll be painful, but of course it'll be worth it, just like switching the US to the portions of metric the rest of the world uses.

And the bicycle industry, which is dominated by Asia (and Europe to a lesser extent) still uses the inch as the length of a link in the chain because it's too painful to switch and obsolete a bunch of things at once... which is why the US will not change.

 

[Maximilian]

... because it's too painful to switch and obsolete a bunch of things at once... which is why the US will not change.

Of course you are right with your aruments and of course nobody expects the US to change.
But the earlier one does a change the cheaper it'll be.
Otherwise we still would have to refer to e.g. the "Ell" with about 20 to 100 different lengh units depending on where you are.

And I suppose that until then we'll always have to check our formula because 655 million total loss is painful as well:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter

 

[LonelyBoy]

Of course you are right with your aruments and of course nobody expects the US to change.
But the earlier one does a change the cheaper it'll be.
Otherwise we still would have to refer to e.g. the "Ell" with about 20 to 100 different lengh units depending on where you are.

And I suppose that until then we'll always have to check our formula because 655 million total loss is painful as well:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter

The MCO incident could have been prevented by doing the whole thing in SAE units. That's an argument against even letting SI in your building.

Standardization of units (to SI or SAE) was always going to happen with the move to a modern world. SAE can clearly be standardized just as well as SI; that's not a reason to switch. Measurements being different in different towns was just a factor of poor communication and little to no inter-city commerce, not something intrinsic to SAE.

 

[YuengLinger]

What a sad death for this thread.

 

[Maximilian]

What a sad death for this thread.

Yes! You're right and I apologize for making a joke that went down someones wrong pipe.
And when it came to serious arguments I wasn't able to stop earlier. Sorry again.

 

[LonelyBoy]

What a sad death for this thread.

Yes! You're right and I apologize for making a joke that went down someones wrong pipe.
And when it came to serious arguments I wasn't able to stop earlier. Sorry again.

Alright, I'll apologize too... but it had been nearly a week since there was any actual discussion of a hypothetical new 85L. Not like it was an active thread at the time that got derailed.

 

[Eldar]

What a sad death for this thread.

Yes! You're right and I apologize for making a joke that went down someones wrong pipe.
And when it came to serious arguments I wasn't able to stop earlier. Sorry again.

Alright, I'll apologize too... but it had been nearly a week since there was any actual discussion of a hypothetical new 85L. Not like it was an active thread at the time that got derailed.

He he, there is a limit to how long a thread about a rumored lens can get, without some diversions. I think this is one of the funnier ones. The only thing missing was for someone to drag in all the additional British peculiar units.

But to be serious; An updated 85/1.2 or 85/1.4, with weather sealing, no CA, same bokeh, improved sharpness and fast (not-by-wire) AF ... Awesome!

 

[LonelyBoy]

He he, there is a limit to how long a thread about a rumored lens can get, without some diversions. I think this is one of the funnier ones. The only thing missing was for someone to drag in all the additional British peculiar units.

But to be serious; An updated 85/1.2 or 85/1.4, with weather sealing, no CA, same bokeh, improved sharpness and fast (not-by-wire) AF ... Awesome!

Speaking of, does anyone know why the 85L has focus-by-wire? It wasn't common then, to my knowledge.

 

[chromophore]

He he, there is a limit to how long a thread about a rumored lens can get, without some diversions. I think this is one of the funnier ones. The only thing missing was for someone to drag in all the additional British peculiar units.

But to be serious; An updated 85/1.2 or 85/1.4, with weather sealing, no CA, same bokeh, improved sharpness and fast (not-by-wire) AF ... Awesome!

Speaking of, does anyone know why the 85L has focus-by-wire? It wasn't common then, to my knowledge.

Actually, focus-by-wire was the primary way autofocusing was implemented in fast-aperture EF prime lenses when the EF lens mount was first developed. For example:

EF 50/1.0L
EF 85/1.2L
EF 200/1.8L
EF 300/2.8L
EF 600/4L

are all focus-by-wire designs. The EF 85/1.2L design has always been focus-by-wire. Optically, this design is a direct descendant of the FD 85/1.2L.

Why use it? Because the bottom line is that for the 85/1.2L design, a mechanical focusing mechanism linking to the focusing ring would add more diameter to the already fat and short lens.

There's nothing intrinsically wrong with focus-by-wire. The reason why AF is slow with this lens is not for this design choice. It's because the optical design of the lens has the focusing group consist of every element except for the last, and all that glass is VERY heavy to move. As I mentioned, this lens was descended from the FD version, and that was designed before autofocusing technology was implemented in SLR lenses. Focus-by-wire gets a bad rap for slow AF but this is not really true. It's only true when the focusing group consists of a lot of elements.

Personally, I don't care about the AF speed as long as AF acquisition is accurate. People want to make the 85L be a "do-it-all" lens. I say it should not have to sacrifice f/1.2 or anything else just for the sake of being more versatile to use. If people want a fast-focusing 85mm prime, use the 85/1.8. I don't want an 85/1.4L and I don't want Canon to think that slapping IS on every lens they update with a slower aperture is going to magically make up for losing a stop of light.

 

[privatebydesign]

Optically, this design is a direct descendant of the FD 85/1.2L.

Not really. They are very different within the context of the Double Gauss design, which is the basis for thousands of lenses.

In particular the aspherical element is very different in the two designs.

 

[LonelyBoy]

Actually, focus-by-wire was the primary way autofocusing was implemented in fast-aperture EF prime lenses when the EF lens mount was first developed. For example:

EF 50/1.0L
EF 85/1.2L
EF 200/1.8L
EF 300/2.8L
EF 600/4L

are all focus-by-wire designs. The EF 85/1.2L design has always been focus-by-wire. Optically, this design is a direct descendant of the FD 85/1.2L.

Why use it? Because the bottom line is that for the 85/1.2L design, a mechanical focusing mechanism linking to the focusing ring would add more diameter to the already fat and short lens.

There's nothing intrinsically wrong with focus-by-wire. The reason why AF is slow with this lens is not for this design choice. It's because the optical design of the lens has the focusing group consist of every element except for the last, and all that glass is VERY heavy to move. As I mentioned, this lens was descended from the FD version, and that was designed before autofocusing technology was implemented in SLR lenses. Focus-by-wire gets a bad rap for slow AF but this is not really true. It's only true when the focusing group consists of a lot of elements.

Personally, I don't care about the AF speed as long as AF acquisition is accurate. People want to make the 85L be a "do-it-all" lens. I say it should not have to sacrifice f/1.2 or anything else just for the sake of being more versatile to use. If people want a fast-focusing 85mm prime, use the 85/1.8. I don't want an 85/1.4L and I don't want Canon to think that slapping IS on every lens they update with a slower aperture is going to magically make up for losing a stop of light.

Thanks for the explanation! I didn't say FBW was a bad thing, and don't actually believe it is - at the entirely other end of the market, I adore my 18-135 and 55-250 STMs. SOME people, however, clearly dislike it (lack of a focus window, for one, which I've never used). Notably, out of the lenses you listed, only the 85L is in (relatively) common use; I've read a thread or two about the 50/1.0 but its FBW design never sank in apparently, and I've never seriously looked at the other three on your list.

Until the STMs, FBW was quite rare in the Canon lineup.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

I've never found my 85mm f1.2 II L particularly slow. Sure if it's set infinity and needs to rack back to MFD...but how often does that happen? What I do find is that the AF ring spins freely and has very little friction. Unless the lens has power (ie on a camera and switched on) then the AF ring doesn't move the AF elements. I've found the 85IIL to be very accurate in it's focus and tracks well. I find it way better then the 50mm f1.2L which is slow and inaccurate. The 35mm f1.4L and 135mm f2 L are both faster in focus lock but just as accurate.

 

[vscd]

Speaking of, does anyone know why the 85L has focus-by-wire? It wasn't common then, to my knowledge.

Focus by wire on the 85L is caused, in my opinion, for the huge amount of glas to be moved. It provides a smoother feeling because mechanical it would be quite difficult to move the kilogram of elements.

 

[mknight]

I'm guessing since I don't see this on the list of announcements for photokina, that this ended up not being true?

 

[GMCPhotographics]

I'm guessing since I don't see this on the list of announcements for photokina, that this ended up not being true?

I can confirm that Canon will certainly releasing a new version of this lens...some day.

 

[Ozarker]

Going to f/1.4 is sensible. At f/1.2 on 85mm, how thin is the DoF? You're almost forced to stop down just to get more than just the tip of someone's nose in focus.

Hi Dilbert. I know you posted this a long time ago, but I just got an app for my Kindle that I've been playing with the past couple of days. Of course you are right.

85mm @f/1.2 and a distance of 10 feet equals a DOF of just .31' At 15' it equals .69' and at 20' the DOF is 1.22'.

So, if the app is correct, one can use f/1.2 but must stand back about 15-20' to get a whole head in focus. 15' ought to be just enough to get both eyes, nose, lips etc. in focus with a slightly turned head.

Yeah, I'm a little over excited about the app. I'm having a load of fun with it and I think it will help me a whole lot.

Great fun! Now you know just how (un)exciting my life is.

 

[turtle]

Its going to be interesting, but I fear the new lens will be so optically outstanding that it will make less appealing portraits than the current lens. With all manufacturers being forced to produce 'optical lasers' (because that's what the market demands), lenses that produce a more organic, human rendering are going to get harder to find. When the new lens is introduced might be the perfect time to buy the old one

 

[zim]

So, if the app is correct, one can use f/1.2 but must stand back about 15-20' to get a whole head in focus. 15' ought to be just enough to get both eyes, nose, lips etc. in focus with a slightly turned head.

So it is actually perfect for portraiture then! ;D

What app are you using? I have dof droid which is OK, I like the graphics but it could be way better if the graphics were interactive so always on the lookout for something better.
Apologies for the OT.