Canon EF 85mm f/1.4L IS USM on the Way [CR3]

[Etienne]

I have a dream ...

... that it will be 600g, and $1200

Ntriiiiiin it's the wake alarm ;D

Is there a snooze button for that?

 

[slclick]

This and the 135 f/2L would be a great 1-2 punch for portraits or indoor action.

 

[Hjalmarg1]

Now THIS is exciting!!! 85mm (best focal distance ever for portraits - the 135mm), F1.4 (good enough for me), and with IS! With currently used systems for improved focus motor and build quality and improved optics, it'll smash the third party lenses! Hopefully it'll have weathersealing!

me 2
very exciting

Count me in! But I hope that it's not heavier than the current 85L, and priced around the Nikon/Sony rivals, filter isn't larger than 77mm 6mm filter and with reproduction ratio of 1:8 or better. Then, my 100L will be for sale.

 

[Hjalmarg1]

I have a dream ...

... that it will be 600g, and $1200

By todays definitions a 600g 85mm lens is a sign of not-so-good optics Look at the Otus / Milvus / Sigma etc... 1kg is a must. And the price - $1200 is good for Sigma. For a "prime brand" it's going to be at least $1800.

If we see an 85mm Canon lens for $1200 / 600g it won't be worth buying most likely

It was a nice dream while it lasted!

Nikon and Sony rivals are around USD 1600-1800 so, Canon will never be cheaper :-\ :'(

 

[mb66energy]

[...]

I would accept a measly 1/4000s global shutter on an FF sensor. Should work easily ... 1/500.000s * 1/12 = plenty of leeway for 1/4000

I wasn't clear enough: 1/500 000 is achieved for the lowest resolution which has the twentieth path of Chronos'sensor so the effective size is 1/20 * 1/12 = 1/240 of effective size of a FF sensor - the 1/500 000 s should be multiplied by 240 (~250) so we are at 1/2000 theoretically.
(Electric) capacities are a bad problem in fast systems so maybe 1/500 is realistic for the high quality read out of a FF sensor. Good for film but less for using f/2.0 at 12:00 AM at sunny skies.

On the other hand just that would help to perform slower shutter speeds without moving parts while a mechanical shutter is involved for faster exposures.

 

[mb66energy]

I have a dream ...

... that it will be 600g, and $1200

By todays definitions a 600g 85mm lens is a sign of not-so-good optics Look at the Otus / Milvus / Sigma etc... 1kg is a must. And the price - $1200 is good for Sigma. For a "prime brand" it's going to be at least $1800.

If we see an 85mm Canon lens for $1200 / 600g it won't be worth buying most likely

I agree but wouldn't say "a 600g 85mm lens is a sign of not-so-good LENS" - I "only" have and use the EF 2.0/100. Optically a dinosaur but 85...135mm are a very "kind" range for lens designers: retrofocus isn't necessary, CA isn't that problematic (except LOCA at high apertures). Start with the EF 2.0/100 and try to fiddle around with newer glass types including organic compounds/coatings/aspherical lenses. It should be possible to add 50g to the current lens (460g) to reduce LOCA and increase the contrast at f/2.0. Add 100g for IS if you find a good optical formula which allows use of an existing lens group for IS. Her you are: 610g for an improved EF 2.0/100 which is still a stunning lens optically, mechanically and size wise! Give it a price tag of 800 EUR (twice the price of the existing version) - and Canon should be fine, users of the lens too.

Maybe it is a market decision that only large lenses can be labeled with 1.5k ... 4k $/EUR. An example for a similar development (speaking only for germany: The same "illness" leads to larger and heavier cars which keep prices high but efforts to reduce fuel efficiency low. O.k. fuel efficiency has been increased, but a 2 ton car needs twice the energy to accelerate to 50 km/h compared to a 1 ton car.

 

[davidcl0nel]

The 35 II is also very very expensive and "light" - this one has an IS (really?... Not the first CR3 which isn't true) - so its unique on the market and can be easily above 2000€ also.
The shrinking market will also be more and more an issue, I think all replacements wll be much more expensive... development costs divided by the expected sales... the current ones can sold for the the manufacturing cost + profit without extra evelopment costs.

 

[leethecam]

I have and love my 85L 1.2

However it does exhibit an annoying quirk, (which Canon confirmed is not a fault and their test lens exhibited similar, albeit slightly less at the cost of less sharpness...)

i need to hve different MF settings from F1.2 through to F4, (after which is is quite stable).

It's not a big deal as I only use this lens in the studio and I have a note of 4 different MF settings taped to the lens hood so I can adjust when I change aperture.

It would be great if the new lens handled this better.

 

[vscd]

i need to hve different MF settings from F1.2 through to F4, (after which is is quite stable).

Can you specify this a little more? Do you mean the written distances on the display don't match the real distances? Why don't you use autofocus?

 

[AvTvM]

maybe he is talking about focus shift? focus changes somewhat with aperture.

Using manual focus I see no issue there. I look thru the viewfinder and turn the ring until the image is sharp where I want it. Same in Live View on Display - for critical focus using 5x and 10x magnifying view. When I change aperture, I need to check and make sure, focus is still perfect. So what, no big deal, at lest not in stills photography. In AF mode it is a problem, because all Canon EOS only autofocus with lens wide open. There is no way to AF at working aperture.

And distances printed on lens are useless and irrelevant in this respect anyways.

 

[Loswr]

i need to hve different MF settings from F1.2 through to F4, (after which is is quite stable).

Can you specify this a little more? Do you mean the written distances on the display don't match the real distances? Why don't you use autofocus?

I assume he's talking about needing different AFMA settings based on aperture, due to (as AvTvM states) focus shift. It's a known issue with the 50L, I haven't heard of that as a major issue with the 85L, and I haven't experienced it with my copy.

 

[AvTvM]

confusing thing is, he talks about MF, which i assumed to stand for "Manual Focus".

AFMA values are only needed for Autofocus.

maybe he is referring to video - changing aperture while recording ... ?

 

[Loswr]

"MF settings" = microfocus adjustment settings, I think. But I suppose we could speculate all night...

 

[leethecam]

To end the confusion - I meant Micro Focus. (Sorry. On another forum we all use MF as shorthand for that, so it carried across here).

When I talked with Canon they admitted there is an aperture issue here with microfocus. Mine is worse than their test copy, but my less is sharper, (like, it's REALLY sharp...) They say it can be an issue with any large aperture prime lens to more or less extents.

 

[vscd]

To end the confusion - I meant Micro Focus. (Sorry. On another forum we all use MF as shorthand for that, so it carried across here).

When I talked with Canon they admitted there is an aperture issue here with microfocus. Mine is worse than their test copy, but my less is sharper, (like, it's REALLY sharp...) They say it can be an issue with any large aperture prime lens to more or less extents.

I'm curious... can't you focus stopped down? Never tried, but should work (with some Exposurecompensation if needed.

 

[AvTvM]

ah, thanks for clarification. i was used to acronym AFMA for af microfocus adjustments.

i have no firsthand experience with 85/1.2, but focus shift appears to be present to some degree in many wide aperture lenses, especially visible on short focus distances. BUT ... the way to avoid/lessen focus shift issues in lens design seems to be "floating element" design and to my knowledge, both EF 85/1.2 and 50/1.2 are floating element designs ... and yet there are many reports re. focus shift with 50/1.2, but not many re. 85/1.2 II !?

Zeiss states with respect to their (manual focus only) ZE 85/1.4:

"Fast lenses of this optical design (without floating elements) shift the focus due to spherical aberration when the f-stop is changed. This phenomenon is especially visible on closer object distances and cannot be influenced. The AF system of most camera models does not respect those characteristics of a lens. The focus is measured and confirmed by the focus indicator as if the lens has been stopped down to f/5.6.

source: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Zeiss-85mm-f-1.4-ZE-Planar-Lens-Review.aspx

 

[AvTvM]

I'm curious... can't you focus stopped down? Never tried, but should work (with some Exposurecompensation if needed.

using manual focus: yes
in autofocus: no
Canon EOS bodies will always use wide open aperture in autofocus mode ... and EF lenses have no aperture ring to manually set aperture ...

 

[YuengLinger]

To end the confusion - I meant Micro Focus. (Sorry. On another forum we all use MF as shorthand for that, so it carried across here).

When I talked with Canon they admitted there is an aperture issue here with microfocus. Mine is worse than their test copy, but my less is sharper, (like, it's REALLY sharp...) They say it can be an issue with any large aperture prime lens to more or less extents.

Which other forum uses MF for AFMA???

The rest of the photography world, textbooks, Photoshop books, user manuals for lenses and bodies, youtube videos, Kelby and Linda.com videos...MF is manual focus.

 

[infared]

I'm curious... can't you focus stopped down? Never tried, but should work (with some Exposurecompensation if needed.

using manual focus: yes
in autofocus: no
Canon EOS bodies will always use wide open aperture in autofocus mode ... and EF lenses have no aperture ring to manually set aperture ...

With a modern Canon EF AF lens...on a Canon "mirrored" camera the aperture in the lens remains open to its widest aperture during MF or AF. That is so that you can see clearly at the brightest opening, see to compose and see the focus chosen (AF) or to see the point of focus that you create (MF).
This is an "automatic' aperture" lens. It keeps the aperture open and it closes down to your actual setting only at the moment of exposure. You can push in you DOF preview button in MF or AF mode to close does the lens aperture see your actual depth of field at any time.
Some modern MF lenses have electrical contacts and have automatic aperture and are compatible with your camera system. Such as Zeiss. They make the lens with your camera mount and include the electronics so that you have the benefit of auto aperture and the use of your DOF preview button.. Vintage adapted lenses and some "modern" 3rd-party lenses have no electrical contacts for your camera, but can be mounted and used on your camera and therefore you are n "full" manual mode. When you close down the aperture on the lens your view darkens (less light through the lens), and your DOF increases...but it gets very difficult to see and/or pick a point of focus. These are "non-automatic"(or "fully" manual), lenses. Theses lenses are difficult to work with at smaller apertures on a DSLR with the mirror down. If you put the camera in live-view, the mirror is up and the camera sensor can brighten the scene so that you can see what you are doing, but only on the rear screen, as you are directly seeing the feed from the sensor. . You cannot get a brighter view through the viewfinder.
Mirrorless cameras excel with vintage and MF lenses with no electrical contacts as you are looking in a viewfinder (and/or the rear LCD), that is a view of the actual sensor and it automatically can brighten the image for you to "see" to compose and focus.
It gets complicated with all the choices out there. LOL!

 

[AvTvM]

This is an "automatic' aperture" lens. It keeps the aperture open and it closes down to your actual setting only at the moment of exposure. You can push in you DOF preview button in MF or AF mode to close does the lens aperture see your actual depth of field at any time.

"see" - yes.
But to my knowledge the camera will still AF with fully open aperture, no matter whether DOF preview button is pressed or not.

The only workaround I know of for the entire problem of focus shift on Canon cameras with EF lenses is using (different) AFMA settings at different apertures. Which is, what the guy asking seems to be doing. Of course it is not really an "elegant" solution in the field.