Clarification & Corrections on the Upcoming New Lenses from Canon [CR3]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
Re: Clarification & Corrections on the Upcoming New Lenses from Canon [CR2]
That 85f1.4LIS can't come soon enough for me. Hope they don't go crazy on the size and weight. IQ should be stellar based on recent releases. Lost a bag of primes in a smash and grab last year and this should fill a few gaps I've been wanting to address. 72mm front thread? (Edited from 67mm as per comment below) I think that's what the 35mm f1.4 has so should be similar but 77mm would be OK as a worse case I guess. My pre-order finger is twitching in anticipation.
That 85f1.4LIS can't come soon enough for me. Hope they don't go crazy on the size and weight. IQ should be stellar based on recent releases. Lost a bag of primes in a smash and grab last year and this should fill a few gaps I've been wanting to address. 72mm front thread? (Edited from 67mm as per comment below) I think that's what the 35mm f1.4 has so should be similar but 77mm would be OK as a worse case I guess. My pre-order finger is twitching in anticipation.
Upvote
0
Re: Clarification & Corrections on the Upcoming New Lenses from Canon [CR2]
50/2.8 TS-E L!!! That will definitely go to my kit unless they go crazy with price. I don't even care that much about macro capability, that will be a bonus.
I'm also interested in new 85 but I don't do portraits very often so I will probably wait a while before getting one.
50/2.8 TS-E L!!! That will definitely go to my kit unless they go crazy with price. I don't even care that much about macro capability, that will be a bonus.
I'm also interested in new 85 but I don't do portraits very often so I will probably wait a while before getting one.
Upvote
0
Re: Clarification & Corrections on the Upcoming New Lenses from Canon [CR2]
67 front threads = highly unlikely, IMHO.
Sigma 85 Art = 86mm
Zeiss 85 Otus = 86mm
Zeiss 85 Milvus = 77mm
And I just don't see this being a sharp-in-the-center-only relatively compact (for it's aperture) double gauss design like we've seen in Canon's 50s. I expect a big honking pickle jar of a lens to compete on the resolution front with Otus and Sigma.
Canon's good at keeping the weight down compared to Sigma/Zeiss and they have made lens weight reduction a goal of late, but they simply need to jam more glass in there to compete in the 2017 market.
If Canon puts out a lens that is clearly outresolved by Sigma and Zeiss and their only retort is "But it has IS and it's lighter!", fuhgeddaboudit. I just don't see that happening here. The 35L I --> 35L II got 30% heavier and jammed three more elements in there. I expect something similar here, even (inappropriately) comparing the 85 f/1.2L II to this new 85 f/1.4L IS.
- A
Graphic.Artifacts said:
67 front threads = highly unlikely, IMHO.
Sigma 85 Art = 86mm
Zeiss 85 Otus = 86mm
Zeiss 85 Milvus = 77mm
And I just don't see this being a sharp-in-the-center-only relatively compact (for it's aperture) double gauss design like we've seen in Canon's 50s. I expect a big honking pickle jar of a lens to compete on the resolution front with Otus and Sigma.
Canon's good at keeping the weight down compared to Sigma/Zeiss and they have made lens weight reduction a goal of late, but they simply need to jam more glass in there to compete in the 2017 market.
If Canon puts out a lens that is clearly outresolved by Sigma and Zeiss and their only retort is "But it has IS and it's lighter!", fuhgeddaboudit. I just don't see that happening here. The 35L I --> 35L II got 30% heavier and jammed three more elements in there. I expect something similar here, even (inappropriately) comparing the 85 f/1.2L II to this new 85 f/1.4L IS.
- A
Upvote
0
Re: Clarification & Corrections on the Upcoming New Lenses from Canon [CR2]
Yes your right. It didn't sound right so I checked. I had already changed the post to 72mm before I read your reply. I was going from memory but I think that was the 35 f2 is I was recalling. Still hoping for something a bit lighter and more compact than the Art series lenses if the optics will allow.
I like to engage in a little wishful thinking now and again. Provides some contrast to my generally cynical view of things and keeps folks on their toes.
Yes your right. It didn't sound right so I checked. I had already changed the post to 72mm before I read your reply. I was going from memory but I think that was the 35 f2 is I was recalling. Still hoping for something a bit lighter and more compact than the Art series lenses if the optics will allow.
I like to engage in a little wishful thinking now and again. Provides some contrast to my generally cynical view of things and keeps folks on their toes.
Upvote
0
Re: Clarification & Corrections on the Upcoming New Lenses from Canon [CR2]
Yes, a lens that is 'slightly less sharp than Art' + a stop slower + IS (like the wonderful 35 f/2 IS USM) surely needs to happen in the 85mm focal length. And in the 50mm focal length. And the...
- A
Graphic.Artifacts said:Yes your right. It didn't sound right so I checked. I hade already changed the post to 72mm before I read your reply. I was going from memory but I think that was the 35 f2 is I was recalling. Still hoping for something a bit lighter and more compact than the Art series lenses if the optics will allow.
I like to engage in a little wishful thinking now and again. Provides some contrast to my generally cynical view of things and keeps folks on their toes.
Yes, a lens that is 'slightly less sharp than Art' + a stop slower + IS (like the wonderful 35 f/2 IS USM) surely needs to happen in the 85mm focal length. And in the 50mm focal length. And the...
- A
Upvote
0
Re: Clarification & Corrections on the Upcoming New Lenses from Canon [CR2]
Here in the UK 85mm pricing is as follows:-
Canon EF 85mm f1.2L II USM £ 1,767.00
Canon EF 85mm f1.8 USM £ 327.00
Sigma 85mm f1.4 Art Canon fit £ 999,00
Tamron 85mm f1.4 SP Canon fit £ 749.00
Knowing Canon and if it is image stabilised it will come out around £ 1,499.00 however the EF 35mm f1.4L II is
£ 1,799.00 so it maybe as expensive as the f1.2L lens at launch! If so it will not deter those with the budgets for either Sigma or Tamron and be a rarefied lens for most users.
We live in hope it will be more reasonably priced.
Here in the UK 85mm pricing is as follows:-
Canon EF 85mm f1.2L II USM £ 1,767.00
Canon EF 85mm f1.8 USM £ 327.00
Sigma 85mm f1.4 Art Canon fit £ 999,00
Tamron 85mm f1.4 SP Canon fit £ 749.00
Knowing Canon and if it is image stabilised it will come out around £ 1,499.00 however the EF 35mm f1.4L II is
£ 1,799.00 so it maybe as expensive as the f1.2L lens at launch! If so it will not deter those with the budgets for either Sigma or Tamron and be a rarefied lens for most users.
We live in hope it will be more reasonably priced.
Upvote
0
Re: Clarification & Corrections on the Upcoming New Lenses from Canon [CR2]
Willing to pay a premium for IS but obviously there are limits. Canon pricing doesn't always follow a rational formula. Wishful thinking maybe but I'm hoping for something a good bit under $1500 US. Assuming it really is intended to fall between the two existing 85's
jeffa4444 said:
Willing to pay a premium for IS but obviously there are limits. Canon pricing doesn't always follow a rational formula. Wishful thinking maybe but I'm hoping for something a good bit under $1500 US. Assuming it really is intended to fall between the two existing 85's
Upvote
0
Re: Clarification & Corrections on the Upcoming New Lenses from Canon [CR2]
Sometimes Canon is eye-rollingly greedy: Non-L 24/28/35 IS lenses initially being sold for $799-849, 24-70 f/4L IS for $1499 immediately come to mind. All of those are great lenses, but the market simply wouldn't bear those prices and they were dramatically reduced -- and not reduced over time like for older lenses, they took a large pricing delta that one could presume was a market course-correction.
But sometimes Canon wows us with reasonableness: the 16-35 f/4L IS was a wonderful surprise. The great landscape lens we had been waiting so long for didn't cost us a mint.
But a world's first f/1.4 IS prime -- an L lens to boot -- is not going to be cheap at all. I appreciate it's not f/1.2, but if it has:
...it will cost a ton. I see this lens comfortably sitting in the $1500-2000 range. It might technically come in under the 85 f/1.2L II for asking price, but it can't possibly be a reasonably priced 'middle' price point between the f/1.2L II and 85 f/1.8 unless Canon does something none of us are expecting, like:
And that list above seems quite improbable. My money's all-in on a big/performance/expensive lens.
- A
Graphic.Artifacts said:
Sometimes Canon is eye-rollingly greedy: Non-L 24/28/35 IS lenses initially being sold for $799-849, 24-70 f/4L IS for $1499 immediately come to mind. All of those are great lenses, but the market simply wouldn't bear those prices and they were dramatically reduced -- and not reduced over time like for older lenses, they took a large pricing delta that one could presume was a market course-correction.
But sometimes Canon wows us with reasonableness: the 16-35 f/4L IS was a wonderful surprise. The great landscape lens we had been waiting so long for didn't cost us a mint.
But a world's first f/1.4 IS prime -- an L lens to boot -- is not going to be cheap at all. I appreciate it's not f/1.2, but if it has:
- Ring USM with FTM mechanical focusing
- Sharpness in same neighborhood as the 85 Art or Otus
- BR gunk inside
...it will cost a ton. I see this lens comfortably sitting in the $1500-2000 range. It might technically come in under the 85 f/1.2L II for asking price, but it can't possibly be a reasonably priced 'middle' price point between the f/1.2L II and 85 f/1.8 unless Canon does something none of us are expecting, like:
- Canon puts Nano USM in it / keeps it focus by wire (seems insane, but it's a win for video)
- Canon doesn't weather seal it (inconceivable for a new L prime in 2017)
- Canon goes for a much smaller/lighter double gauss design that will not compete resolution-wise with the competition (why? that's what you do with the 85 f/1.8 refresh, not an L lens)
And that list above seems quite improbable. My money's all-in on a big/performance/expensive lens.
- A
Upvote
0
Re: Clarification & Corrections on the Upcoming New Lenses from Canon [CR2]
I have a question about TS-E "long" lenses for architecture.
For architecture it is extremely useful shifting a wide angle lens: it removes the highly distorted areas close to the photographer, placing more emphasis in the subject and augmenting the "effective" wide angle (e.g. more room for the top of the buildings).
I feel the need of shifting even at 35mm (I sometimes even instinctively drive my hand to the unexistent knob! ) but I assume that at 45mm the amount of shifting will be really low to keep the image beautiful (too much shifting may be unnatural/ugly even at 17mm). I was interested in the 45 TS-E (I have not bought it mostly because is old and unsharp) but if the new replacement is even longer, at 50mm, I wonder if the shifting allowance for proper architectural shots still justifies it.
Those using the 45mm for architecture... how much do you typically shift it?
Maybe a normal 50mm lens slightly corrected for keystoning will suffice, if I were to shift it by only 1 or 2 mm. There are lot of choices at 50mm in normal lenses (ok, not yet any one interesting from Canon) also more suitable for other non-architectural uses, for those of us which don't plain to tilt.
I have a question about TS-E "long" lenses for architecture.
For architecture it is extremely useful shifting a wide angle lens: it removes the highly distorted areas close to the photographer, placing more emphasis in the subject and augmenting the "effective" wide angle (e.g. more room for the top of the buildings).
I feel the need of shifting even at 35mm (I sometimes even instinctively drive my hand to the unexistent knob!
) but I assume that at 45mm the amount of shifting will be really low to keep the image beautiful (too much shifting may be unnatural/ugly even at 17mm). I was interested in the 45 TS-E (I have not bought it mostly because is old and unsharp) but if the new replacement is even longer, at 50mm, I wonder if the shifting allowance for proper architectural shots still justifies it.Those using the 45mm for architecture... how much do you typically shift it?
Maybe a normal 50mm lens slightly corrected for keystoning will suffice, if I were to shift it by only 1 or 2 mm. There are lot of choices at 50mm in normal lenses (ok, not yet any one interesting from Canon) also more suitable for other non-architectural uses, for those of us which don't plain to tilt.
Upvote
0
Re: Clarification & Corrections on the Upcoming New Lenses from Canon [CR2]
I wouldn't rule out these TS will be made in Malaysia. After all till now they weren't "L", and maybe the current ones are already made in Malaysia, AFAIK that plant is specialized in manufacturing EF lenses and pentaprisms - and maybe Canon will still manufacture there anyway, who knows?
ahsanford said:50 f/2.8? 135 f/4? Only 1:2 max mag? Maybe they are being made in Malaysia.
I wouldn't rule out these TS will be made in Malaysia. After all till now they weren't "L", and maybe the current ones are already made in Malaysia, AFAIK that plant is specialized in manufacturing EF lenses and pentaprisms - and maybe Canon will still manufacture there anyway, who knows?
Upvote
0
Re: Clarification & Corrections on the Upcoming New Lenses from Canon [CR2]
This might be my favourite CR post ever. All of this is awesome news.
If the new 85mm comes at a cheaper price point than the 85/1.2, I will press that pre-order button so fast, I might break a couple of fingers in the process :-[
Canon Rumors said:
This might be my favourite CR post ever. All of this is awesome news.
If the new 85mm comes at a cheaper price point than the 85/1.2, I will press that pre-order button so fast, I might break a couple of fingers in the process :-[
Upvote
0
Re: Clarification & Corrections on the Upcoming New Lenses from Canon [CR2]
A Mamiya 210mm shifted ... I have an adapter for my 35/55/80 and 210mm lenses
The 35 and 55 are the only ones I've actually used much.
Usually just enough to get verticals OK, or shunt the horizon down lower in the frame, to prevent lampposts/trees leaning inwards
It's the lack of use of these that primarily persuaded me not to get the TS-E45 (I use the 17 and 24 a lot)
I find the 17 harder to use well, but well worth the practice, since it gets far more shots that are 'noticed' and favourably commented on by architectural clients, especially for big prints (where the 'excesses' are less noticeable)
I always smile when people authoritatively tell me that 17mm is 'too wide', especially when I stitch up/down TS-E17 shots to get a very wide square shot
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/using-645-mf-lenses-as-shift-lenses/
The 50mm may be of interest if it's really top notch optically - The 90mm will need to be really special to replace my ts-e90, and the 135?? I just need to try that one out, maybe for macro with bellows.
cgc said:I have a question about TS-E "long" lenses for architecture.
For architecture it is extremely useful shifting a wide angle lens: it removes the highly distorted areas close to the photographer, placing more emphasis in the subject and augmenting the "effective" wide angle (e.g. more room for the top of the buildings).
I feel the need of shifting even at 35mm (I sometimes even instinctively drive my hand to the unexistent knob!
Those using the 45mm for architecture... how much do you typically shift it?
Maybe a normal 50mm lens slightly corrected for keystoning will suffice, if I were to shift it by only 1 or 2 mm. There are lot of choices at 50mm in normal lenses (ok, not yet any one interesting from Canon) also more suitable for other non-architectural uses, for those of us which don't plain to tilt.
A Mamiya 210mm shifted ... I have an adapter for my 35/55/80 and 210mm lenses
The 35 and 55 are the only ones I've actually used much.
Usually just enough to get verticals OK, or shunt the horizon down lower in the frame, to prevent lampposts/trees leaning inwards
It's the lack of use of these that primarily persuaded me not to get the TS-E45 (I use the 17 and 24 a lot)
I find the 17 harder to use well, but well worth the practice, since it gets far more shots that are 'noticed' and favourably commented on by architectural clients, especially for big prints (where the 'excesses' are less noticeable)
I always smile when people authoritatively tell me that 17mm is 'too wide', especially when I stitch up/down TS-E17 shots to get a very wide square shot
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/using-645-mf-lenses-as-shift-lenses/
The 50mm may be of interest if it's really top notch optically - The 90mm will need to be really special to replace my ts-e90, and the 135?? I just need to try that one out, maybe for macro with bellows.
Attachments
Upvote
0
Re: Clarification & Corrections on the Upcoming New Lenses from Canon [CR2]
If my 35 Art suddenly started autofocusing like, um, any decent lens at all, then I'd be happy.
Doubt I'll ever buy another Sigma.
ahsanford said:
If my 35 Art suddenly started autofocusing like, um, any decent lens at all, then I'd be happy.
Doubt I'll ever buy another Sigma.
Upvote
0
Re: Clarification & Corrections on the Upcoming New Lenses from Canon [CR2]
I'm struck by the number of Canon primes in the 85-100mm range, and there are also a bunch of zooms covering the range too. Not sure where the 85 f1.4 IS would be most likely to fit in. Very high performance? Yes. Pickle jar big? Not so sure. Maybe the slot is as a high end workhorse that would pair up with the 35LII.
ahsanford said:
I'm struck by the number of Canon primes in the 85-100mm range, and there are also a bunch of zooms covering the range too. Not sure where the 85 f1.4 IS would be most likely to fit in. Very high performance? Yes. Pickle jar big? Not so sure. Maybe the slot is as a high end workhorse that would pair up with the 35LII.
Upvote
0
Re: Clarification & Corrections on the Upcoming New Lenses from Canon [CR2]
The 50mm tse sounds like it will be great for product shots.
Can't wait to try one out.
The 50mm tse sounds like it will be great for product shots.
Can't wait to try one out.
Upvote
0
Re: Clarification & Corrections on the Upcoming New Lenses from Canon [CR2]
I never use a TS lens longer than 24mm for architecture.
The plain fact is that if you need a longer lens to achieve the AOV you want you are far enough away that the keystoning issues are minimal.
I use a 50 or 85 on rare occasions and only have to use a touch of adjustment in PS on the 50 only.
cgc said:I have a question about TS-E "long" lenses for architecture.
For architecture it is extremely useful shifting a wide angle lens: it removes the highly distorted areas close to the photographer, placing more emphasis in the subject and augmenting the "effective" wide angle (e.g. more room for the top of the buildings).
I feel the need of shifting even at 35mm (I sometimes even instinctively drive my hand to the unexistent knob!
Those using the 45mm for architecture... how much do you typically shift it?
Maybe a normal 50mm lens slightly corrected for keystoning will suffice, if I were to shift it by only 1 or 2 mm. There are lot of choices at 50mm in normal lenses (ok, not yet any one interesting from Canon) also more suitable for other non-architectural uses, for those of us which don't plain to tilt.
I never use a TS lens longer than 24mm for architecture.
The plain fact is that if you need a longer lens to achieve the AOV you want you are far enough away that the keystoning issues are minimal.
I use a 50 or 85 on rare occasions and only have to use a touch of adjustment in PS on the 50 only.
Upvote
0
Re: Clarification & Corrections on the Upcoming New Lenses from Canon [CR2]
What would the three different lens be useful for in terms of macro. Would the they have different uses? What would be advantage of 50mm over 90mm or 135mm. Does a 135mm give you a bigger practical magnification? Is it just a focal length thing i.e. A wider field of view at 50mm. Would a 50mm have a shorter focussing distance?
How better than a 100mm macro would these be. Would I get an equivalent say F22 depth of field at F2.8.
Will exposure fool the camera like it does when shift or tilt one of the current TS-E lens (I use the 24mm TS-E currently)
What would the three different lens be useful for in terms of macro. Would the they have different uses? What would be advantage of 50mm over 90mm or 135mm. Does a 135mm give you a bigger practical magnification? Is it just a focal length thing i.e. A wider field of view at 50mm. Would a 50mm have a shorter focussing distance?
How better than a 100mm macro would these be. Would I get an equivalent say F22 depth of field at F2.8.
Will exposure fool the camera like it does when shift or tilt one of the current TS-E lens (I use the 24mm TS-E currently)
Upvote
0
Similar threads
