More Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II Information

[StudentOfLight]

Well rip-off Britain is alive & well price in the UK £ 1,799 at today exchange rate thats $ 2770. Even subtracting 20% VAT its $ 2216.

Too expensive for my tastes.

All European Canon shooters should unite and let Canon know that we do not accept this over pricing in Europe. $1799 in the US and $2200-$2300 + VAT in Europe is simply unacceptable.

South African prices seem to line up relatively closely with the US prices. Unfortunately our local currency is quite volatile so our Canon prices tend to fluctuate with the exchange rates. :'(

Agree that the Europe pricing is unfair. It not like people live under a rock. Everyone who invests such huge amounts of money in high-end photographic equipment has internet access and knows what pricing is on offer in other regions. Huge disparities leave a bitter taste in the mouth.

 

[Crosswind]

Blue Spectrum Refractive

What about this BR thing inside the new 35L? It seems to be an "organic optical material", but organic things get weaker and weaker (for example; older models of colorimeters that used organic filters inside for monitor calibration were useless or very inaccurate after several years).

Is there something... that is preventing damage over time to this BR element? I don't understand a lot about lens design, but this is something that worries me.

 

[Viggo]

Re: Blue Spectrum Refractive

What about this BR thing inside the new 35L? It seems to be an "organic optical material", but organic things get weaker and weaker (for example; older models of colorimeters that used organic filters inside for monitor calibration were useless or very inaccurate after several years).

Is there something... that is preventing damage over time to this BR element? I don't understand a lot about lens design, but this is something that worries me.

You have nothing to worry about. Fluorite is also organic. Ever heard of glass been worn out in a Canon lens? ;D
Even the very old designs with no weather sealing and is 40 years old still works but with a little dust. Fungus can grow on any glass, keep your lenses not outdoor in the winter and you'll be fine

 

[AlanF]

Re: Blue Spectrum Refractive

What about this BR thing inside the new 35L? It seems to be an "organic optical material", but organic things get weaker and weaker (for example; older models of colorimeters that used organic filters inside for monitor calibration were useless or very inaccurate after several years).

Is there something... that is preventing damage over time to this BR element? I don't understand a lot about lens design, but this is something that worries me.

You have nothing to worry about. Fluorite is also organic.

Fluorite is Calcium Fluoride, CaF2, which is totally, completely and absolutely inorganic. Organic compounds contain, by definition, carbon - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_compound

(There is the mythical "flourite", which sounds organic!)

 

[Viggo]

Re: Blue Spectrum Refractive

What about this BR thing inside the new 35L? It seems to be an "organic optical material", but organic things get weaker and weaker (for example; older models of colorimeters that used organic filters inside for monitor calibration were useless or very inaccurate after several years).

Is there something... that is preventing damage over time to this BR element? I don't understand a lot about lens design, but this is something that worries me.

You have nothing to worry about. Fluorite is also organic.

Fluorite is Calcium Fluoride, CaF2, which is totally, completely and absolutely inorganic. Organic compounds contain, by definition, carbon - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_compound

(There is the mythical "flourite", which sounds organic!)

"Unfortunately, fluorite in nature grows in very small crystals and is not suitable for use in photographic lenses, although even back in the 19th century, natural fluorite crystals were being used in microscope lenses.

To overcome these problems, Canon set about growing its own synthetic fluorite crystals in large enough quantities to create photographic lenses from them."

From Canon's website.

 

[mb66energy]

Re: Blue Spectrum Refractive

What about this BR thing inside the new 35L? It seems to be an "organic optical material", but organic things get weaker and weaker (for example; older models of colorimeters that used organic filters inside for monitor calibration were useless or very inaccurate after several years).

Is there something... that is preventing damage over time to this BR element? I don't understand a lot about lens design, but this is something that worries me.

You have nothing to worry about. Fluorite is also organic.

Fluorite is Calcium Fluoride, CaF2, which is totally, completely and absolutely inorganic. Organic compounds contain, by definition, carbon - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_compound

(There is the mythical "flourite", which sounds organic!)

"Unfortunately, fluorite in nature grows in very small crystals and is not suitable for use in photographic lenses, although even back in the 19th century, natural fluorite crystals were being used in microscope lenses.

To overcome these problems, Canon set about growing its own synthetic fluorite crystals in large enough quantities to create photographic lenses from them."

From Canon's website.

Crystal growth is a physical (or chemical) process where solvatized ions (here Ca++ and F-) recombine to CaF2 which is solid. It is the same process which is used to produce salt from salt water where you get small crystals. Under controlled conditions you can grow very large crystals: High purity materials + avoiding shake.

Another process of crystal growth is the growing of large crystals from the molten material. Maybe Canons large CaF2 crystals are made with this process. A well established process for other applications is to grow large silicon crystals from molten silicon to produce electronic chips ...

But back to your first question: How stable are organic materials? It depends ... Lucite (plexi glas, PMMA) is good for 10 or 20 years stability under outdoor conditions. Dioxines are organic compounds which are cancerogen - a large problem is their stability which is better than that of plutonium: Only burning them at 1400 degree centigrade damages the molecular structure.

The Canon BR element encloses the organic material between two (glass?) lenses and I think it is sealed by a metal ring to avoid ageing. Perhaps it is fluid so it is a good thing to seal it very well!

Organic compounds have one large advantage: The variability of compound structure and its properties is nearly without limit. The carbon atoms have four binding possibilities so you can make networks, chains, add other atoms inside these complex structures. Look at diamond and graphite - both are made of carbon but have different internal structure which leads to totally different properties.

 

[AlanF]

Re: Blue Spectrum Refractive

What about this BR thing inside the new 35L? It seems to be an "organic optical material", but organic things get weaker and weaker (for example; older models of colorimeters that used organic filters inside for monitor calibration were useless or very inaccurate after several years).

Is there something... that is preventing damage over time to this BR element? I don't understand a lot about lens design, but this is something that worries me.

You have nothing to worry about. Fluorite is also organic.

Fluorite is Calcium Fluoride, CaF2, which is totally, completely and absolutely inorganic. Organic compounds contain, by definition, carbon - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_compound

(There is the mythical "flourite", which sounds organic!)

"Unfortunately, fluorite in nature grows in very small crystals and is not suitable for use in photographic lenses, although even back in the 19th century, natural fluorite crystals were being used in microscope lenses.

To overcome these problems, Canon set about growing its own synthetic fluorite crystals in large enough quantities to create photographic lenses from them."

From Canon's website.

Crystal growth is a physical (or chemical) process where solvatized ions (here Ca++ and F-) recombine to CaF2 which is solid. It is the same process which is used to produce salt from salt water where you get small crystals. Under controlled conditions you can grow very large crystals: High purity materials + avoiding shake.

Another process of crystal growth is the growing of large crystals from the molten material. Maybe Canons large CaF2 crystals are made with this process. A well established process for other applications is to grow large silicon crystals from molten silicon to produce electronic chips ...

But back to your first question: How stable are organic materials? It depends ... Lucite (plexi glas, PMMA) is good for 10 or 20 years stability under outdoor conditions. Dioxines are organic compounds which are cancerogen - a large problem is their stability which is better than that of plutonium: Only burning them at 1400 degree centigrade damages the molecular structure.

The Canon BR element encloses the organic material between two (glass?) lenses and I think it is sealed by a metal ring to avoid ageing. Perhaps it is fluid so it is a good thing to seal it very well!

Organic compounds have one large advantage: The variability of compound structure and its properties is nearly without limit. The carbon atoms have four binding possibilities so you can make networks, chains, add other atoms inside these complex structures. Look at diamond and graphite - both are made of carbon but have different internal structure which leads to totally different properties.

Dioxins more stable than plutonium? The half-life of dioxin depends on its location. In human bodies the half-life is 11–15 years, though it can be as high as 20 years. In the environment, the half-life varies depending on the type of soil and the depth of penetration. Sun will break down dioxin, so on leaf and soil surfaces it will last 1–3 years, depending on conditions. Dioxin buried or leached under the surface or deep in the sediment of rivers and other bodies of water can have a half-life of more than 100 years.

Different isotopes of plutonium have different half-lives. The longest-lived are plutonium-244, with a half-life of 80.8 million years, plutonium-242, with a half-life of 373,300 years, and plutonium-239, with a half-life of 24,110 years. All of the remaining radioactive isotopes have half-lives that are less than 7,000 years.

 

[mb66energy]

Re: Blue Spectrum Refractive

[...]

Crystal growth is a physical (or chemical) process where solvatized ions (here Ca++ and F-) recombine to CaF2 which is solid. It is the same process which is used to produce salt from salt water where you get small crystals. Under controlled conditions you can grow very large crystals: High purity materials + avoiding shake.

Another process of crystal growth is the growing of large crystals from the molten material. Maybe Canons large CaF2 crystals are made with this process. A well established process for other applications is to grow large silicon crystals from molten silicon to produce electronic chips ...

But back to your first question: How stable are organic materials? It depends ... Lucite (plexi glas, PMMA) is good for 10 or 20 years stability under outdoor conditions. Dioxines are organic compounds which are cancerogen - a large problem is their stability which is better than that of plutonium: Only burning them at 1400 degree centigrade damages the molecular structure.

The Canon BR element encloses the organic material between two (glass?) lenses and I think it is sealed by a metal ring to avoid ageing. Perhaps it is fluid so it is a good thing to seal it very well!

Organic compounds have one large advantage: The variability of compound structure and its properties is nearly without limit. The carbon atoms have four binding possibilities so you can make networks, chains, add other atoms inside these complex structures. Look at diamond and graphite - both are made of carbon but have different internal structure which leads to totally different properties.

Dioxins more stable than plutonium? The half-life of dioxin depends on its location. In human bodies the half-life is 11–15 years, though it can be as high as 20 years. In the environment, the half-life varies depending on the type of soil and the depth of penetration. Sun will break down dioxin, so on leaf and soil surfaces it will last 1–3 years, depending on conditions. Dioxin buried or leached under the surface or deep in the sediment of rivers and other bodies of water can have a half-life of more than 100 years.

Different isotopes of plutonium have different half-lives. The longest-lived are plutonium-244, with a half-life of 80.8 million years, plutonium-242, with a half-life of 373,300 years, and plutonium-239, with a half-life of 24,110 years. All of the remaining radioactive isotopes have half-lives that are less than 7,000 years.

Thanks for your clarification - for TCDD - "the" dioxin you are right. But I think half life in the human body is more related to the persistence of TCDD in the body while newer investigations show that the human body can decompose dioxins especially if the dose is very high.

My information is from 1995 and was related to the group of dioxins - several 100 compounds in that "class" of compounds. But maybe that information was wrong ...

 

[AlanF]

Trust me - I'm emeritus professor of organic chemistry. Let's go over how the BR material could degrade. The first route is photobleaching because of the absorption of light. But, this material is highly translucent in the visible spectrum so it doesn't absorb its energy, and the surrounding glass would screen out the shorter wavelength high energy UV that excites double bonds etc. The next is oxidation, but if the organic material is sealed in glass, then oxygen would be excluded. Then, there is moisture, but again the glass would save it. So, the BR should see you through the lifetime of the lens.

 

[Sabaki]

Well rip-off Britain is alive & well price in the UK £ 1,799 at today exchange rate thats $ 2770. Even subtracting 20% VAT its $ 2216.

Too expensive for my tastes.

All European Canon shooters should unite and let Canon know that we do not accept this over pricing in Europe. $1799 in the US and $2200-$2300 + VAT in Europe is simply unacceptable.

South African prices seem to line up relatively closely with the US prices. Unfortunately our local currency is quite volatile so our Canon prices tend to fluctuate with the exchange rates. :'(

Agree that the Europe pricing is unfair. It not like people live under a rock. Everyone who invests such huge amounts of money in high-end photographic equipment has internet access and knows what pricing is on offer in other regions. Huge disparities leave a bitter taste in the mouth.

Roger Machin of Canon SA championed pricing parity with the U.S. which came into effect last year so yes, our prices are in line with the USA's

Heard that's about to change though Skyrocketing US/RSA exchange rate and a 10% extra

 

[Crosswind]

Let's go over how the BR material could degrade...*snip*

Thank you a lot for all the information and thanks for not inserting tons of quote text, it really helps readability.

 

[midluk]

Well rip-off Britain is alive & well price in the UK £ 1,799 at today exchange rate thats $ 2770. Even subtracting 20% VAT its $ 2216.

Too expensive for my tastes.

All European Canon shooters should unite and let Canon know that we do not accept this over pricing in Europe. $1799 in the US and $2200-$2300 + VAT in Europe is simply unacceptable.

In Germany it's about 2050€ including 19% VAT (all prices in Germany are including VAT, except for explicit B2B offers), that is about 2300$, so about 1930$ without tax. Still a little bit higher than the US price, but OK compared to the other european prices I have seen around here.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

Well rip-off Britain is alive & well price in the UK £ 1,799 at today exchange rate thats $ 2770. Even subtracting 20% VAT its $ 2216.

Too expensive for my tastes.

All European Canon shooters should unite and let Canon know that we do not accept this over pricing in Europe. $1799 in the US and $2200-$2300 + VAT in Europe is simply unacceptable.

In Germany it's about 2050€ including 19% VAT (all prices in Germany are including VAT, except for explicit B2B offers), that is about 2300$, so about 1930$ without tax. Still a little bit higher than the US price, but OK compared to the other european prices I have seen around here.

The reason the German price is so high...so that Merkel can afford to re-house all the Syrian Migrants...$8.5 billion so far