Multiple New Diffracitve Optics Lenses Coming from Canon in 2018 [CR2]

[Otara]

Here's a wake up for you and most other 'hardcore'-type photographers:

99% of people don't look at things which aren't in focus, and bokeh does not matter.

I suspect with lenses at this level, that changes quite rapidly - because ultimately the first person you have to please is the person taking the actual photo. Because they're the person buying the lens, and they're the one who wants to be happy with the pictures they're taking.

So in this case the 99% are irrelevant.

 

[Talys]

Would love it too. However, Nikon model has severe bokeh issues. If Canon can solve these it'll be a massive success.

Here's a wake up for you and most other 'hardcore'-type photographers:

99% of people don't look at things which aren't in focus, and bokeh does not matter.

Just like how sensor colour depth and tonal range doesn't matter. Just like how APD filters don't matter. Just like how 1:1 pixel-level sharpness doesn't really matter as long as something in the overall image is sharp.

Plenty of the best-selling lenses ever do not have good bokeh. Plenty of the most popular photos ever have nearly everything front-to-back in focus anyway. It doesn't matter if you're talking about the widest landscape lens or the tightest ultra-telephoto wildlife lens, or anything in between. People aren't looking at the blurry mush. They look at the person's face, or the food on the plate, or the bird, or the sunlight falling across the meadow, or whatever it is you've photographed.

Yes, the Nikon has a fresnel element which makes bokeh drop a little and background highlights take on busy ringlet patterns at smaller apertures. And nobody who sees any photo taken with it will ever care, and Canon could put out a similar lens with the exact same results and it'd be just as popular; and if they can, they absolutely should. (Though they will be hard-pressed to improve on the current 300mm f/4 IS other than in IS effectiveness and AF speed.)

I say this without being a smartass: If you're not interested in focus (and therefore sharpness) or bokeh, save yourself a whole bunch of money and buy a kit xx-250 or xx-300.

And you're right, those lenses probably outsell ones that are thousands of dollars by a factor of tens of thousands or more.

Although every photo should have something in focus, and most photos have something out of focus, what is in focus and isn't matters a lot. If the eyes are blurry, the picture is garbage. If a dog's paw is in focus but the head isn't, toss it. If it's a product shot for a car brochure and the whole vehicle isn't flawless after post, it's useless.

 

[Maiaibing]

Would love it too. However, Nikon model has severe bokeh issues. If Canon can solve these it'll be a massive success.

Here's a wake up for you and most other 'hardcore'-type photographers:

99% of people don't look at things which aren't in focus, and bokeh does not matter.

True. But I take pictures for the 1%. YMMV.

 

[JMZawodny]

My guess at the new DO lenses.

There will be three,
600 f/4
400 f/2.8
800 f/5.6

We've known about the 600, there have been rumors of a new 800 of some sort, and the 400 f/2.8 is my stretch predict based only upon it having a similarly sized front optic to the other two. I'll be happy if I hit 2 out of 3.

 

[Maiaibing]

My guess at the new DO lenses.

There will be three,
600 f/4
400 f/2.8
800 f/5.6

We've known about the 600, there have been rumors of a new 800 of some sort, and the 400 f/2.8 is my stretch predict based only upon it having a similarly sized front optic to the other two. I'll be happy if I hit 2 out of 3.

300mm f/4 would be a smash..

 

[AlanF]

My guess at the new DO lenses.

There will be three,
600 f/4
400 f/2.8
800 f/5.6

We've known about the 600, there have been rumors of a new 800 of some sort, and the 400 f/2.8 is my stretch predict based only upon it having a similarly sized front optic to the other two. I'll be happy if I hit 2 out of 3.

400mm f/4 would be a smash..

???? There is a 400mm f/4 DO.

 

[mjg79]

I understand why the idea of this tech being used in a 600mm or 800mm lens is exciting but I think Canon should consider a competitor for Nikon's 300/4. Canon's 300/4 is still good but is due an update, has the older IS system and this would seem a good chance to convert it to DO as it's a lens generally used by those who want to save weight (its key advantage over a 300/2.8 - so press home that advantage).

As for the 70-300 4.5-5.6 DO I used it and it really wasn't very good. I don't know how likely it is that Canon would want yet another 70-300 lens but DO really makes sense for that range. A 70-300 is a useful lens for travel so DO would be very welcome. With modern coatings, lens elements and IS it could be a great lens.

 

[Click]

Canon and Apple will never let me save money. :'(

Same here.

 

[candc]

We know the 600 do is in the works. The 800 is due for replacement so that makes sense for the second one. I would guess a zoom also.

Cost is higher now due to manufacturing difficulties and limited production. The price should come down in line with refractive lenses if "do" optics become more common in there lens lineup.

Good to hear.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I understand why the idea of this tech being used in a 600mm or 800mm lens is exciting but I think Canon should consider a competitor for Nikon's 300/4. Canon's 300/4 is still good but is due an update, has the older IS system and this would seem a good chance to convert it to DO as it's a lens generally used by those who want to save weight (its key advantage over a 300/2.8 - so press home that advantage).

As for the 70-300 4.5-5.6 DO I used it and it really wasn't very good. I don't know how likely it is that Canon would want yet another 70-300 lens but DO really makes sense for that range. A 70-300 is a useful lens for travel so DO would be very welcome. With modern coatings, lens elements and IS it could be a great lens.

Its possible that its coming, but the 300 f/4 is very good and inexpensive. A DO version might more than double the price, but not likely improve much but the IS.


a 300mm f/2.8 DO might be interesting, its a lens that already is in the higher price range, and a lighter one would be valuable.

 

[mjg79]

I understand why the idea of this tech being used in a 600mm or 800mm lens is exciting but I think Canon should consider a competitor for Nikon's 300/4. Canon's 300/4 is still good but is due an update, has the older IS system and this would seem a good chance to convert it to DO as it's a lens generally used by those who want to save weight (its key advantage over a 300/2.8 - so press home that advantage).

As for the 70-300 4.5-5.6 DO I used it and it really wasn't very good. I don't know how likely it is that Canon would want yet another 70-300 lens but DO really makes sense for that range. A 70-300 is a useful lens for travel so DO would be very welcome. With modern coatings, lens elements and IS it could be a great lens.

Its possible that its coming, but the 300 f/4 is very good and inexpensive. A DO version might more than double the price, but not likely improve much but the IS.


a 300mm f/2.8 DO might be interesting, its a lens that already is in the higher price range, and a lighter one would be valuable.

What really got me thinking was using the new 100-400 II and seeing how wonderful it is in terms of image quality and the IS. Canon should be able to do even better with a 300 prime. But then how to differentiate it from the 100-400 etc? The aperture is a bit wider but DO might allow it to be a lot lighter.

It's not good to go off second hand opinions I know but pat of my feelings on this is knowing a few Nikon shooters who love their 300/4 and have shown me some great photos they got.

And yes indeed, a 300 2.8 DO would make a lot of sense too!

 

[PCM-madison]

I hope at least one is a zoom. I've been happy with my 70-300mm DO, especially for travel. It is small and black so it doesn't attract the attention of a white L telephoto lens. It focuses well including for moving subjects. I am also very happy with the image quality shooting in RAW. Better optics, IS, etc in a new lens would be welcome. Hawk shot with a 60D, 70-300 DO @ 300mm, ISO 200, F8, 1/1000. Cityscape shot with a 6D, 70-300 DO @ 130mm, ISO 125, F14, 1/80

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I understand why the idea of this tech being used in a 600mm or 800mm lens is exciting but I think Canon should consider a competitor for Nikon's 300/4. Canon's 300/4 is still good but is due an update, has the older IS system and this would seem a good chance to convert it to DO as it's a lens generally used by those who want to save weight (its key advantage over a 300/2.8 - so press home that advantage).

As for the 70-300 4.5-5.6 DO I used it and it really wasn't very good. I don't know how likely it is that Canon would want yet another 70-300 lens but DO really makes sense for that range. A 70-300 is a useful lens for travel so DO would be very welcome. With modern coatings, lens elements and IS it could be a great lens.

Its possible that its coming, but the 300 f/4 is very good and inexpensive. A DO version might more than double the price, but not likely improve much but the IS.


a 300mm f/2.8 DO might be interesting, its a lens that already is in the higher price range, and a lighter one would be valuable.

What really got me thinking was using the new 100-400 II and seeing how wonderful it is in terms of image quality and the IS. Canon should be able to do even better with a 300 prime. But then how to differentiate it from the 100-400 etc? The aperture is a bit wider but DO might allow it to be a lot lighter.

It's not good to go off second hand opinions I know but pat of my feelings on this is knowing a few Nikon shooters who love their 300/4 and have shown me some great photos they got.

And yes indeed, a 300 2.8 DO would make a lot of sense too!

The 300mm f/4 except for the IS and loud clunk it makes when focusing is better than the 100-400, has a very close focus distance, and is f/4. A new version would possibly be slightly lighter, it could use rear focus groups like the other newer lenses. A upgrade like that would probably put it in the $1500-$1700 range. With DO, probably $2500.

Its not a big seller now, so Canon seems to have been ignoring any upgrades. However, they are coming out with new tilt shifts, and those don't exactly sell by the zillions, so it is time to upgrade the 300/4.

However, the 50mm f/1.4 needs a replacement more urgently.

 

[NancyP]

Phil says: "... that their engineers work more on the development of lentils that make us dream..."
No, Phil isn't smoking anything. The translation program or the spell-check is "smoking something". ;D

I have to wonder what a 400 f/2.8 DO would weigh....

I also have to wonder when the 50mm f/1.4, or 50 f/1.2L, is getting a replacement.

 

[RGF]

Would they be at a premium price though? Wouldn't a DO lens require less materials than a non-DO lens? The 400mm DO doesn't sell for much more than the 300/2.8.

Since when does Cost Of Goods (COG) determine the price. How much is it worth to you to shave off a few pounds and perhaps 4-6 inches off a 600 and still get great image quality?

 

[RGF]

My guess at the new DO lenses.

There will be three,
600 f/4
400 f/2.8
800 f/5.6

We've known about the 600, there have been rumors of a new 800 of some sort, and the 400 f/2.8 is my stretch predict based only upon it having a similarly sized front optic to the other two. I'll be happy if I hit 2 out of 3.

Since they already have a 400 F4 DO, why would they create 400 F2.8? Perhaps 300 F2.8 first.'

others should reasonable though they opt for 500 F5.6 DO for a light weight hand held lens (or perhaps 200-560 DO F4 - 5.6)

 

[Triceratops]

Canon please make 200-600 happen. Pleassseeee!!! :-\ :-\

 

[Talys]

As for the 70-300 4.5-5.6 DO I used it and it really wasn't very good. I don't know how likely it is that Canon would want yet another 70-300 lens but DO really makes sense for that range. A 70-300 is a useful lens for travel so DO would be very welcome. With modern coatings, lens elements and IS it could be a great lens.

The 70-300 4.5-5.6 DO is nice only because it's tiny. I mean, lens-retracted, it's about the size of a 24-70.

But yeah, I get what you mean -- this would be a nice carry-around, if only if were tiny and had a bit more awesomeness in the IQ department, too

 

[Joakim]

Would they be at a premium price though? Wouldn't a DO lens require less materials than a non-DO lens? The 400mm DO doesn't sell for much more than the 300/2.8.

Well that is a 400 F4, compared to a 300 F2.8. The Non-DO 400 is a 2.8 and considerably more expensive.

The article talks about a 600 F4 DO, i.e same aperture as the current 600 F4, so it is likely to be more expensive.
It would have to be a 600 F5.6 or thereabouts to match the 400 F4 DO -> 300 F2.8 comparison.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

I think a 300mm f2.8 DO is wishful thinking. Is anyone going to stomach a 15% weight and size reduction on what is already a very light and small white tele? Especially considering the excessive price hike that will occur?
As it stands, the current 300mm f2.8 LIS II is a direct rival to the 400mm f4 DO in many peoples opinion. There is little weight, size and price difference between them and it kind of falls to a comparison of who wants the native 300mm f2.8 vs the native 400mm?

The best usage of the DO tech is with the very big and heavy white teles like the 600mm f4, the 800 f5.6 and probably the 400mm f2.8. The 300mm f4 and 2.8 are already very light and small lenses.