Patent: Canon RF 135mm f/1.4L DS USM optical formula

Larsskv

EOS R
Jun 12, 2015
852
295
I wish the article used the same subject and conditions while comparing different lenses to illustrate the point.

"Notice how the this way bigger nose, and this other way bigger nose in profile shot from a different distance both in outdoor directional and higher contrast natural light are 3D compared to these two indoor lit noses show straight on with one clearly smaller and a different shape than the others?"

I suppose? Maybe? But I don't know that it's because of the lenses and a sticker effect.

(I haven't actually read the full article, and studied the diagrams, but the examples seem clearly flawed.)

I agree - a side by side comparison would be much more helpful.

From my own experience though, I prefer images from my 35L, ower the 35LII, because of the 3D-effect I see in the 35L Images. The 35LII isn’t bad, as the Sigma 50ART is, but its not great.

And with regards to old vs modern lenses. I do believe that correcting aberrations may cause a loss of depth rendering, but the recent Canon RF lenses proves that depth rendering /3D effect can remain alongside with correction of aberrations. I haven’t found that any of my RF lenses is bad in that regard.
 

twoheadedboy

EOS R5
CR Pro
Jan 3, 2018
268
369
Kenosha, WI
When you say "sticker" do you mean 2D vs. 3D, because that word is not mentioned there either?

As for that article, there are numerous problems with both evaluation methodology and conclusions highlighted in the comments. It's fine if you prefer the way a certain lens renders a certain combination of foreground subjects, background blur, and transition; but suggesting there is any sort of objective way to determine a "winner" in this regard is bogus. The RF 50mm f/1.2 is the best lens I have ever shot on any AF body/system, dating back to my consumer Nikon days in the late 90's, and many people agree with that assessment. I'm not saying my opinion is superior to yours/this article author's, but the fact that it's a reasonable/shared conclusion at all makes the very premise of the article invalid, since is attempting to make authoritative conclusions rather than subjective ones.
 

bbasiaga

Canon Shooter
Nov 15, 2011
483
582
USA
Lens rendering is a very hotly debated topic. Like any art, its subjective in its interpretation and value. For the life of me, I cannot see the Zeiss '3d micro contrast' all their aficionados go on about. Even when two images are put next to each other and the poster describes it in detail to me. And I could see the sail boat in those weird pictures from the 90s, so its not my eyes! I'm not saying images from the Zeiss are bad, I'm just saying I don't see this phenomenon as others claim to.

Similar with the 50mm Art. I recently got one second hand, and I absolutely love it. Haven't seen any sticker effect.

I guess my point is, if you think you are interested in a lens, but the internet is making you second guess becuase of talk like this - rent it and try for yourself. The rental fees are not bad for a week or weekend, and you could save yourself hundreds by not buying something you wouldn't have liked. If you do like it, the rental fee will seem small in comparison to your enjoyment of the lens.

Brian
 

SNJ Ops

EOS M6 Mark II
Jul 27, 2021
52
37
Lens rendering is a very hotly debated topic. Like any art, its subjective in its interpretation and value. For the life of me, I cannot see the Zeiss '3d micro contrast' all their aficionados go on about. Even when two images are put next to each other and the poster describes it in detail to me. And I could see the sail boat in those weird pictures from the 90s, so its not my eyes! I'm not saying images from the Zeiss are bad, I'm just saying I don't see this phenomenon as others claim to.

Similar with the 50mm Art. I recently got one second hand, and I absolutely love it. Haven't seen any sticker effect.

I guess my point is, if you think you are interested in a lens, but the internet is making you second guess becuase of talk like this - rent it and try for yourself. The rental fees are not bad for a week or weekend, and you could save yourself hundreds by not buying something you wouldn't have liked. If you do like it, the rental fee will seem small in comparison to your enjoyment of the lens.

Brian
Very well said, I’m another who is yet to see the Zeiss rendering and why some like it so much, not saying it doesn’t exist but I’m yet to see it personally.

In terms of Canon the RF 85mm f1.2 renders a great image at the same time as being very sharp. Nikon, Sony and Sigma also have recent mirrorless lenses which also have these characteristics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Del Paso

Larsskv

EOS R
Jun 12, 2015
852
295
When you say "sticker" do you mean 2D vs. 3D, because that word is not mentioned there either?

As for that article, there are numerous problems with both evaluation methodology and conclusions highlighted in the comments. It's fine if you prefer the way a certain lens renders a certain combination of foreground subjects, background blur, and transition; but suggesting there is any sort of objective way to determine a "winner" in this regard is bogus. The RF 50mm f/1.2 is the best lens I have ever shot on any AF body/system, dating back to my consumer Nikon days in the late 90's, and many people agree with that assessment. I'm not saying my opinion is superior to yours/this article author's, but the fact that it's a reasonable/shared conclusion at all makes the very premise of the article invalid, since is attempting to make authoritative conclusions rather than subjective ones.

yep! all discussions on this topic is difficult because differences is hard to measure, and it seems to be a subjective element to it. No doubt about that.

yes, the RF50L is really good in terms of “3D rendering” but in that regard, I dont think it beats the EF50L.

There are many problems with the article, but if you pay attention to the phenomenon, you might start to see differences in rendering between lenses. Some will think or describe differences in terms of bokeh. I say some if this shows itself as differnces in 3D rendering, which is an illusion, since every picture is flat.
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,506
2,389
yep! all discussions on this topic is difficult because differences is hard to measure, and it seems to be a subjective element to it. No doubt about that.

yes, the RF50L is really good in terms of “3D rendering” but in that regard, I dont think it beats the EF50L.

There are many problems with the article, but if you pay attention to the phenomenon, you might start to see differences in rendering between lenses. Some will think or describe differences in terms of bokeh. I say some if this shows itself as differnces in 3D rendering, which is an illusion, since every picture is flat.

I believe I understand what you mean by this so let me give it a try.

It's the effect you have where a face (say) is in focus...and everything else is very out of focus. It looks like someone put a sticker with a face on it, on top of a bunch of bokeh.

I suspect the effect is lessened if you have some stuff that is only *slightly* out of focus in the frame. Of course if you get very close to your subject (such that you can't see the sides of his head at all), you're going to get the sticker effect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jd7

privatebydesign

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
10,634
5,982
I wish the article used the same subject and conditions while comparing different lenses to illustrate the point.

"Notice how the this way bigger nose, and this other way bigger nose in profile shot from a different distance both in outdoor directional and higher contrast natural light are 3D compared to these two indoor lit noses show straight on with one clearly smaller and a different shape than the others?"

I suppose? Maybe? But I don't know that it's because of the lenses and a sticker effect.

(I haven't actually read the full article, and studied the diagrams, but the examples seem clearly flawed.)
Any lens ‘comparison‘ that doesn’t use the same camera and subjects at the same time in the same lighting is worthless. And to use a phrase like “some people simply don’t see it” is sloppy and points to not actually being able to illustrate it.

In his first image he is much closer to the subject then the second and third image so has a completely different perspective. In the second and third images he is comparing an interior diffuse low contrast lighting of an Asian face type to an exterior high contrast white European face type and saying the Asian appears to have “a flat nose”!

I can’t believe PetaPixel actually posted this article!
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
9,097
12,797
Any lens ‘comparison‘ that doesn’t use the same camera and subjects at the same time in the same lighting is worthless. And to use a phrase like “some people simply don’t see it” is sloppy and points to not actually being able to illustrate it.

In his first image he is much closer to the subject then the second and third image so has a completely different perspective. In the second and third images he is comparing an interior diffuse low contrast lighting of an Asian face type to an exterior high contrast white European face type and saying the Asian appears to have “a flat nose”!

I can’t believe PetaPixel actually posted this article!
Here, PetaPixel predicts that Canon will abandon the M-series in 2022 and will not make any new DSLRs. https://petapixel.com/2021/12/22/petapixels-bold-camera-predictions-for-2022/
 
  • Haha
Reactions: privatebydesign

home_slice

I'm New Here
Aug 5, 2018
16
8
Why aren’t we hearing anything about a fast L 35mm?! That is such a staple lens and at this point, the only EF left in my kit. sure I would probably pick up a fast 24mm if it happened but 35mm is my go-to lens. Do other people not consider it a priority? I would think that would have been one of the first primes to come out?!
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
26,400
5,161
Why aren’t we hearing anything about a fast L 35mm?! That is such a staple lens and at this point, the only EF left in my kit. sure I would probably pick up a fast 24mm if it happened but 35mm is my go-to lens. Do other people not consider it a priority? I would think that would have been one of the first primes to come out?!
Probably because 1) the 35L II is reply recent compared to other fast primes, and 2) Canon would like you to buy the 28-70mm f/2.
 

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
CR Pro
Aug 9, 2018
1,374
1,526
Lens rendering is a very hotly debated topic. Like any art, its subjective in its interpretation and value. For the life of me, I cannot see the Zeiss '3d micro contrast' all their aficionados go on about. Even when two images are put next to each other and the poster describes it in detail to me. And I could see the sail boat in those weird pictures from the 90s, so its not my eyes! I'm not saying images from the Zeiss are bad, I'm just saying I don't see this phenomenon as others claim to.

Similar with the 50mm Art. I recently got one second hand, and I absolutely love it. Haven't seen any sticker effect.

I guess my point is, if you think you are interested in a lens, but the internet is making you second guess becuase of talk like this - rent it and try for yourself. The rental fees are not bad for a week or weekend, and you could save yourself hundreds by not buying something you wouldn't have liked. If you do like it, the rental fee will seem small in comparison to your enjoyment of the lens.

Brian
I presently own 5 Zeiss lenses.
All of them are excellent.
They all are renowned for their wonderful and unique 3D effect.
But I've never seen it..
Neither have I found that fleur de sel tastes of violets.
Maybe I'm just dumb...:confused:
 

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
CR Pro
Aug 9, 2018
1,374
1,526
Very well said, I’m another who is yet to see the Zeiss rendering and why some like it so much, not saying it doesn’t exist but I’m yet to see it personally.

In terms of Canon the RF 85mm f1.2 renders a great image at the same time as being very sharp. Nikon, Sony and Sigma also have recent mirrorless lenses which also have these characteristics.
This 3D effect certainly exists in advertising and in Zeiss fan-forums. I guess that somebody once used this expression (3D or microcontrast), and, since then, every reviewer feelt obliged to mention this Zeiss specific "property".
Do not misunderstand me, most Zeiss lenses are extremely sharp and contrasty, but "microcontrasty"???
PS: even on the EOS R, the RF 85 f1,2 is a mind-blowing cutie.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

SNJ Ops

EOS M6 Mark II
Jul 27, 2021
52
37
This 3D effect certainly exists in advertising and in Zeiss fan-forums. I guess that somebody once used this expression (3D or microcontrast), and, since then, every reviewer feelt obliged to mention this Zeiss specific "property".
Do not misunderstand me, most Zeiss lenses are extremely sharp and contrasty, but "microcontrasty"???
PS: even on the EOS R, the RF 85 f1,2 is a mind-blowing cutie.
Maybe the Milvus and Otus lenses special in their day but a select few recent mirrorless lenses across the big 3 are easily some of the very finest ever made.

RF
50mm f1.2 L
85mm f1.2 L

Z
50mm f1.2 S
58mm 0.95 Noct


E
50mm f1.2 GM
135mm f1.8 GM


Sigma
85mm f1.4 DG DN
105mm f2.8 Macro DG DN
35mm f1.2 DG DN

Voigtländer
50mm f2 APO-Lanthar

All of the above I reckon would most likely surpass their Zeiss counterparts.
 

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
CR Pro
Aug 9, 2018
1,374
1,526
Maybe the Milvus and Otus lenses special in their day but a select few recent mirrorless lenses across the big 3 are easily some of the very finest ever made.

RF
50mm f1.2 L
85mm f1.2 L

Z
50mm f1.2 S
58mm 0.95 Noct


E
50mm f1.2 GM
135mm f1.8 GM


Sigma
85mm f1.4 DG DN
105mm f2.8 Macro DG DN
35mm f1.2 DG DN

Voigtländer
50mm f2 APO-Lanthar

All of the above I reckon would most likely surpass their Zeiss counterparts.
Fully agree!
Provided you add most recent Leica SL and M lenses...
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

beckstoy

Take The Shot, Man!
CR Pro
I don't know where this fascination with supremely big and heavy and very expensive prime lenses will end but...

The RF 50 f1.2 weighs over 2 lbs, is 3.5 inches fat and 4.5 inches long, and costs $2,300. It has a 77mm front filter element.

The RF 85 f1.2 weighs close to 3 lbs, is over 4 inches fat and close to 5 inches long. It takes an 82mm front filter. It has a theoretical entrance pupil diameter of 71mm.

An RF 135 f1.4 would need a theoretical entrance pupil of 96mm. That makes the front element nearly twice as massive as the 85mm f1.2. So you are probably looking at a lens that weighs 5 lbs, is 5.5 inches fat, 6.5 inches long, takes a 105mm front filter and costs $3,799.
If you don't understand the fascination with these large lenses, you probably aren't a portrait photographer (or at least, a different kind of portrait photographer). I love them, and spend a bit more time in the gym to prepare for my shoots. You can't replicate the files you get through these lenses with any "lighter" lenses. Some fake it with PP'ing, but others, like me, understand.
I'll be putting that $3799 down, that's for sure. I have a year or so to get in better shape to add this lens to my (already very heavy) bag.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy