Patent: CN-E 35-260mm f/2.8 Soft Focus Lens

[Canon Rumors]

<p>Canon has published a patent for a new zoom cinema lens with a soft focus mechanism. The lens is for the Super 35 image sensor size.</p>
<p><strong>Patent Publication No. 2014-235203 (Google Translated)</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Published 2014.12.15</li>
<li>Filing date 2013.5.31</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Example 3</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Zoom ratio 7.50</li>
<li>The focal length f = 34.00-68.00-102.00-136.00-254.99mm</li>
<li>Fno. 2.70</li>
<li>Half angle ω = 24.58-12.88-8.67-6.52-3.49 °</li>
<li>Image height Y = 15.55mm</li>
<li>Overall length of the lens 441.54mm</li>
<li>BF 51.02mm</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Canon patent</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>4-group zoom of positive and negative negative-positive</li>
<li>Spherical aberration adjustment group (soft focus)</li>
<li>Not shift the focus position can be switched to soft focus</li>
</ul>
<p>Source: [<a href="http://egami.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2015-01-11" target="_blank">EG</a>]</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

 

[candc]

I have no idea how it works but that has to be record number of elements?

 

[dash2k8]

Does anyone actually find them useful? If you wanted soft, you could do that in post, couldn't you?

 

[zim]

First reaction to this was, oh err the sites been hacked . ;D
Then realised this is a cine lens, I assume soft focus is a much more tedious affect to apply post or its used in cine for more than the traditional stills use?

 

[Skip]

Does anyone actually find them useful? If you wanted soft, you could do that in post, couldn't you?

Or buy a Sigma 150-500mm ;D ;D

 

[mb66energy]

IMO it is always a good idea to see immediately what you get - and if I think in "4k" + "movie" I see hardly a good method to do some on the fly high quality processing to get images consistently soft. We speak about calculating soft focus effects for 24 x 8 MPix frames per second resulting in 192 full color MPix per second which is roughly 1.2 GByte per second.

Another reason for the existence of such lenses might be the fact that "hardware softening" changes the bokeh differently from the main subject - this would be a hard job (if possible) in post.

Just my 2ct ...

 

[preppyak]

Another reason for the existence of such lenses might be the fact that "hardware softening" changes the bokeh differently from the main subject - this would be a hard job (if possible) in post.

This is the reason. Achieving the softness of the object in focus is relatively easy in post with some diffusion, etc...but smoothing out the bokeh is borderline impossible. Especially if your subject is moving, since you'd have to mask that motion and not have it be noticeable.

Why do all that when you can flick a switch and voila, its done

 

[cbphoto]

The lens is for the Super 35 image sensor size.

I suspect this lens has been designed for the C-series cinema cameras.

 

[Maiaibing]

Does anyone actually find them useful? If you wanted soft, you could do that in post, couldn't you?

I'm sure the cine people will be happy.

What Canon should do for stills is release an equivilent lens to the Minolta (now SONY) 135mm with a apodization filter that controls the bokeh - its an amazing piece of glass for portraits etc. And there is no way of emulating its effect through software (ever!). Cine can also use the effect for good purpose.

 

[DominoDude]

Does anyone actually find them useful? If you wanted soft, you could do that in post, couldn't you?

I'm sure the cine people will be happy.

What Canon should do for stills is release an equivilent lens to the Minolta (now SONY) 135mm with a apodization filter that controls the bokeh - its an amazing piece of glass for portraits etc. And there is no way of emulating its effect through software (ever!). Cine can also use the effect for good purpose.

Do you mean something similar to the old Canon EF 135mm f/2.8 Softfocus lens?

 

[Maiaibing]

What Canon should do for stills is release an equivilent lens to the Minolta (now SONY) 135mm with a apodization filter that controls the bokeh

Do you mean something similar to the old Canon EF 135mm f/2.8 Softfocus lens?

No. No softening. It actually takes tack sharp pictures. But the bokeh (OOF areas) are the smoohtest ever - and we're not talking pixel peeping here. Its a stand out effect. And you can actually control the front/back bokeh(!).

The price you pay is 2 stops due to the the apodization filter. Plus its manual only (if that's a problem).

I have several times been extremely close to buying a SONY cam just to be able to shoot that lens. (I may still do it one day...).

 

[DominoDude]

What Canon should do for stills is release an equivilent lens to the Minolta (now SONY) 135mm with a apodization filter that controls the bokeh

Do you mean something similar to the old Canon EF 135mm f/2.8 Softfocus lens?

No. No softening. It actually takes tack sharp pictures. But the bokeh (OOF areas) are the smoohtest ever - and we're not talking pixel peeping here. Its a stand out effect. And you can actually control the front/back bokeh(!).

The price you pay is 2 stops due to the the apodization filter. Plus its manual only (if that's a problem).

I have several times been extremely close to buying a SONY cam just to be able to shoot that lens. (I may still do it one day...).

Aha, thanks!
Sounds indeed like a totally different behaviour.

 

[dash2k8]

In summary, it seems the only benefit is the bokeh, yeah? Not to be overly critical, but does that limit this soft-focus lens to backlit situations under warm sunsets and perhaps some night-on-the-street scenes?

I'm really racking my brains to think of a recent movie with a soft-focus scene. The image that keeps showing up in my head is some old Whitney Houston music videos.

 

[Khufu]

Does anyone actually find them useful? If you wanted soft, you could do that in post, couldn't you?

First reaction to this was, oh err the sites been hacked . ;D
Then realised this is a cine lens, I assume soft focus is a much more tedious affect to apply post or its used in cine for more than the traditional stills use?

...and if you're short on both time for editing and finances for new soft-focus glass just lick the front of the lens you've got to hand, sorted!

 

[preppyak]

In summary, it seems the only benefit is the bokeh, yeah? Not to be overly critical, but does that limit this soft-focus lens to backlit situations under warm sunsets and perhaps some night-on-the-street scenes?

I'm really racking my brains to think of a recent movie with a soft-focus scene. The image that keeps showing up in my head is some old Whitney Houston music videos.

Well, we are relying on a google translation of the terms, its quite possible that the practical effect could be similar to what Sony does with their 135 lens, which is genuinely unique.

Truth is, in the cine world, even 4k is only relying on about 8mp of resolution. So, what shows up as "soft-focus" on a 20mp modern sensor could have a very different use within the video world.

35-260 is an interesting range for that application. Maybe they intend it for things like broadcast news? Or a similar event/talking style, where background separation is key and "sharpness" in the traditional sense is not as crucial

 

[danski0224]

No. No softening. It actually takes tack sharp pictures. But the bokeh (OOF areas) are the smoohtest ever - and we're not talking pixel peeping here. Its a stand out effect. And you can actually control the front/back bokeh(!).

The price you pay is 2 stops due to the the apodization filter. Plus its manual only (if that's a problem).

I have several times been extremely close to buying a SONY cam just to be able to shoot that lens. (I may still do it one day...).

Do you know about the Nikon 105mm and 135mm f/2.0 DC lenses?

They can be used on Canon cameras too.

 

[Maiaibing]

No. No softening. It actually takes tack sharp pictures. But the bokeh (OOF areas) are the smoohtest ever - and we're not talking pixel peeping here. Its a stand out effect. And you can actually control the front/back bokeh(!).

The price you pay is 2 stops due to the the apodization filter. Plus its manual only (if that's a problem).

I have several times been extremely close to buying a SONY cam just to be able to shoot that lens. (I may still do it one day...).

Do you know about the Nikon 105mm and 135mm f/2.0 DC lenses?

They can be used on Canon cameras too.

Very interesting! I once read that DC was a soft focus lens - which it is clearly not. Different tech than SONY but same results. It even has autofocus. I'm very surprised not more Nikon people use this lens. Its almost a reason to in itself to use Nikon if you do outdoor portraits and wedding shots.

Hope Canon has one comming up as part of their strategy to market new lenses in order to promote their lens line-up as a key selling point.

___

Edit note: Nikon actually adds to the confusion by calling it "Defocus Control" that's maybe why I thought it was a soft focus lens. Gives a wrong idea of the lens.

 

[danski0224]

I had heard about the Nikon DC lens over at Fred Miranda's site in the Alt forum.

It is a great lens, and I use it on Canon.

If I had a nit to pick, it's the minimum focus distance. Close work needs an extension tube, although it is probably fine as is for portrait work.

If I can find a 135 at a great price, I'll get one.

 

[dash2k8]

So... no real-world examples of a soft focus lens in use? I'm very curious.

 

[Maiaibing]

So... no real-world examples of a soft focus lens in use? I'm very curious.

Check out the amply named "The dying art of in-camera soft focus" group at flickr:
https://www.flickr.com/groups/712053@N20/pool/