so, where is the Canon 35 1.4 II??

[saveyourmoment]

After releasing the EF 11-24 4L, i am waiting for the new ef 35 1.4 II that outperforms the Sigma 35 1.4 Art. Any hints on that?

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=1ea857bcc120d70b7dbf621a5fbeb4c0&topic=23437.0

 

[keithfullermusic]

After releasing the EF 11-24 4L, i am waiting for the new ef 35 1.4 II that outperforms the Sigma 35 1.4 Art. Any hints on that?

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=1ea857bcc120d70b7dbf621a5fbeb4c0&topic=23437.0

Outperforms? How is that possible?

But seriously, at the price point of the Sigma I'm not sure if Canon will ever release a vii

 

[Foxdude]

EF 35mm F 1.2L..... mmmm, anybody?

 

[Marsu42]

After releasing the EF 11-24 4L, i am waiting for the new ef 35 1.4 II that outperforms the Sigma 35 1.4 Art. Any hints on that?

Sure, lots of hints that it won't happen. Canon didn't update any legacy L prime lately (that I remember just now), they just keep selling them and making money. Obviously lots of people out there that keep buying Canon even if Sigma has the better iq, but arguably the worse af. If Canpon were serious about a 35L2 with better iq and sealing, they'd done it long before now.

 

[TeT]

After releasing the EF 11-24 4L, i am waiting for the new ef 35 1.4 II that outperforms the Sigma 35 1.4 Art. Any hints on that?

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=1ea857bcc120d70b7dbf621a5fbeb4c0&topic=23437.0

Outperforms? How is that possible?

But seriously, at the price point of the Sigma I'm not sure if Canon will ever release a vii

I fully expect the canon 35II to beat sigma optically and the AF functionality will win over low price in most instances (should)

right now the 35 2 IS has some qualities that are better than either the 35L or the Sigma 35...

My theory is that they are awaiting Sigma to release all 3 before tossing out the new versions...

 

[StudentOfLight]

After releasing the EF 11-24 4L, i am waiting for the new ef 35 1.4 II that outperforms the Sigma 35 1.4 Art. Any hints on that?

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=1ea857bcc120d70b7dbf621a5fbeb4c0&topic=23437.0

Outperforms? How is that possible?

But seriously, at the price point of the Sigma I'm not sure if Canon will ever release a vii

I'm sure Canon will have to release an update. The 35L shows too much chromatic aberration wide open for the new 50.6MP bodies.

There is room for improvement in sharpness (over the 35 Art) in the peripheral areas of the image. With new glass and coatings I'm sure Canon can produce a lens which competes with the Sigma Art in optical performance wide open while maintaining the Autofocus characteristics of the original.

A Canon option will invariably be more expensive than the Sigma option but from a total performance perspective I think many will opt for the 1st party glass given the choice.

 

[Marsu42]

I don't see how you are so certain to conclude ...

I'm sure Canon will have to release an update.

... from ...

The 35L shows too much chromatic aberration wide open for the new 50.6MP bodies.

... because Canon won't *update* their whole lineup to shine on 50mp, that would drive the lenses' prices through the roof even though 95% of their customers shoot with ~20mp sensors. Btw CA is easily removed, if anything's the issue it's raw resolving power. They'll certainly consider the 5ds on new premium releases like 24-70L2, but otherwise I don't see Canon caring a lot about their "system".

Canon will ask themselves the simple question: "We have to invest xyz €€€ r&d to produce a 35L2 that will have to cost abc €€€ - how many people will buy this instead of getting the Sigma over the old 35L1? And how many people will simply buy a 24-70L2 or 35IS instead, so we get the money anyway?"

 

[drjlo]

Every time I use my 35L, I truly wonder what real-world improvements are needed, especially at the cost of heavier/larger size and higher price. 35L is a great lens..

 

[Ripley]

After releasing the EF 11-24 4L, i am waiting for the new ef 35 1.4 II that outperforms the Sigma 35 1.4 Art. Any hints on that?

Sure, lots of hints that it won't happen. Canon didn't update any legacy L prime lately (that I remember just now), they just keep selling them and making money. Obviously lots of people out there that keep buying Canon even if Sigma has the better iq, but arguably the worse af. If Canpon were serious about a 35L2 with better iq and sealing, they'd done it long before now.

I purchased the 35A and 50A over the holidays and their autofocus is great. I'm currently renting the 24-105A and its autofocus is great as well. I understand that people have had autofocus issues with Art lenses in the past, but to say their autofocus is arguably worse is incorrect. For reference, I shoot with a 5Diii, currently own the Canon 24-70ii, and used to own the Canon 70-200ii.

 

[Marsu42]

but to say their autofocus is arguably worse is incorrect.

Sorry, I'm not a native speaker (native English speaker, that is ) ... doesn't "arguably" mean that you can argue about the point, i.e. find it correct or incorrect? The trusty dict.leo.org site seems to think so, but it only translates single words and doesn't put them into a sample context.

 

[stephan00]

I guess that the most common use of "arguably" is in the sense of "everybody knows", "as can be shown easily, but I don't want to waste my time doing so", "as has been shown by some clever people" or even, in extreme cases "this is my opinion, so if you don't agree, get the hell out of this thread"

But since my native tongue also isn't English but a secondary variant of German, I may very well be mistaken (however, I've found LEO wanting from time to time in the matter of finer details, so take what you read there at least with a tiny grain of salt)

[edit:]
P.S.: Had Fermat's native tongue been English, he'd probably have written: "It is *arguably* impossible to separate a cube into two cubes, or a fourth power into two fourth powers, or in general, any power higher than the second, into two like powers." Then subsequent generations of mathematicians would just have nodded and moved on, and not invested a lot of time and effort trying to prove his Last Theorem

 

[sagittariansrock]

but to say their autofocus is arguably worse is incorrect.

Sorry, I'm not a native speaker (native English speaker, that is ) ... doesn't "arguably" mean that you can argue about the point, i.e. find it correct or incorrect? The trusty dict.leo.org site seems to think so, but it only translates single words and doesn't put them into a sample context.

Arguably generally means "there are very good points to argue in favor of" or "it can be argued (successfully)". I think the experience of several forum members provide enough data points to argue that Sigma AF can be iffy, although the problem might lie with Canon restricting the AF algorithms. As the only third party manufacturer that makes fast (>f/2.8) AF lenses for Canon/Nikon, the shallow DoF places Sigma at an unfortunate disadvantage.
On that note (sorry to sort of hijack this thread) does anyone know if the Sigma AF problems are limited to Canon mounts or do Nikon users also face similar issues?

 

[Marsu42]

but to say their autofocus is arguably worse is incorrect.

Sorry, I'm not a native speaker (native English speaker, that is ) ... doesn't "arguably" mean that you can argue about the point, i.e. find it correct or incorrect? The trusty dict.leo.org site seems to think so, but it only translates single words and doesn't put them into a sample context.

Arguably generally means "there are very good points to argue in favor of" or "it can be argued (successfully)".

Ah, right, I didn't get this tricky part. Another reason to be in an English forum, it's not just a wider audience than just Germans, but I practice my one foreign language (well, I do speak horse, guniea pig and some rabbit).

Concerning the Sigma: Yes, I understand af can be an issue and this is probably the reason why Canon isn't too concerned about the better iq of 3rd party lenses. For what I do, I'd certainly be very undecided if a bit better iq is worth a more unreliable af.

 

[jebrady03]

Nothing like arguing the semantics of the (ridiculous) English language on an international forum. Good job guys.

 

[Viggo]

I'll be first in line when it does appear, but ten years is a long wait, and I have saved up
For it and spent it on other gear many times. I will NEVER buy another third party lens. The 35 L II can be upgraded in all areas and weather sealing and AF is enough for me to buy it.

 

[Mitch.Conner]

There was also this rumor:

http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/07/new-canon-l-primes-but-not-until-2015-cr2/

 

[StudentOfLight]

I don't see how you are so certain to conclude ...

I'm sure Canon will have to release an update.

... from ...

The 35L shows too much chromatic aberration wide open for the new 50.6MP bodies.

... because Canon won't *update* their whole lineup to shine on 50mp, that would drive the lenses' prices through the roof even though 95% of their customers shoot with ~20mp sensors. Btw CA is easily removed, if anything's the issue it's raw resolving power. They'll certainly consider the 5ds on new premium releases like 24-70L2, but otherwise I don't see Canon caring a lot about their "system".

Canon will ask themselves the simple question: "We have to invest xyz €€€ r&d to produce a 35L2 that will have to cost abc €€€ - how many people will buy this instead of getting the Sigma over the old 35L1? And how many people will simply buy a 24-70L2 or 35IS instead, so we get the money anyway?"

The use of a Bayer filter requires demozaicing, i.e. RGB data needs to be estimated for a given pixel by pulling colour values from adjacent pixels. My belief is that if the CA characteristics of a lens are so severe that colour fringes spill across more than 2 pixels wide (i.e. more that the Antialiasing filter) then you have loss of fine contrast and colour fidelity. The combined LCA and LOCA (exacerbated by field curvature) on the 35L can be at least 13micrometers towards the outer third of the image which equates to about 3x the pixel pitch of the 50.6MP bodies.

Regarding correction in post processing...
(from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromatic_aberration )
"In reality, even a theoretically perfect post-processing based chromatic aberration reduction-removal-correction systems do not increase image detail as a lens that is optically well corrected for chromatic aberration would for the following reasons:

• Rescaling is only applicable to lateral chromatic aberration but there is also longitudinal chromatic aberration

• Rescaling individual color channels result in a loss of resolution from the original image

• Most camera sensors only capture a few and discrete (e.g., RGB) color channels but chromatic aberration is not discrete and occurs across the light spectrum

• The dyes used in the digital camera sensors for capturing color are not very efficient so cross-channel color contamination is unavoidable and causes, for example, the chromatic aberration in the red channel to also be blended into the green channel along with any green chromatic aberration.

The above are closely related to the specific scene that is captured so no amount of programming and knowledge of the capturing equipment (e.g., camera and lens data) can overcome these limitations."

Anyway, these are what my earlier comments are based on. Please correct me if I'm jumping to incorrect conclusions. I am willing to admit if I make a mistake.

P.S. I did not imply that Canon needed to update all their lenses, only a couple which suffer from CA. I believe many of the newer lenses are ready make very good use of the 50MP sensors if stopped down to f/4 or f/5.6.

 

[Hjalmarg1]

After releasing the EF 11-24 4L, i am waiting for the new ef 35 1.4 II that outperforms the Sigma 35 1.4 Art. Any hints on that?

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=1ea857bcc120d70b7dbf621a5fbeb4c0&topic=23437.0

None of the three wide angle-to-standard focal lenght 'L' primes (24L, 35L & 50L) can match the resolution and IQ needed for the new 50MP bodies. Particularly the 24L and 35L.

 

[privatebydesign]

After releasing the EF 11-24 4L, i am waiting for the new ef 35 1.4 II that outperforms the Sigma 35 1.4 Art. Any hints on that?

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=1ea857bcc120d70b7dbf621a5fbeb4c0&topic=23437.0

None of the three wide angle-to-standard focal lenght 'L' primes (24L, 35L & 50L) can match the resolution and IQ needed for the new 50MP bodies. Particularly the 24L and 35L.

What utter drivel. All three will show comfortably more resolution on the new 50MP cameras than they do on the current 24MP cameras.

Lenses don't "out resolve" sensors, and sensors don't "out resolve" lenses. The system resolution will always be lower than the lower performing part of that system. The 50 f1.8 will resolve a lot more on the new cameras too, just not as much as a 200 f2.

P.S. Even a theoretical 'perfect' lens wouldn't resolve 50MP from the new cameras, it just doesn't work like that.

 

[SoullessPolack]

After releasing the EF 11-24 4L, i am waiting for the new ef 35 1.4 II that outperforms the Sigma 35 1.4 Art. Any hints on that?

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=1ea857bcc120d70b7dbf621a5fbeb4c0&topic=23437.0

None of the three wide angle-to-standard focal lenght 'L' primes (24L, 35L & 50L) can match the resolution and IQ needed for the new 50MP bodies. Particularly the 24L and 35L.

You clowns just don't get it, do you? Read what privatebydesign wrote; he's one of the most intelligent and well educated members on this board. What he said is true.

I've declared it before, I'm going to declare it now, and I'm sure I'll have to declare it again in the future. There is always going to be some improvement in resolving ability, no matter the lens, when you step up in resolution. It's physics. You may not understand if you have a Wikipedia knowledge base, but go get a degree in physics (even an associates would be sufficient), and you'll understand why. Your camera is a system. Lens and sensor (to dumb it down to two things). There's always going to be a weak point. Either the lens is the weak point, or the sensor is the weak point. It's inherent to the field.

I'll play along with your ridiculous statement, okay? Follow along. So what if the lenses can't match the resolution of the sensor? You have subperforming lenses with a sensor that has the potential for better output, if only you had a better lens. BOOM!!! Canon introduces new and amazing lenses. Now guess what? Now you have amazing lenses that outperform your sensor, so they have the potential to have better output, if only you had a better sensor. If you want to foolishly play that game, you'll be stuck in a neverending cycle of playing catch-up.