Report: Canon to launch 4 fast L prime lenses in the first half of 2024
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
ashmadux
Art Director, Visual Artist, Freelance Photography
Thier engineers just cant figure it out!
Thier CEO hates 50mm (at 1.4), at this point im sure its some f'ing stupid like that. It's been way too long, and it's way too blatant an oversight to be unintentional.
Or....Likely marketing hasnt found a scheme to make it intentionally hobbled so its marginally worse than the 1.2 but still better than the thrifty nifty cheapy. What a dilemma, arghrghh.
Upvote
0
If a 14mm F1.4 actually becomes reality, I really hope they try to maximize vignette and coma/astigmatism correction, since the obvious use case is astronomy where edge aberrations really stand out. If it's not priced in the stratosphere (see what I did there) I might have to pick it up for some backcountry dark sky trips. I get by just fine with my 14-35/4 (as the primary focus of those trips is not astro), but gaining an extra 3 stops would be pretty awesome. Obviously IS is not needed in such a lens and would make it unnecessarily larger, so I'd be a bit baffled to see it included.
Upvote
0
Buy every lens except the 35mm f/1.4!I will do my best to ignore this rumor (specifically the part about the 35mm) until we get a more solid one.
I dunno. Why IS in these lenses? They did not put it in the 50 and 85 1.2 where it would have made more sense. I use those 2 and I am not missing ILIS, so I am sure that IBIS would be fine for wider primes.
I am all for having more options and the 14 f/1.4 does intrigue me. The 24 and 28 much less so, unless the 35 will indeed be 1.4, in which case I may avoid it out of spite
And yes, spite. It's my hobby, my passion, my money, so Canon gets my business only if I like their offerings. No need to discuss, you're not going to change my mind.
In the meantime, I am patiently waiting for the 10-20 and 200-800 I have ordered to ship....
Upvote
0
Decisions decisions
Naah, either the 24 or the 28, I wouldn't get both. Too close. I am honestly intrigued by the 14.
So, if Canon does listen to me (why not?
), I'd get the 14 and the 35 1.2...If Canon doesn't listen to me (why oh why?
), I might get the 14 and the 28.We will see... actually I'd love to know if there will be a TS 24, since I'd prefer that to a fast non-TS 24.
So many rumors! Canon! You have to deliver all those lenses + the ones I want + the ones I do not crave now but I will want once they appear... now! or I will not buy your lenses anymore and that will spell d00m for ya
(disclaimer: for people with reading comprehension issues, I do not think that Canon will fold if they do not release the lenses I want)
Upvote
0
D
Deleted member 393539
Guest
That and also I'll take f/1.4 IS over f/1.2 non-IS if rumours a true about IS.
Upvote
0
It's a matter of personal preferences. I often use the 28mm for landscapes, because I find its perspective more natural than the 24's. I wouldn't buy the 24mm, but the 28mm I find tempting. In other situations, it's the 24mm I prefer (Leica M or TS-E 24 II).
It a purely subjective decision which cannot be rationally explained.
Upvote
0
As you wrote, this is only a rumor. Don't give up hope!I will do my best to ignore this rumor (specifically the part about the 35mm) until we get a more solid one.
I dunno. Why IS in these lenses? They did not put it in the 50 and 85 1.2 where it would have made more sense. I use those 2 and I am not missing ILIS, so I am sure that IBIS would be fine for wider primes.
I am all for having more options and the 14 f/1.4 does intrigue me. The 24 and 28 much less so, unless the 35 will indeed be 1.4, in which case I may avoid it out of spite
And yes, spite. It's my hobby, my passion, my money, so Canon gets my business only if I like their offerings. No need to discuss, you're not going to change my mind.
In the meantime, I am patiently waiting for the 10-20 and 200-800 I have ordered to ship....
Upvote
0
The 50 mm lenses get 7 stops of Coordinated IS;
The 85 f/1.2 lenses get 8 stops of Coordinated IS which is the very same as the RF 85 f/2 IS and EF 85 f/1.4 IS.
There would not be much benefit to adding IS to those lenses.
Upvote
0
True, but then even less for (ultra) wides
BTW, how can IS be "coordinated" for the 50 / 85 1.2? those lenses do not have ILIS
Upvote
0
28mm is my least favourite focal length for a prime. I always found it neither here nor there. I prefer 24mm of 35mm for a prime. A 20 1.4 would be a good landscape lens. 14mm 1.4 will be interesting . I have the Sigma EF 14mm 1.8. An improvement on that would be tempting. I think Canons overall strategy is going well. Cameras are very good and lens excellent. There is plenty to spend money on. I’d hate to still have GAS. I’d be bankrupted at RF prices.
Upvote
0
I think it is also a German manufacturer thing as well. Leica has a SL 28/2, M 28/1.4, M 28/2, M 28/2.8, and M 28/5.6, and their Q camera has a 28 instead of a 35 (unlike the RX1). Zeiss also picked 28mm for their Otus wide angle over a 35mm.
Upvote
0
Why would the number or amount of software corrections matter? On my own, I've been thinking that for any given headline spec and price point, a lens design that lets software correct things more or less without tradeoff should always outperform a lens that doesn't. Correcting for something with the actual optics is never a freebie, and always impacts other things such as price, weight, size, sharpness, contrast, sharpness, bokeh, focus speed, IS, and irreparable aberrations, would you agree?
Software mainly corrects distortion and vignetting. Now, I've been shown a couple astro images on this group (single shots, not using stacks or any other modern ways to reduce noise), that were exposed for the CENTER, where the corners seemed to show more noise. I don't know why you can't use such modern tools, or simply expose more for the corners, but fair enough, such a case definitely exists.
I've asked around many times and haven't seen the same for distortion, though. If you're talking about distortion can you spell out why this would be something to hope for?
Upvote
0
Funny, I ended up the exact opposite. I had the EF 35/1.4 MkI and 24/1.4 from the week they went on sale and found the 35 too normally and the 24 too wide. Also f/1.4 on 24mm isn't a lot of bokeh, about the same as 50/2.8. I actually shoot the Sigma EF-mount 28/1.4 on my R5 and find it's a happy medium. In a landscape photo especially, I'm not sure I'd need f/1.4. Heck, I don't usually need more than f/5.6 for landscape.
Upvote
0
I'm hoping for a 35/1.0 to be honest. It's not crazy. It's only a 35mm entrance pupil/aperture, same as a 50/1.4. There are already 35/1.0 from Zenit (full frame) and Fuji (small sensor I think). Canon always wanted to slightly out-spec the competition.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Similar threads
