Marco Nero wrote:
thunder storm wrote:
I think it is better to wait for some reviews before calling a lens "darned cool".
Not at all. And don't just take my word for it, even Canon knows how cool this lens is. The other experienced photographers here knew what a big deal it was to see this in the EF-M lens lineup. When the rumors surfaced, many were incredulous. Now that it's confirmed, some are still buzzing because they KNOW how this lens will impact their work. It's going to produce pictures with that old-time 35mm look (from both the bokeh and the 50mm focal length equiv). After spending several decades and having worked as a Canon dealer (in the past), I can usually tell what an aperture+focal-length is going to produce. It becomes second nature, especially if you play with those types of lenses and apertures on a long-term basis.
You did not test this lens.
The image below is from the new lens... how different is this "anticipated" bokeh compared to any other EF-M lens? I'm sure you'd agree that it's pretty bold. That's also pretty cool.
Of course it will have large bokeh. But performance is more than just large bokeh.
.
.
It might be darned cool. It might not be darned cool. We don't know by know as there are some questions unanswered.
It's cool alright. I carried what was about a 40mm f/1.4mm lens on the original EOSM for three or more years on a daily basis. To get a 50mm (equiv) f/1.4 lens in native EF-M mount is a wondrous thing. It's faster than the 22mm f/2 and it has a very useful focal length.
Yes, it will have large bokeh. But performance is more than just large bokeh.
- Will it have good contrast and sharpness wide open in a good portion of the frame?
I believe it will.
Exactly. It is a belief. But you did not test it. There is no empirical basis to your belief.
Let's see if I'm wrong in just a few weeks time. These shots from Canon imply VERY good image quality across the images and no obvious vignetting or light-falloff in the corners although i predict it will have some in the corners (Canon may have resolved this by using a smaller primary element that is cropped physically by the forward lens retainer).
I am sorry, but i would like to see some shots not from Canon but from reviewers which have proven to be objective to a high degree. Obviously Canon will use shots at the strongest point of this lens. Canon will not put it to a stress test for pictures which will be used for marketing, but will do the opposite.
.
.
- How much will it suffer from vignetting?
That will depend on the lens design. The EF f/1.4L lens I've been using is a Full Frame lens so it gets cropped on an APS-C camera. The new 32mm f/1.4 lens will probably have light-falloff in the corners...
Exactly.
not that this would make it a problem.
That is a personal preference. Fact: less signal is more noise with when it needs to be more amplified.
Sony couldn't control
This lens will not perform better due to a bad performance of Sony.
it on their near-equivalent lens and Canon manages to control light-falloff with Super Spectra optical coatings (which this one has). It won't be unusable if it vignettes or we'd see evidence of it on the latest samples that surfaced.
- Will AF be accurate wide open on bodies with a larger than ideal single AF-point?
I expect it to be when combined with modern DPAF sensors. It didn't present a problem on my old non-DPAF EOSM.
Yes, i have that expectation too, for what it is, just an expectation. But whe don't know by now.
- To what extend will AF be fast enough to track moving subjects?
This is a shallow DOF lens designed for portraits etc but I don't imagine it will have problems. It's not really the lens you'd use for tracking moving objects.
Why not? I would not mind if it will do it well, especially because the focal length makes it an all round lens.
Normally you'd use a lens with a narrower aperture for sports tracking etc.
Really? You mean large aperture lenses are not suitable for shooting sports? I think they are, and it is nice to be able to use a shorter shutter speed with the same ISO. Even if you use f/2.8 for eventual AF error this lens is still brighter than the dark EF-M zooms. So i think it is for tracking moving subjects maybe the best EF-M lens there is.
The brighter the lens, the more light travels to the sensor...so it ought to be fine. Even stopped down.
Here you give an argument for using a large aperture lens for tracking moving subjects yourself.
- Is the bokeh not just huge, but also beautiful? Is this lens able to render complex backgrounds (and foregrounds!) eventually with harsh edges smooth?
The EF 135mm f/2 USM lens produces REALLY strong bokeh and it's far more manageable with shallow DOF that shorter focal lengths. This lens has about a quarter of that focal length yet it has a much larger aperture for light transmission. I haven't seen the shape of the aperture from the blades but Canon tend to produce round bokeh balls with most of their lenses and decent looking SunStars/StarBursts. It has 7 blades and that's the same as the 22mm, 28mm and 11-22mm lenses. The bokeh won't be as strong as f/1.2 but it will be VERY noticeable in any shots taken wide-open at f/1.4. The bokeh will be visibly much stronger than the EF-M 22mm f/2 lens and the increased focal length will push it further.
But you did not test this lens. There is no empirical basis the bokeh is beautiful in difficult circumstances. All whe have is some logic saying the bokeh is strong. Quality of bokeh is not the same as how strong the bokeh is.
I think the specs are appealing enough to get some attention from renowned reviewers. Let's wait for that before shouting "hallelujah" in the Canon church.
I suspect you haven't used a lens of this focal length and aperture before,?
No, i never take pictures with a thin dof, i just talk about specs.
Did you miss the official samples from the lens? You can see them here where I sourced and reposted them:
Again: I am sorry, but i would like to see some shots not from Canon but from reviewers which have proven to be objective to a high degree. Obviously Canon will use shots at the strongest point of this lens. Canon will not put it to a stress test for pictures which will be used for marketing, but will do the opposite.
As whe don't have an emperical basis from an objective source yet, it is to early to claim this lens will perform good, especially when it comes to the quality of the all important bokeh in a stress test with difficult conditions. Only logic is telling us the bokeh will be strong, but that tells nothing about the quality.
All we - MarcoNero included- have, is beliefs, hopes, and expectations, but nothing more than that. We just don't know. And the rest is religion.
