VIDEO: UNBOXING 32mm f/1.4 - "RAZOR SHARP"

.
TIP: TURN ON "Closed Caption" for English translation.
This video was produced just prior to the announcement of the new lens and the reviewer wasn't granted permission to release any sample images until the lens starts shipping.  But you can pick up quite a bit of information from the translated video (using Closed Caption).

HIGHLIGHTS BELOW (with English Translation)
.
* "Sharpness is like a Razor" (Razor Sharp!) [5:09]
.
* "When you hold the lens you can feel that you are holding a premium lens, just like the Canon L-series." [3:25]
.
* " ... it has a premium look on the body"... (Looks Good). [3:50]
.
* "Canon tells us that ... this lens's picture quality is nearly equal to the EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM which is amazing" [4:30]
.
* "...to be honest, this is the sharpest and the [nicest] premium lens on the EF-M series lenses" [4:50]

Sounds good. 👍

Marco Nero wrote:

.
TIP: TURN ON "Closed Caption" for English translation.
This video was produced just prior to the announcement of the new lens and the reviewer wasn't granted permission to release any sample images until the lens starts shipping. But you can pick up quite a bit of information from the translated video (using Closed Caption).

HIGHLIGHTS BELOW (with English Translation)
.
* "Sharpness is like a Razor" (Razor Sharp!) [5:09]
.
* "When you hold the lens you can feel that you are holding a premium lens, just like the Canon L-series." [3:25]
.
* " ... it has a premium look on the body"... (Looks Good). [3:50]
.
* "Canon tells us that ... this lens's picture quality is nearly equal to the EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM which is amazing" [4:30]
.
* "...to be honest, this is the sharpest and the [nicest] premium lens on the EF-M series lenses" [4:50]

No test. The original information source is still Canon. The only news here is how it looks like on an M50, which is not so hard to imagine anyway.

thunder storm wrote:

Marco Nero wrote:

HIGHLIGHTS BELOW (with English Translation)
.
* "Sharpness is like a Razor" (Razor Sharp!) [5:09]
.
* "When you hold the lens you can feel that you are holding a premium lens, just like the Canon L-series." [3:25]
.
* " ... it has a premium look on the body"... (Looks Good). [3:50]
.
* "Canon tells us that ... this lens's picture quality is nearly equal to the EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM which is amazing" [4:30]
.
* "...to be honest, this is the sharpest and the [nicest] premium lens on the EF-M series lenses" [4:50]

No test.

It's an UNBOXING. What part of that is beyond your grasp? It's also an early first impression when Canon won't let the user post any samples online yet (until the product is released).

The original information source is still Canon.

Still crapping all over this lens, despite the information available already? The presentation isn't from Canon at all. This is from someone with access to an advance copy of the lens who doesn't likely work for Canon.

The only news here is how it looks like on an M50, which is not so hard to imagine anyway.

A flippant response? Really? I think it's time for you to calm down and stop taking everything anyone else does as a personal insult. If you enjoy throwing criticism at every post about a new and upcoming product that you yourself do not yet have access to, then you are going to put other members off from posting their own finds online and from discussing such products in the forum. Do you not see that your behavior is mirrored in most of your posts here?

Marco Nero wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

Marco Nero wrote:

HIGHLIGHTS BELOW (with English Translation)
.
* "Sharpness is like a Razor" (Razor Sharp!) [5:09]
.
* "When you hold the lens you can feel that you are holding a premium lens, just like the Canon L-series." [3:25]
.
* " ... it has a premium look on the body"... (Looks Good). [3:50]
.
* "Canon tells us that ... this lens's picture quality is nearly equal to the EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM which is amazing" [4:30]
.
* "...to be honest, this is the sharpest and the [nicest] premium lens on the EF-M series lenses" [4:50]

No test.

It's an UNBOXING. What part of that is beyond your grasp? It's also an early first impression when Canon won't let the user post any samples online yet (until the product is released).

The original information source is still Canon.

Still crapping all over this lens,

No, i don't talk about the lens here. My comment is that there is no objective information here, as this person is only repeating specs and statements coming from Canon as source.

despite the information available already?

Coming from Canon.

The presentation isn't from Canon at all. This is from someone with access to an advance copy of the lens who doesn't likely work for Canon.

Yes, but he did not use the access to test it. Maybe he will soon, but did not yet.

The only news here is how it looks like on an M50, which is not so hard to imagine anyway.

A flippant response? Really? I think it's time for you to calm down

I am perfectly calm.

and stop taking everything anyone else does as a personal insult.

I don't.

If you enjoy throwing criticism at every post about a new and upcoming product

No, it is not critisism on the product - not at all - , it is critisism on how possibly and likely biased information is stated as a fact.

that you yourself do not yet have access to,

My point is nobody has except Canon, and that is why i don't say anything about the performance of the lens, as i really think it is wise - for me and for everybody - to wait for objective information.

then you are going to put other members off from posting their own finds online and from discussing such products in the forum. Do you not see that your behavior is mirrored in most of your posts here?

The same could count for your posts, but you are free to post every opinion just is i am free to do the same.

thunder storm wrote:

Marco Nero wrote:

The presentation isn't from Canon at all. This is from someone with access to an advance copy of the lens who doesn't likely work for Canon.

Yes, but he did not use the access to test it. Maybe he will soon, but did not yet.

Obviously he DID test it because he stated that Canon had told them they were not yet allowed to post their photographs (presumably due to typical Embargo from Canon)
.
Mike's right: We're done here.

Marco Nero wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

Marco Nero wrote:

The presentation isn't from Canon at all. This is from someone with access to an advance copy of the lens who doesn't likely work for Canon.

Yes, but he did not use the access to test it. Maybe he will soon, but did not yet.

Obviously he DID test it because he stated that Canon had told them they were not yet allowed to post their photographs (presumably due to typical Embargo from Canon)

That is the argument for my point: it is to early to say anything about the image quality, because Canon does not want anybody to share any empirical evidence, making it impossible to back up any claim about the image quality.

looks wonderful on the m50, cannot wait to try it out.  Will be going to asia in November so I think i will be renting this lens for the trip.

Folks often don’t pay attention to the sample photos Canon always provides with any new lens because they are (1) not objective and (2) not representative - the are the very best a professional photographer can get from the lens.

Think about it...

(1) ”Not objective” often seems to imply “they probably cheated, so I don’t trust it”. Can you imagine the uproar if that info leaked, as it inevitably would is some case? Disastrous. A company of Canon’s stature would be foolish to risk it. So I am sure they don’t.

(2) The best possible image the lens can produce is what I want to see, because then the skill and taste of the photographer is not a limiting factor, as it is so often with the informal tests posted here or even DPR’s sample images. It is one piece of valuable information in a purchase decision. (Don’t get me wrong - the more forum images the better IMHO).

OTOH, Canon’s photographer has selected conditions (and models) that are ideal for the lens. I won’t. He/she uses a tripod, I don’t. They have studio lights. Not me. So there is that, too.

So I welcome Canon’s best shot as an indicator of how good the lens could be under the right circumstances. If even then the sample images have flaws or don’t appeal, then for sure the lens will have flaws in my much less skilled hands. It is useful information, to be considered alongside DPR’s sample images and images posted in the forum.

But what we need to know is how this lens performs in a difficult situation. Harsh edges, strong contrasts of light and dark, bright light, complex backgrounds..... The ability to handle difficult situations is what makes a stellar lens better than just an o.k. lens.

And we consumers need these lenses. Consumers need better lenses than professionals, as consumers often have far less control over the situations (backgrounds, light) we are shooting in. We are shooting in difficult conditions a big portion of the time.

thunder storm wrote:

But what we need to know is how this lens performs in a difficult situation. Harsh edges, strong contrasts of light and dark, bright light, complex backgrounds..... The ability to handle difficult situations is what makes a stellar lens better than just an o.k. lens.

And we consumers need these lenses. Consumers need better lenses than professionals, as consumers often have far less control over the situations (backgrounds, light) we are shooting in. We are shooting in difficult conditions a big portion of the time.

Then go buy the professional lenses and pay the premium and just because you are an amateur photographer is no excuse not to learn to put yourself in the best position releative to the light and back ground. There are plenty of pros who shoot in the same difficult conditions they just know how to overcome them.

MyM3 wrote:

Sounds good. 👍

Everything sounds better in Italian.

Roland King wrote:

Why would a lens have a focus limiter? Never seen one before. My only guess would be to help the AF out so it doesn't hunt but as I say I've not seen one before.

Well, it turns out that this lens can focus with a MFD of just 9 inches (9.06") ... so that means that if you were to try to photograph a person, animal or subject through a bush or beyond something sitting on the table in front of you, that the camera can be told to ignore locking focus on anything in the foreground. I usually see Focus Limiters switches on Macro or Telephoto Lenses because those can often waste time hunting across the focus range. What surprises me is that the switch on this lens has only two positions (instead of three) because most FL switches tend to allow you to shoot closeup and ignore the background (which might be useful with this lens for generating bokeh).
.

.
Some of the sample pictures shot just this. Shooting a flower in the grass becomes much easier, even though the camera can focus on perhaps some of the grass that is in front of the flower.
,
I think Canon's examples below show this switch being used although in theory it shouldn't be necessary to use it with the touch-screen focus system on the EOSM cameras. I imagine most people with have it set for the Zero-to-Infinity setting so they can access the full focus range on the lens.  Who knows... it might be handy when you're shooting a whole bunch of things close to the lens (like the girl behind the flowers below)...
.

Don Lacy wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

But what we need to know is how this lens performs in a difficult situation. Harsh edges, strong contrasts of light and dark, bright light, complex backgrounds..... The ability to handle difficult situations is what makes a stellar lens better than just an o.k. lens.

And we consumers need these lenses. Consumers need better lenses than professionals, as consumers often have far less control over the situations (backgrounds, light) we are shooting in. We are shooting in difficult conditions a big portion of the time.

Then go buy the professional lenses and pay the premium

There are limits to my budget, but i am saving up.

and just because you are an amateur photographer is no excuse not to learn to put yourself in the best position releative to the light and back ground.

I don't us it as an excuse. I have a lot to learn, i know, and i am trying a lot. But the conditions for a learning process are also more difficult for an amateur as long as you don't hire models which you can steer.

There are plenty of pros who shoot in the same difficult conditions they just know how to overcome them.

That is true. But there is a context here. I was responding to another post. And in this post was mentioned that the sample pictures coming from a lens manufacturer are often made in less difficult conditions for the lens. My comment to that is are also less difficult condition for these pro photographers when they make these sample pictures.

Roland King wrote:

Why would a lens have a focus limiter? Never seen one before. My only guess would be to help the AF out so it doesn't hunt but as I say I've not seen one before.

The purpose of this focus limiter is to have faster AF from 0.5 meters to infinity, so the lens won't have to hunt true the whole focus range from 0.5 meters to closest focus distance. In meters this is a small range, but for the focusing range it is a large portion.

This lens might need a limiter for both having a very close minimum focus distance and having a large aperture and therefor larger elements while it has only stm-motorizing.

But it is nice this lens has this limiter, as this lens is perfect for family pictures in low light. I would have this limiter on 0.5 - infinity most of the time, only having it switched to "full" to focus closer when i need it.

John TF wrote:

Folks often don’t pay attention to the sample photos Canon always provides with any new lens because they are (1) not objective and (2) not representative - the are the very best a professional photographer can get from the lens.

Think about it...

(1) ”Not objective” often seems to imply “they probably cheated, so I don’t trust it”. Can you imagine the uproar if that info leaked, as it inevitably would is some case? Disastrous. A company of Canon’s stature would be foolish to risk it. So I am sure they don’t.

I think there are margins here. Canon can use these margins and likely will. But they can't and wont for instance use a R 50 f/1.2 picture or a EF 35mm f/1.4 picturee as a sample for this new lens.

Canon let us know some information about sharpness. I think this sounds promising. But here are margins too between truth and lying. They could have measured a very carefully tuned version, while the lenses coming from the factory could show a copy to copy variation, with only 10% performing at the level of this tested lens, and the rest below this level. I am not saying Canon does this, but in the mean time it is possible for a company to do this without a lot of risk. If they do it it is a lot of work to show empirical evidence as you will need to test a lot of lenses, and if you did this, you still can not claim Canon said a 100% lie.

Furthermore, IQ is not about sharpness alone. For instance: a lens can be very sharp, but at the same time have low contrast.

(2) The best possible image the lens can produce is what I want to see, because then the skill and taste of the photographer is not a limiting factor, as it is so often with the informal tests posted here or even DPR’s sample images. It is one piece of valuable information in a purchase decision. (Don’t get me wrong - the more forum images the better IMHO).

Of course it is perfectly fine if the lest it tested without user error.

OTOH, Canon’s photographer has selected conditions (and models) that are ideal for the lens. I won’t. He/she uses a tripod, I don’t. They have studio lights. Not me. So there is that, too.

Agree. And that is why i don't care much about sample pictures.

So I welcome Canon’s best shot as an indicator of how good the lens could be under the right circumstances. If even then the sample images have flaws or don’t appeal, then for sure the lens will have flaws in my much less skilled hands. It is useful information, to be considered alongside DPR’s sample images and images posted in the forum.

The best indicator is difficult circumstances for a lens without any user error. As someone else mentioned here before, even pros have to deal with less than ideal circumstances for a lens, and a stellar lens will help anybody in these situations compared tot a mediocre lens.