Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Canon RF 85mm f/1.2 USM L vs the new DS
#1
non-DS:
https://cweb.canon.jp/eos/rf/lineup/rf85...ec-mtf.png

DS:
https://cweb.canon.jp/eos/rf/lineup/rf85...ec-mtf.png


So why the non-DS?
But maybe I'm the only one who doesn't like hard bubbles.
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com

Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
#2
You call it "bubbles" when there is strong outlining. You mean "discs" I guess.

The reason why the DS sharper wide open is because in effect it is closed down, because of the defocus smoothing coating. So, even more impressive MTF results (it is not as if the non-DS is not impressive!), due to the stopped down character.

Why the non-DS? Obvious!

The DS has less shallow DOF (obviously, as the DS is "stopped down" by the DS coating). So if you are after that, you need the non-DS. The DS also takes in less light. And is more expensive.
The purple dashed lines show where (and on which elements) the DS coating technology is applied:
https://cweb.canon.jp/eos/rf/lineup/rf85...uction.png

- So, get the DS if bokeh smoothness is most important.

- Get the non-DS if shallow DOF or low light performance is most important. And save a bit of money ($300).
#3
(10-24-2019, 07:07 AM)Brightcolours Wrote: ....

The DS has less shallow DOF (obviously, as the DS is "stopped down" by the DS coating). ...

I tried to decode the double negative. In other words, the DS has a larger DoF, even wide open?

Does the filter used in the DS influence the AF (PD or CDAF slower or even working no more)? I'm just asking because I made this very bad and uninformed decision to follow Klaus' verdict on the Fujinon 56/1.2 R APD:

Quote:Now is it worth it ? Well, of course, it is! How often can you buy magic for money after all! We'd also favour it over the already great non-APD variant. In fact ... the tested sample will remain in my stock. Highly recommended!

Which is pretty misleading as one cannot use this lens in dark situations, PD AF doesn't work anymore. That was one of the rather expensive mistakes I made - and the Canon lens is more than double the price of the Fuji. Besides, I don't find the differences of both 56 mm bokehwise worth the higher price.
#4
(10-24-2019, 07:21 AM)JJ_SO Wrote:
(10-24-2019, 07:07 AM)Brightcolours Wrote: ....

The DS has less shallow DOF (obviously, as the DS is "stopped down" by the DS coating). ...

I tried to decode the double negative. In other words, the DS has a larger DoF, even wide open?

Does the filter used in the DS influence the AF (PD or CDAF slower or even working no more)? I'm just asking because I made this very bad and uninformed decision to follow Klaus' verdict on the Fujinon 56/1.2 R APD:

Quote:Now is it worth it ? Well, of course, it is! How often can you buy magic for money after all! We'd also favour it over the already great non-APD variant. In fact ... the tested sample will remain in my stock. Highly recommended!

Which is pretty misleading as one cannot use this lens in dark situations, PD AF doesn't work anymore. That was one of the rather expensive mistakes I made - and the Canon lens is more than double the price of the Fuji. Besides, I don't find the differences of both 56 mm bokehwise worth the higher price.

Yes, the DS has larger DOF wide open. The by you mentioned APD Fuji also has less shallow DOF than the non-APD, by the way.
Example for the RF Canons:
https://www.canonrumors.co/wp-content/up...l-ds-1.jpg

I do not know if the AF will be affected with the Canon DPAF system. Maybe in very low light?
#5
(10-24-2019, 07:32 AM)Brightcolours Wrote:
(10-24-2019, 07:21 AM)JJ_SO Wrote:
(10-24-2019, 07:07 AM)Brightcolours Wrote: ....

The DS has less shallow DOF (obviously, as the DS is "stopped down" by the DS coating). ...

I tried to decode the double negative. In other words, the DS has a larger DoF, even wide open?

Does the filter used in the DS influence the AF (PD or CDAF slower or even working no more)? I'm just asking because I made this very bad and uninformed decision to follow Klaus' verdict on the Fujinon 56/1.2 R APD:

Quote:Now is it worth it ? Well, of course, it is! How often can you buy magic for money after all! We'd also favour it over the already great non-APD variant. In fact ... the tested sample will remain in my stock. Highly recommended!

Which is pretty misleading as one cannot use this lens in dark situations, PD AF doesn't work anymore. That was one of the rather expensive mistakes I made - and the Canon lens is more than double the price of the Fuji. Besides, I don't find the differences of both 56 mm bokehwise worth the higher price.

Yes, the DS has larger DOF wide open. The by you mentioned APD Fuji also has less shallow DOF than the non-APD, by the way.
Example for the RF Canons:
https://www.canonrumors.co/wp-content/up...l-ds-1.jpg

I do not know if the AF will be affected with the Canon DPAF system. Maybe in very low light?

In very low light CDAF becomes rather slow. I still don't know wether it's a real technical limitation of this "bokeh filters" or an artificial limitation to make sure all or at least more pictures are in focus.
#6
When the light gets low, your ability to detect contrast is worse because of the noisy results from the sensor. Is there more contrast, or just a too light pixel (due to noise) you are looking at? And the following frame things can look different again.

I do not know if and (if so) why the 56mm f1.2 APD would be worse with AF in lower light than for instance a n f2.8 lens.
#7
What has the T-value to do with the depth-of-field (unless we are talking about a truly black zone that is smaller than the aperture)?
I suppose the apodization element can have an impact on PD AF but it should be irrelevant for CD-AF.
However, an 85mm f/1.2 is hardly aligned to action photography - at f/1.2 it's more than a gamble to hit the correct focus point in this case.

(And I do still enjoy the Fuji 56mm f/1.2 APD and see no reason for changing the verdict)
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com

Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
#8
(10-24-2019, 09:32 AM)Klaus Wrote: What has the T-value to do with the depth-of-field (unless we are talking about a truly black zone that is smaller than the aperture)?
I suppose the apodization element can have an impact on PD AF but it should be irrelevant for CD-AF.
However, an 85mm f/1.2 is hardly aligned to action photography - at f/1.2 it's more than a gamble to hit the correct focus point in this case.

(And I do still enjoy the Fuji 56mm f/1.2 APD and see no reason for changing the verdict)

Why is the T-value lower? Because you have a.... gradually closed aperture, that is why. So yes, the DOF is less shallow, wide open. See above image (very clear to see).

This is always the case, whether it is this Canon DS lens, a STF lens from Sony or APD from Fuji.
#9
(10-24-2019, 09:32 AM)Klaus Wrote: ....
I suppose the apodization element can have an impact on PD AF but it should be irrelevant for CD-AF.
However, an 85mm f/1.2 is hardly aligned to action photography - at f/1.2 it's more than a gamble to hit the correct focus point in this case.

(And I do still enjoy the Fuji 56mm f/1.2 APD and see no reason for changing the verdict)

At the time of my decision to "upgrade" my 56/1.2 R I tried the APD version during a Fuji show. No one there and also not you told me the lens becomes useless in dark situations as the camera switches to the very slow CDAF. A hint would have been welcome as I would have saved some money. Lateron I found some reports and even Fuji tells you:

Quote:Users of cameras with phase-detection autofocus should note that contrast-detect AF will be used due to the presence of the built-in apodization filter. 

In the manual. Which I read when? Right, AFTER the purchase. What you wrote is

Quote:The effect of apodization filter is poison for phase-detection AF systems but in the mirrorless world, contrast detection AF is naturally available thus the Fujinon XF 56mm f/1.2 R APD can fully take advantage of this. While there's a slight penalty in certain situations, the AF speed remains certainly fast enough (without being really fast though).

Wrong. You can't call it a slight penalty when the lens just doesn't focus in dim light and with AF-C. Maybe you should start to understand that some of us use and need a fast apertures to take pictures in rather low light. I get it that you love the lens because of it's bokeh, but that's only one reason to pay an extra for a large aperture. Streetphotography in dim situations with this lens? Impossible. Wedding, concerts, stage performances? No go. This is a serious flaw, not just a slight penalty! It is a highly specialized portrait lens and fuji only puts an accent on "super bokeh" - the downside of that concept needs also be clarified.

And you say "... at f/1.2 it's more than a gamble to hit the correct focus point in this case."

Well, the Fuji lens also has f/1.2 and no real quick AF-C. And I think, in front of a Sony there's no gambling - the eye will be sharp. Can't say anything about the AF qualities of Canon R ML.
#10
I don't think anyone struggles with wide open focus with the EOS R and the 50mm f1.2 and 85mm f1.2...
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)