Antonio Tiki wrote:
85 f1.2 on the Canon USA website is $2200. The 84 f1.8 is $480. If people can't see that there is a market for a $1200 85mm f1.4, then I give up.
Of course there is a market but Canon makes much more money if if a little more than 50% of those who really really want the 1.4 go and buy the 1.2
Antonio Tiki wrote:
85 f1.2 on the Canon USA website is $2200. The 84 f1.8 is $480. If people can't see that there is a market for a $1200 85mm f1.4, then I give up.
There's been an even bigger market for a Compact FF body with Pro AF for god knows how long, but still no go for Canon
Dawei Ye wrote:
There's been an even bigger market for a Compact FF body with Pro AF for god knows how long, but still no go for Canon
I guess this is where they could seperate the "True" Professionals from "Wanna-be's" like me? Canon could develop a new line of "Little-L" Lenses and put an orange or purple ring around them as mid-point lens...
Canon could make an 85 f/1.4L and it would be OK...there are plenty of other focal lengths where there are two Ls in the same focal length...the 16-35 and 17-40, the 24-70 and 24-105, the 70-200s, the 200 f/2.8 and 200 f/2, the 300 f/4 and 300 f/2.8, the 400 f/5.6 and the 400 f/2.8 (and the 400/4 DO in the middle).
They could do it, but I doubt they'd want to pull sales from the f/1.2.
With the Sigma in the market, that'll be a popular lens, and I love my Rokinon (Samyang) 85/1.4...it's very nearly the optical equal of the 85L, and it might even have nicer bokeh.
I'd rather see a new 85/1.2 with a faster focusing system...and match that with a 35/1.2, 50/1.2II and a 135/2 IS BUT if Canon ever decides to design an 85/1.4 with similar performance as the 85/1.8 for, lets say, somewhere around $800 I'd be all over it.
Jman13 wrote:
Canon could make an 85 f/1.4L and it would be OK...there are plenty of other focal lengths where there are two Ls in the same focal length...the 16-35 and 17-40, the 24-70 and 24-105, the 70-200s, the 200 f/2.8 and 200 f/2, the 300 f/4 and 300 f/2.8, the 400 f/5.6 and the 400 f/2.8 (and the 400/4 DO in the middle).
They could do it, but I doubt they'd want to pull sales from the f/1.2.
With the Sigma in the market, that'll be a popular lens, and I love my Rokinon (Samyang) 85/1.4...it's very nearly the optical equal of the 85L, and it might even have nicer bokeh....Show more →
ALL of your examples (sub 200mm) are zooms. Canon will sell many more zooms than they do primes.the best you will get is they could withdraw the 35/2 85/1.8 slap a red ring on the front and double the price. Bingo lower price L (35/2 may need ring usm).
Ian.Dobinson wrote:
If you look at the recent lens releases they have either been Hyper expensive L's or a bunch of EFs consumer zooms. Correct me if I'm wrong but the last consumer grade (non L) EF lens released was the 70-300 IS. Maybe with the Pixel jumps now Canon are basicly saying you'll have to pay for the best quality new releases or stick with the old stuff.
canondoc wrote:
I feel bad for the people that don't understand the concept of the 85mm 1.4L. I really do.
Oh well, it IS FredMiranda after all.
Sorry I genuinely don't understand what you mean - do you mean the people incredulous about the lack of a 85 1.4, and not realising the arbitrary nature of their request, or do you mean the posters who recognise the arbitrary nature of a 85 1.4 and trying to inject some discussion of practical and business realism and the idiosyncrasies of canon's product development team?
canondoc wrote:
I feel bad for the people that don't understand the concept of the 85mm 1.4L. I really do.
Oh well, it IS FredMiranda after all.
Oh, I understand the concept. People want some specialty lens that makes little business sense or they want something for nothing. Maybe Canon should make a 300/3.3 in addition to the 300/4 and 300/2.8. Dream on!
In the case of the 85/1.2, just buy it and stop down to f/1.4.
chez wrote:
The guy asks an honest question and gets a mitt full of smart ass replies.
Welcome to the Internet, FM isn't the only forum with this problem.
If Canon brought out an 85L1.4 because it was only way to increase AF speed,
and has similar IQ to the 1.2 I think it would be very popular.
But that's a big if.
EB-1 wrote:
Oh, I understand the concept. People want some specialty lens that makes little business sense or they want something for nothing. Maybe Canon should make a 300/3.3 in addition to the 300/4 and 300/2.8. Dream on!
In the case of the 85/1.2, just buy it and stop down to f/1.4.
EBH
Yes, but how do you shed 1 pound and speed up the focus?
I have the 85 1.2 and barely use it but it's nice to have but I would be willing to purchase another 85 1.8 if Canon maybe updated it a bit to stop some of the CA you get from it, I would be willing to pay the extra for that but I wouldn't want to lose it's speed. I normally use it for Volleyball and Basketball at f/2.0 so don't need 1.4 on that one.
Most ultra fast lenses came originally from the era of film...with ever higher ISO speeds for digital I would have thought the need for ultra fast lenses (with their inherent problems and costs) has passed.
With ever improving lens technology it would make sense
to develop the f1.4 as the ultimate fast lens....just make it better than current generation lenses if possible.
I'd be all over the 85 f/1.8 if it were a stop faster
High ISO is not always the answer Anthony; many times you want to shoot with a fast lens for the limited DOF.
For 85mm I can see that f/1.4 is not much of a loss compared to f/1.2, but I'd be prepared to pay the higher price of the f/1.2 if the current lens was not so compromised (aside from IQ). Below 85mm, f/1.2 is very desirable IMO.
Another option rather than Canon opting for an 85 f/1.4, is to offer say a new 100/105 f/1.8L IS. This would be a great alternative and I would happily buy the Sigma for 85mm and the Canon for 100mm. They should though as a matter of course, redo the 85L II properly this time.
What don't you get about the wish for an L-quality 85 that is faster focusing, less money and weighing less?
I'd be happy with an 85/1.8L as well... just like I would have been really happy with a 50/1.4L...
Making the fastest available lens in a length is nice as an option, but when it is your only option it is far from ideal for those that don't care about having the fastest aperture, but still want L-quality.
(I've owned the 85/1.8, it is fine, but not L-quality all the way round IMO.)
Dawei Ye wrote:
Sorry I genuinely don't understand what you mean - do you mean the people incredulous about the lack of a 85 1.4, and not realising the arbitrary nature of their request, or do you mean the posters who recognise the arbitrary nature of a 85 1.4 and trying to inject some discussion of practical and business realism and the idiosyncrasies of canon's product development team?
