# Any rumors on an F/1.4L prime between 20mm and 24mm?



## mikekx102 (Oct 16, 2017)

Hi,

I'm into landscapes and night landscapes - I love milky way photos - but I'm quite puzzled by the available options. The obvious choice is the 24mm F1.4L II, which I own, but the coma is gross. The 14mm F/2.8L performs poorly with coma too. I want to buy a Canon F/1.4L lens of a really good quality, low coma and 24mm or wider as this is my passion, and would pay Zeiss Otus money if it was optically excellent and wide. It seems like a huge hole in the Canon line up. Does anyone feel the same way?

Lets start this rumor. The EF 20mm F/1.4L. When size, weight and cost aren't as important as coma correction and being able to use it at F1.4 without reservation.


Mike.


----------



## andrei1989 (Oct 16, 2017)

there's the sigma 20mm 1.4


----------



## BeenThere (Oct 16, 2017)

New 25mm f/1.4 Milvus coming.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 16, 2017)

[Faster than f/2.8] + [wider than 24] + [excellent coma control] + [vignetting well controlled when shooting wide open]

Can anyone name me a _single_ lens that ticks all those boxes? I believe astro folks may win the prize for highest expectations in photographic gear, as this is Lucy with the football every time a fast wide lens comes out. Hopes get up, test results get published, and everyone gets sad.

If you are shooting astro, things like a red ring, weather sealing, USM focusing, etc. tend to drop by the wayside. In addition, Canon has shown (other than perhaps the 35L and the 24-70 f/2.8L II) that it cannot deliver a wide lens sans coma. Your best bet is a 24 f/1.4L III (possibly with that BR gunk), but I wouldn't get your hopes up. So for the OP's ask, this screams third party solution. 

I wouldn't hold out for Canon to hand you some Excalibur of Astro instrument. What in their track record implies that it's in their wheelhouse to deliver this?

- A


----------



## slclick (Oct 16, 2017)

Rokinon 24 1.4 is widely held to be the best astro lens at this time. There is also the IRIX line of glass, I have no familiarity with it.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 17, 2017)

slclick said:


> Rokinon 24 1.4 is widely held to be the best astro lens at this time. There is also the IRIX line of glass, I have no familiarity with it.



Irix is not a disaster with coma on FF:
https://www.lenstip.com/486.7-Lens_review-Irix_15_mm_f_2.4_Blackstone_Coma__astigmatism_and_bokeh.html

But it's also not particularly sharp on the wide open end:
https://www.lenstip.com/486.4-Lens_review-Irix_15_mm_f_2.4_Blackstone_Image_resolution.html

But I've never shot it myself and I defer to those that have. They also offer an 11mm f/4 that might do the trick, but I haven't seen reviews for it yet.

- A


----------



## mikekx102 (Oct 17, 2017)

BeenThere said:


> New 25mm f/1.4 Milvus coming.



Yeah this should be interesting. The Otus 28mm f1.4 has a filter size of 95mm, while this 25mm f1.4 has a filter size of 82mm. I would have expected it to be the opposite way around.



ahsanford said:


> [Faster than f/2.8] + [wider than 24] + [excellent coma control] + [vignetting well controlled when shooting wide open]
> 
> Can anyone name me a _single_ lens that ticks all those boxes? I believe astro folks may win the prize for highest expectations in photographic gear, as this is Lucy with the football every time a fast wide lens comes out. Hopes get up, test results get published, and everyone gets sad.
> 
> ...



For the record I'm not so worried about vignetting. But sigma have made a 20mm f1.4, and canon's 35mm f1.4l II is awesome, so I do think its possible to come up with a 20-24 f1.4l prime with 35L II quality.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 17, 2017)

mikekx102 said:


> For the record I'm not so worried about vignetting. But sigma have made a 20mm f1.4, and canon's 35mm f1.4l II is awesome, so I do think its possible to come up with a 20-24 f1.4l prime with 35L II quality.



I could be wrong, but the wider FL you go you may need a bulbous / not front filterable front element to combat vignetting. Astro folks may care about things when you are shooting ISO 6400 @ f/2.8 and then find out you need to push your corners _4+ stops_ like the 16-35 f/2.8L III. 

I know these lenses are wider than 24mm, but compare two popular UWA zooms here:
https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Vignetting-Test-Results.aspx?FLI=0&API=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0&Lens=1073&Camera=979&LensComp=986

...my point being: _they don't just put a bulbous front element on cameras to p--- off filter users_. They do help for some things.

But can Canon make a fast 20 or 24 as good as the 35? Sure, it's possible. That's a high bar to be sure, but they could do it if they wanted to. My question is: will they dial it in for general use (which would imply front filterability) or would they dial it in for astro use (which might imply vignetting concerns drive a larger front element)?

- A


----------

