# New Unique Macro Coming? [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Feb 8, 2015)

```
<p>We’re told that a “world’s first” macro is coming from Canon some time in the next year. This is all we were told and can’t even begin to guess what the “world’s first” would mean.</p>
<p>Canon has been pretty innovative in lens design, from the EF 8-15 f/4 zoom fisheye, the 1.4x built-in teleconverter in the EF 200-400 f/4L IS, and the latest EF 11-24 f/4L ultra wide. All 3 of those lenses are pretty creative.</p>
<p>We hope to hear more soon.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## Mitch.Conner (Feb 8, 2015)

I think I saw something a few months ago on another site about a 300mm macro with image stabilization possibly coming based on a patent filing (which also included an image stabilized version of the 180mm macro).

Maybe that's it?


----------



## pdirestajr (Feb 8, 2015)

Wasn't there rumors of a tilt-shift macro a while back?


----------



## rs (Feb 8, 2015)

T/S? Fazier?


----------



## Chaitanya (Feb 8, 2015)

I am still waiting for a EF 60mm f/2.8 Macro(L/non L) with IF and USM/STM motor. For some of my work 100mm f/2.8L is too long.


----------



## danski0224 (Feb 8, 2015)

120mm autofocus macro tilt-shift f/2


----------



## tpatana (Feb 8, 2015)

150mm w/ 2:1 macro.


----------



## VeijoM (Feb 8, 2015)

A zoom macro (1:1). Wasn't such rumored from Canon at some point, or have I been dreaming.


----------



## mrsfotografie (Feb 8, 2015)

Fisheye macro????


----------



## tcmatthews (Feb 8, 2015)

A 2:1 macro? That would be cool.


----------



## ecka (Feb 8, 2015)

tpatana said:


> 150mm w/ 2:1 macro.



+1
Or 200/4 IS 2:1 Macro . Or it could be a 100mm f/2 1:1 macro with a built-in 2x TC, which converts it into 200/4 2:1


----------



## IglooEater (Feb 8, 2015)

mrsfotografie said:


> Fisheye macro????



That'd certainly be unique.. :


----------



## Adrian (Feb 8, 2015)

A built in stepping motor/system to allow auto stacking of images.


----------



## lintoni (Feb 8, 2015)

Adrian said:


> A built in stepping motor/system to allow auto stacking of images.


Just for you! 

http://zerenesystems.com/cms/stacker/docs/tutorials/usingmagiclantern


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Feb 8, 2015)

At a guess, I think it'll be a TS-e macro lens. Fairly long, say around 100mm.


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 8, 2015)

defractive optics macro lens?


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Feb 8, 2015)

Maybe a body designed solely for macro work. 50mp and a large touch screen separate from the main body. Mirrorless would make sense.


----------



## Apbphoto (Feb 8, 2015)

How about a MP-e 65mm with IS.


----------



## DominoDude (Feb 8, 2015)

My thinking goes along the same path as Don H's: A *200mm f/2 DO Macro*, and it comes with a built in LED light to ensure you get sufficient amount of light on your subject.


----------



## wisselink (Feb 8, 2015)

danski0224 said:


> 120mm autofocus macro tilt-shift f/2



Almost there, you forgot to mention the build in 1,4x converter


----------



## deleteme (Feb 8, 2015)

GMCPhotographics said:


> At a guess, I think it'll be a TS-e macro lens. Fairly long, say around 100mm.



I'm with you on this. 
Unless of course they adopt a modular lens system that can use different components to create different FLs.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Feb 8, 2015)

What do you think? ???

300mm F5.6 Macro IS...US$600
500mm F8 Macro manual focus...US$700
800mm F11 Macro manual focus...US$800


----------



## Hannes (Feb 8, 2015)

A 1:1 TS macro would be interesting. The Schneider 1:4 isn't really a macro I suppose so it would be a world first http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/818360-REG/Schneider_06_1064382_PC_TS_Super_Angulon.html


----------



## Menace (Feb 8, 2015)

Built in light.


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 8, 2015)

Just today I dreamed about an EF-M 50 f/2.0 IS USM-STM lens. USM for speed, STM for video ...


----------



## TW (Feb 8, 2015)

My wild guesses:

EF 80-200 f4 L IS Zoom Macro w/ Hybid IS

or

TS-E 135 f2.8 Tilt-Shift Macro

Possibly 2:1 magnification?


----------



## tculotta (Feb 8, 2015)

I'd agree with the macro zoom postulation.


----------



## rbr (Feb 8, 2015)

A zoom macro would be my guess and would probably be the most useful. It would be easier to frame close up subjects more precisely than having to move a tripod back and forth. Either that of a TS-e macro to get more DOF up close.

A 2:1 macro could be useful too, but that's already possible with various combinations of tubes and/or tc's with certain lenses.

A 200 f2 DO macro? That sounds like a gimmick that nobody would buy. It would cost at least $5K probably. There's not enough DOF at f2 at 200mm and 1:1 to be worthwhile.


----------



## danski0224 (Feb 8, 2015)

wisselink said:


> Almost there, you forgot to mention the build in 1,4x converter



The built-in 1.4x was assumed, but you are right, I should have specified it...

Might as well add some IS too.


----------



## Vivid Color (Feb 8, 2015)

lintoni said:


> Adrian said:
> 
> 
> > A built in stepping motor/system to allow auto stacking of images.
> ...



Thank you for posting this Iintoni. Maybe I'll have to put magic lantern on my Canon T1i.


----------



## dash2k8 (Feb 8, 2015)

10x magnification?


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Feb 8, 2015)

Menace said:


> Built in light.



That was my first thought, but it probably exists already.


----------



## BeenThere (Feb 9, 2015)

My guess is a 70-200 f/4 Zoom with 5 stop IS, and maybe DO technology to shorten and lighten it a bit. 1:1 or a little better at all focal lengths and para focal so focus does't change as you zoom.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Feb 9, 2015)

My guess as others have stated is a tilt / shift macro between 90 - 135mm. Some zooms already have a close focus option and whilst not true macro it's entirely possible to design them that way.


----------



## slclick (Feb 9, 2015)

IS...stands for Insect Stabilization.


----------



## lol (Feb 9, 2015)

I have a love-hate relationship with the existing MP-E65 so would love to see something like that without its current operating characteristics. Biggest ones I'd like are: make it parfocal and can I have more working distance please? Well, any working distance at all. I have hit subjects when trying at higher magnification before... I'd say 100mm focal length minimum, preferably 150mm or more. I would be happy to lose a bit of maximum magnification if it helps, as I rarely find going above 3x to really give much more out.

At the other end of the spectrum, a lower magnification macro zoom would be nice. Imagine a 70-200 f/4 macro! I don't mind losing AF in the macro range, while still allowing the lens to be used as a normal telephoto.


----------



## TommyLee (Feb 9, 2015)

TW said:


> My wild guesses:
> 
> EF 80-200 f4 L IS Zoom Macro w/ Hybid IS
> 
> ...



I believe you are pretty close here......

I would have guessed a zoom macro...
but 2:1 and hybrid I.S. ... yum

that would be great....I never used f2.8 on my macros .... so f4 is fine.,..

how about a sliding extension tube......

and a 1.4x
///////


so is it about $500 for each feature....

yikes


my first lens was the macro 100mm with a 20D.....
left at sunrise...
I didnt come home til it was dark......

I wondered why the 180 macro didnt get replaced ...with I.S. ...

I guess I wont be getting a new guitar.......


----------



## surapon (Feb 9, 2015)

Menace said:


> Built in light.



+100 For me too, Dear Mr. Menace----You are right on the target of my Idea = LED Light Around the Lens and have the Solar panel+ Batteries on top of my Hat, to provide the Light for all day and all night.
Have a good Sunday night, Sir.
Surapon


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Feb 9, 2015)

lol said:


> I have a love-hate relationship with the existing MP-E65 so would love to see something like that without its current operating characteristics. Biggest ones I'd like are: make it parfocal and can I have more working distance please?



Parfocal applies to a zoom. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parfocal_lens

Are you asking for the MP-E65 to be in focus as you move the lens in closer or further away? That's a depth of field issue, and its limited by physics, which is why someone suggested a stepper motor for stacked images. You will have to focus a lens when you move it closer or further away.


----------



## ejenner (Feb 9, 2015)

+1 for 90-135 T/S macro, possibly 2:1.

It won't have AF or IS though.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Feb 9, 2015)

mrsfotografie said:


> Fisheye macro????


My 15mm f2.8 fisheye with MFD of 15cm can focus as close as a macro.


----------



## Simen1 (Feb 9, 2015)

A macro 3D lens


----------



## Tyroop (Feb 9, 2015)

Softfocus like the 135/f2.8? No, it wouldn't be a 'world first' - I had that feature with my non-L 100mm macro. The lens was also capable of activating the soft focus feature at random. When I replaced it with the L IS version the feature had disappeared completely.


----------



## epsiloneri (Feb 9, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Are you asking for the MP-E65 to be in focus as you move the lens in closer or further away?


That would be really nice, and wouldn't have to break the laws of physics. Just fix the plane of focus to, say, 300mm from the camera image plane. Then let the magnification change by extending the lens by the appropriate amount, without changing focus distance from the image plane. The subject-to-front lens distance would change, but not the subject-to-camera body distance. One would still need a rail for focus stacking, but it would cut down on one variable for framing.



Hjalmarg1 said:


> My 15mm f2.8 fisheye with MFD of 15cm can focus as close as a macro.


Yes, but can you get 1:1 magnification? 



Tyroop said:


> Softfocus like the 135/f2.8? No, it wouldn't be a 'world first' - I had that feature with my non-L 100mm macro. The lens was also capable of activating the soft focus feature at random.


Must have been a problem with your specific copy, I see no significant IQ difference between the L and non-L 100mm macros (I've used both).


----------



## Alejandro (Feb 9, 2015)

¿Have you seen the Venus 60mm f/2.8 2:1 Macro lens WITH infinity focus?

With this in hand im guessing a 100m/180mm f/2.8 2:1 or 3:1 Macro with infinity focus.


----------



## Sabaki (Feb 9, 2015)

My first question would be, is this a dedicated macro lens that only does macro?

For the engineers and technicians amongst you: Is it at all physically possible to gain greater depth of field by changing the lens design or perhaps the distance to/from the sensor or is this relationship set in stone?

If I could dream...internal lighting that will illuminate your subject with 100% beautifully diffused light!


----------



## lol (Feb 9, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Parfocal applies to a zoom. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parfocal_lens
> 
> Are you asking for the MP-E65 to be in focus as you move the lens in closer or further away? That's a depth of field issue, and its limited by physics, which is why someone suggested a stepper motor for stacked images. You will have to focus a lens when you move it closer or further away.



[quote author=Wikipedia]A parfocal lens is a lens that stays in focus when *magnification*/focal length is changed.[/quote]

This is nothing to do with changing focusing distances, nor is it directly related to depth of field. As epsiloneri described, "all" I's like is not to have to refocus when changing magnification with an MP-E style lens. I never said it would be easy to implement but it is in theory possible. It would be acceptable if the focal length wasn't constant to make things easier. e.g. if it was a zoom lens.


----------



## bf (Feb 9, 2015)

First Ef-m macro!


----------



## 9VIII (Feb 9, 2015)

GMCPhotographics said:


> At a guess, I think it'll be a TS-e macro lens. Fairly long, say around 100mm.



They've been rumored to replace the 90mm TS-E for over a year now, if the 130mm TS-E is a true macro lens, I'll be in heaven.


----------



## scyrene (Feb 9, 2015)

BeenThere said:


> My guess is a 70-200 f/4 Zoom with 5 stop IS, and maybe DO technology to shorten and lighten it a bit. 1:1 or a little better at all focal lengths and para focal so focus does't change as you zoom.



It's worth remembering that the rated IS drops considerably at macro distances. The 100L has 4-stop IS only at non-macro distances. By 1:1 it's officially 2 stops (as per TDP).


----------



## scyrene (Feb 9, 2015)

epsiloneri said:


> Hjalmarg1 said:
> 
> 
> > My 15mm f2.8 fisheye with MFD of 15cm can focus as close as a macro.
> ...



Not sure how serious you are, but isn't a fisheye macro oxymoronic? 'True' macro implies 1:1 magnification of the subject at the sensor, but a fisheye has the widest field of view of any lens type. How could you have both simultaneously? My gut feeling is it's physically impossible, but I'm not an engineer.


----------



## scyrene (Feb 9, 2015)

bf said:


> First Ef-m macro!



This would be good. The 100L + EOS-M is a good combination but an M-sized macro lens would be even better for portability.


----------



## bf (Feb 9, 2015)

scyrene said:


> bf said:
> 
> 
> > First Ef-m macro!
> ...



You bet! I wish they'd listen.


----------



## Tiosabas (Feb 9, 2015)

I say a 50 f2 IS macro with 1:2, a bit less exotic but conceivable.


----------



## JoeKerslake (Feb 9, 2015)

I think a lot of the suggestions here are too conventional. You wouldn't describe a 50mm macro lens or an EOS-M lens as a "worlds first", it's got to be something revolutionary.


----------



## iron-t (Feb 9, 2015)

An EF-M macro with hybrid IS would be tremendous, although it would NOT be sold in the United States. If Canon wants volume sales in a macro I would not expect it to release either an MF-only lens or anything near 100mm. I'm thinking longer focal length (possibly with zoom) and IS and a price tag around $1500 USD. A TS-E macro would be pretty cool though.


----------



## mackguyver (Feb 9, 2015)

How about a wide angle macro? I know Zeiss makes the 25mm f/2.8 which focuses close (0.17m / 0.56 ft), but that's still not 1:1. There might be a wide angle macro out there, but I'm not aware of one, at least a mass market one. Maybe Canon will make a 35mm true macro lens for FF.


----------



## lintoni (Feb 9, 2015)

Vivid Color said:


> lintoni said:
> 
> 
> > Adrian said:
> ...


Just to clarify, it works on other cameras with ML support, and there are other software solutions available.


----------



## mrzero (Feb 9, 2015)

I'd love to see a long zoom macro with IS, like a 70-200 or so.


----------



## Rahul (Feb 9, 2015)

Unless it is more than 200mm in FL, it should be a TS-E lens. 

Give me a 100mm TS-E 1:1 macro lens and I'll be amongst the earliest adopters of this lens.


----------



## NancyP (Feb 9, 2015)

sabaki, the only things affecting depth of field are focal length and aperture - no free lunch in macro world. 
A 1:1 TS macro would be cool, popular with product photographers, most of whom swear by the TS-E 90 +/- extenders. I would guess that 90 to 120 mm would be the sweet spot. I would like a 300 or 400mm 1:1 macro, perhaps by having swing-in elements or a converter with glass to cover the 1:4 to 1:1 magnifications. (It would be great for those head shots of rattlesnakes and cottonmouths. Really. I currently use the 180 plus 1.4x TC, and even that is slightly closer than I would like.) It needn't be continuously focusable from infinity to 1:1, if that presents a design issue. I admit that I would like a lighter 180mm 1:1 macro with IS, but the IS would be more for the 1:3 and lesser magnification, because IS doesn't do much at high magnification. Speaking of which, I wonder how in-body image stabilization (sensor position adjustment) would work in macro. Sony A7II users?

I am not sure that any of these are truly unique. The MP-E 65, now THAT'S unique!


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 9, 2015)

This constant clamour for T/S macro lenses displays a remarkable consistency for failing to grasp how tilt works and the intrinsic limitations of tilt lenses on cameras with deep mirror boxes.

Sure, the 90mm TS-E is a wonderful product lens and it is often paired with extension tubes to reduce minimum focus distance and increase magnification, a 25mm tube gives you a 0.6x magnification, but tilt use becomes limited at these distances because of mirrorbox shadowing and if you look at the classic 90 TS-E + tube images they are all done with the camera tilted too.

A 90 TS-E MkII with a closer focusing distance, yes; a T/S Macro (1:1) I think is highly unlikely.


----------



## Rahul (Feb 9, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> a T/S Macro (1:1) I think is highly unlikely.



My question is, would it be possible? If yes, Canon may charge another $ 3,000 for this lens. 

The point here is that right now everyone is simply speculating what the new "Unique" feature would be. If a certain lens design is technically not possible, fine, let's speculate on something else. However, if a lens design is possible even theoretically, why dismiss it altogether?


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Feb 9, 2015)

Hopefully a non-linear focusing design that will allow very fine adjustments at higher magnifications.


----------



## RLPhoto (Feb 9, 2015)

An Updated 180mm Macro? IS perhaps? A Zoom 180mm Macro with IS?


----------



## weixing (Feb 9, 2015)

Hi,
With dual speed focusing ring?? One for fast focusing and one for very fine focusing??

Have a nice day.


----------



## Stuart (Feb 9, 2015)

Why would you need a TS macro? its a small subject - just move the camera to the new focus plane position.


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 9, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> This constant clamour for T/S macro lenses displays a remarkable consistency for failing to grasp how tilt works and the intrinsic limitations of tilt lenses on cameras with deep mirror boxes.
> 
> Sure, the 90mm TS-E is a wonderful product lens and it is often paired with extension tubes to reduce minimum focus distance and increase magnification, a 25mm tube gives you a 0.6x magnification, but tilt use becomes limited at these distances because of mirrorbox shadowing and if you look at the classic 90 TS-E + tube images they are all done with the camera tilted too.
> 
> A 90 TS-E MkII with a closer focusing distance, yes; a T/S Macro (1:1) I think is highly unlikely.


+1


----------



## mrsfotografie (Feb 9, 2015)

scyrene said:


> epsiloneri said:
> 
> 
> > Hjalmarg1 said:
> ...



The lens would have to be practically on the subject itself I imagine, it does seem oxymoronic I agree which is why I mentioned the idea in the first place


----------



## keithcooper (Feb 9, 2015)

*Fully Telecentric please*

I'd like an object-space telecentric version of the MP-E 65, or if Canon really want our cash, a fully telecentric zoom macro...

... a macro version of the TS-E90 would be nice too


----------



## slclick (Feb 9, 2015)

I would like to see a 1-3x Macro, 90mm or greater, 150mm preferably. The 3-5 range of the MP-E 65 has such a steep learning curve that if they would make a baby brother with a longer focal length I believe that would appeal much more to many macro shooters.


----------



## davidcl0nel (Feb 9, 2015)

TS stands for Tilt/Shift - Shift isn't really needed here - and itcosts to build a bigger circle of light.
Maybe only a tiltable frontlens, but enough to tilt the focus plane to 90°. On Ultrawide there is only a small angle needed, I don't know, hoch much for a 100+mm lens. And rotate in any direction, so you have the chance, to tilt in any direction, not only 30° steps.


----------



## NancyP (Feb 9, 2015)

Re: wide angle macro, and need to get lens right on the subject:
Photograph some insects - they may oblige by hopping off the leaf onto your lens. Only one macro view possible - tiny insect feet.


----------



## mnclayshooter (Feb 9, 2015)

davidcl0nel said:


> TS stands for Tilt/Shift - Shift isn't really needed here - and itcosts to build a bigger circle of light.
> Maybe only a tiltable frontlens, but enough to tilt the focus plane to 90°. On Ultrawide there is only a small angle needed, I don't know, hoch much for a 100+mm lens. And rotate in any direction, so you have the chance, to tilt in any direction, not only 30° steps.



You mean a Lens Baby?


----------



## kirispupis (Feb 9, 2015)

A 90mm TS-E lens with greater magnification has been rumored for sometime, but it would not count as a unique macro. Nikon's PC-E 85 already is .5x. I suppose it is possible to increase the magnification beyond that, but I am not sure the need is there.

Canon could release an update to the MP-E 65, but I doubt that. The current copy is still extremely good and Canon has absolutely no competition in this space.

Another possibility is a low aperture macro. The lowest one I am aware of is the Zeiss 100/2. Still, low aperture in macro if mainly for very abstract photography. I do not believe there would be a huge need.

Finally, Canon could create a >200mm macro lens. A 300/4 macro lens would be intriguing, but I question the market need. Already the 180mm is a niche lens - suited for specific types of flowers and insects. For many uses the 180mm is too long.

Note that I currently own the 100/2.8 IS, MP-E 65, TS-E 90 and have owned the 180, so I would likely be a prime customer for any new macro. That being said, I suspect this rumor is untrue. I know Canon has patents for new macros and may have a prototype or two out there, but I do not believe the market is large enough to actually release something. Most likely Canon will update the TS-E 90 and the 180 (IMHO the poorest resolving of the macros) within the next few years, but their more innovative lenses will be in the more widely used lenses.


----------



## logaandm (Feb 9, 2015)

I have a Mirex Pentax 645 to EOS TS adapter and I have experimented with the Pentax 120mm Macro with it. Indeed the problem was the amount of limited shift I could get without severe vignetting. 

I was able to "gain" about 1 to 1.5 stops of increased DOF. So instead of having to use f32, for example, I could use f22 to get about the same DOF but almost no noticeable improvement in sharpness. To me, this wasn't a big enough gain to make it worth the effort. That is not to say some combination of focal length and TS design couldn't improve on that. 

But....

Putting the same adapter on the EOS-M was a different story. Not only could I use the full range of the adapter to get usable focal plane changes, I used a tripod mount on the lens instead of the camera the usability goes way up because I was moving the camera instead of the lens and the lens could stay pointed at the subject.

Macro is all about sharp pixels on the subject. it usually makes more sense to use a smaller sensor for macro since shallow DOF is less of a problem.


----------



## epsiloneri (Feb 9, 2015)

logaandm said:


> I have a Mirex Pentax 645 to EOS TS adapter and I have experimented with the Pentax 120mm Macro with it.


Cool, thanks for your story.


----------



## Mitch.Conner (Feb 10, 2015)

White 100mm L?  World's First White (true) Macro.


----------



## Vivid Color (Feb 10, 2015)

scyrene said:


> bf said:
> 
> 
> > First Ef-m macro!
> ...



+1


----------



## Daniel Flather (Feb 10, 2015)

How's aboot a 200mm f4 IS 2.5:1 L in white.


----------



## PhilA (Feb 10, 2015)

I'm amazed no has mentioned bellows! A macro lens combined with a bellows would certainly be unique and very applicable to macro work.


----------



## DominoDude (Feb 10, 2015)

PhilA said:


> I'm amazed no has mentioned bellows! A macro lens combined with a bellows would certainly be unique and very applicable to macro work.



That would mean that we had to be firmly rooted in some kind of reality. *rolls eyes and drools*

On a more serious side: Yeah, that would be unique and make sense!


----------



## fotografiasi (Feb 10, 2015)

a tilt and shift macro L lens would be great


----------



## photonius (Feb 10, 2015)

VeijoM said:


> A zoom macro (1:1). Wasn't such rumored from Canon at some point, or have I been dreaming.



Yes, there was a patent for this. Indeed, it seems perhaps the most likely lens to be coming - maybe to replace
the 180mm macro. 
Nikon had a 70-180 macro, so a zoom macro is not exactly new. But the nikon could only do 1:3 at 70mm. 
So, a zoom with IS that goes to 1:1 all the way, would be novel. 
people questioned the use of a macro zoom, but for long lenses, a zoom is really useful, because adjusting the frame would mean moving forward or backward over seizable distances, more than a focus rail usually can do.


----------



## photonius (Feb 10, 2015)

mrsfotografie said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > epsiloneri said:
> ...



Well, I think those lenses are essentially endoscopes, so not really novel either.


----------



## troy19 (Feb 10, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> ... coming from Canon some time in the next year ...



Admin, is it really next year (2016) or already this year ?


----------



## troy19 (Feb 10, 2015)

3,5 / 180 macro IS USM with really efficient 5-axis stabilization to aim at Sony ...


----------



## Steve Balcombe (Feb 10, 2015)

Sabaki said:


> For the engineers and technicians amongst you: Is it at all physically possible to gain greater depth of field by changing the lens design or perhaps the distance to/from the sensor or is this relationship set in stone?





NancyP said:


> sabaki, the only things affecting depth of field are focal length and aperture - no free lunch in macro world.



Actually this is not strictly true - the depth of field is also affected by how asymmetrical the optical design is.

The simple depth of field calculation assumes a symmetrical lens design like the 50/1.8, but lenses are typically not symmetrical (in the sense of the pupil magnification being 1.0, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pupil_magnification). The MP-E 65 has a pupil magnification of about 0.5 (*very* rough estimate by inspection) and this does visibly increase the depth of field. I calculated one example:

Focal length 65 mm, f/5.6
Subject distance 250 mm (needed by the calculation; this is towards the minimum for the MP-E 65)
CoC 0.03 mm which is considered standard for full frame. Any figure would do for the comparison.

Pupil magnification of 1.0 gives a DoF of 3.68 mm

Pupil magnification of 0.5 gives a DoF of 4.63 mm

Granted that's only a mm different but it's over 25%.


----------



## kirispupis (Feb 10, 2015)

PhilA said:


> I'm amazed no has mentioned bellows! A macro lens combined with a bellows would certainly be unique and very applicable to macro work.



Because such a lens already exists. It is called the MP-E 65.


----------



## RGF (Feb 10, 2015)

Perhaps a combination Macro with builtin step motor to allow focus stacking. Hard to imagine how they would do this in the lens alone but perhaps Canon is referring to some sort of accessory along with the lens?


----------



## NancyP (Feb 10, 2015)

"Well, I think those lenses are essentially endoscopes, so not really novel either." Good one, Photonius!

Steve, thanks for information.

The old macro set-ups were true bellows, a few of which also had T/S capacity. Old lenses were reversed double Gauss normal lenses (50-60mm) or enlarger lenses (symmetrical designs mostly). For greater than 1:1 there were specialized bellows lenses or long-working-distance microscope objectives. The MP-E 65 is far better in the field than a delicate bellows.


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 10, 2015)

I have this setup with the old and rare Canon 35mm Macrophoto lens. 

Tilt bellows do not work to any useful degree on cameras with deep mirror boxes, those overpriced Novaflex options are utterly ridiculous.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Feb 10, 2015)

RGF said:


> Perhaps a combination Macro with builtin step motor to allow focus stacking. Hard to imagine how they would do this in the lens alone but perhaps Canon is referring to some sort of accessory along with the lens?



Could this be more easily implemented in software in camera as opposed to in the lens?

That would be a cool capability if Canon could have automated focus stacking as an option with all their lenses. 

I wonder how difficult it would be to program?


----------



## Pixelzoomer (Feb 10, 2015)

*Re: New Unique Macro Coming? [CR1] *

Some time ago Canon filed a patent (courtesy of Canonrumors!) for a 135mm tilt-shift MACRO to replace their 90mm tilt-shift. That would fit the bill as a unique and amazing creative tool.

I know nothing about tilt-shift principles, but I recall seeing an article* saying that the closer the subject, the greater the tilt required, so this would mean to be useful as a macro, it would require a significant tilt range.

* (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/focusing-ts.shtml).


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 10, 2015)

*Re: New Unique Macro Coming? [CR1] *



Pixelzoomer said:


> Some time ago Canon filed a patent (courtesy of Canonrumors!) for a 135mm tilt-shift MACRO to replace their 90mm tilt-shift. That would fit the bill as a unique and amazing creative tool.
> 
> I know nothing about tilt-shift principles, but I recall seeing an article* saying that the closer the subject, the greater the tilt required, so this would mean to be useful as a macro, it would require a significant tilt range.
> 
> * (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/focusing-ts.shtml).



Yes, and that is the intrinsic issue with cameras with deep mirror boxes, you can't use extreme tilts because of shadowing, further, the longer the focal length the more tilt you need, both of which are why field cameras range to 40º and more whereas the Canon T/S lenses have a very modest 8º.

Although it isn't the proximity to the subject that causes the issue, it is the very short J point distance, the line around which the plane of focus rotates, needed to get a wide range of plane of focus control.


----------



## lastcoyote (Feb 10, 2015)

I'm more than satisfied with my MP-E 65. 
Think I'd rather Canon looked at a mark II of the MT-24EX.


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 10, 2015)

Daniel Flather said:


> How's aboot a 200mm f4 IS 2.5:1 L in white.


I think Daniel has the answer..... A White macro lens .....


----------



## kirispupis (Feb 10, 2015)

AcutancePhotography said:


> RGF said:
> 
> 
> > Perhaps a combination Macro with builtin step motor to allow focus stacking. Hard to imagine how they would do this in the lens alone but perhaps Canon is referring to some sort of accessory along with the lens?
> ...



Automated focus stacking already exists. There is a device called StackShot (I own one) that makes this easy. For all practical purposes you can't do this in the lens because any extension of the lens changes the magnification. You need to move the entire camera - which is what StackShot does.


----------



## George Wang (Feb 10, 2015)

Love to see a 200mm+ TS-E macro with the same TS function and min. focus distance as 24mm L TS-E II and.... AUTO FOCUS!!?.... First in the World it would be!!


----------



## keithcooper (Feb 10, 2015)

'L' pinhole - just needs a 'tilt' option and all would be fine ;-)

If you want some lenses that there really aren't any the likes of in Canon's range then try here...

http://www.edmundoptics.com/imaging/imaging-lenses/telecentric-lenses


----------



## Vivid Color (Feb 11, 2015)

Don Haines said:


> Daniel Flather said:
> 
> 
> > How's aboot a 200mm f4 IS 2.5:1 L in white.
> ...


And it needs to come with a white hood.


----------



## Dalantech (Feb 12, 2015)

lastcoyote said:


> I'm more than satisfied with my MP-E 65.
> Think I'd rather Canon looked at a mark II of the MT-24EX.



Registered an account on this forum just to agree with you 100% -the current Mt-24EX is in desperate need of a refresh!


----------



## slclick (Feb 12, 2015)

Dalantech said:


> lastcoyote said:
> 
> 
> > I'm more than satisfied with my MP-E 65.
> ...



I think 'desperate' is a tad reaching. I'd love to read your proposed list of updates and fixes to the flash.


----------



## mrzero (Feb 12, 2015)

slclick said:


> Dalantech said:
> 
> 
> > lastcoyote said:
> ...



RT


----------



## Pixelzoomer (Feb 12, 2015)

*Re: New Unique Macro Coming? [CR1] *



privatebydesign said:


> Yes, and that is the intrinsic issue with cameras with deep mirror boxes, you can't use extreme tilts because of shadowing, further, the longer the focal length the more tilt you need, both of which are why field cameras range to 40º and more whereas the Canon T/S lenses have a very modest 8º.
> 
> Although it isn't the proximity to the subject that causes the issue, it is the very short J point distance, the line around which the plane of focus rotates, needed to get a wide range of plane of focus control.



Thanks for that, it is something I never thought of.


----------



## RGF (Feb 18, 2015)

kirispupis said:


> AcutancePhotography said:
> 
> 
> > RGF said:
> ...



Perhaps that is what will make this lens unique? change the focus distance without focus blooming?


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 18, 2015)

Personally I think Keith Coopers idea of a telecentric macro would be the most amazing 'unique' feature. Imagine doing focus stacking where the objects in frame stay the same size through the pull.

It is the kind of 'because we can' lens that Canon have a habit of throwing down, like the 17TS-E f4L, the 8-15 f4L fisheye, the MP-E 65, the 11-24 f4L. Indeed looking at that list I suspect if will be an f4L ;D


----------



## Dalantech (Feb 26, 2016)

lastcoyote said:


> I'm more than satisfied with my MP-E 65.
> Think I'd rather Canon looked at a mark II of the MT-24EX.





Dalantech said:


> Registered an account on this forum just to agree with you 100% -the current Mt-24EX is in desperate need of a refresh!





> I think 'desperate' is a tad reaching. I'd love to read your proposed list of updates and fixes to the flash.



Bummer -I didn't get a notification that you quoted me. So I guess I should start by showing you, if you're still interested, in what I've done with the current MT-24EX. Here's a video of my current diffuser. Here' what I'm able to do with it:



Finger Fed Bumblebee III by John Kimbler, on Flickr

In addition to the changes that Canon made to the MR-14EX II I'd like to see in an updated MT-24EX:


The same type of diffusion plastic that was used in the MR-14EX, or better still the same kind of wide angle diffusion plastic that you see in a standard flash's wide angle diffuser. The MT-24 really needs something to force the light to spread out as rapidly as possible, and the current Fresnel diffuser doesn't cut it.
The modeling lamps need to be just focusing aids, made from LEDs, and two of them should be on each side of each flash head on both sides of the flash tube. Currently, due to the location of the modeling lamps, diffuser design is a pain. Maybe even incorporate the focusing LEDs into the flash tube assembly, behind the diffuser where the flash tube is located.
There needs to be a better way to mount third party diffusers. The little indents on the side of the current MT-24 EX only work for light weight diffusers.
That's just a short and sweet wish list. I'm sure some misguided individuals would like to see a wireless twin flash but it would be a mistake. Just look at all the complaints about battery life and cycle times from Nikon users about the R1C1 for proof...


----------



## jeffa4444 (Feb 26, 2016)

photonius said:


> VeijoM said:
> 
> 
> > A zoom macro (1:1). Wasn't such rumored from Canon at some point, or have I been dreaming.
> ...


That Nikon zoom was techically a close-focus zoom 1:1 or greater throughout the range is needed to be truly Macro. No one has ever made a "true" macro zoom not even in high end cinematography. 
50-150mm f2.8 1:1 zoom would be a world first and cover the majority of the present true macro 1:1 or greater range on full frame.


----------



## scyrene (Feb 28, 2016)

kirispupis said:


> AcutancePhotography said:
> 
> 
> > RGF said:
> ...



Well you *can*... I've done focus stacking the lazy way with the MP-E by 'zooming' (which in this lens changes the magnification of course), and HeliconFocus (and no doubt other software) manages fine. The finished image is the dimensions of the smallest frame though, of course. But sure, it's not as good a way of doing it.


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 28, 2016)

Whilst stacking is done optimally by maintaining focus and moving the camera and lens, refocusing does not present too many extra issues most of the time.

That said, one of the many features of the wireless remote control CamRanger is to automatically refocus by a set amount and reshoot, it makes accurate many image stacks very simple, it obviously only works on auto focus lenses though.


----------



## RGF (Mar 12, 2016)

Canon Rumors said:


> <p>We’re told that a “world’s first” macro is coming from Canon some time in the next year. This is all we were told and can’t even begin to guess what the “world’s first” would mean.</p>
> <p>Canon has been pretty innovative in lens design, from the EF 8-15 f/4 zoom fisheye, the 1.4x built-in teleconverter in the EF 200-400 f/4L IS, and the latest EF 11-24 f/4L ultra wide. All 3 of those lenses are pretty creative.</p>
> <p>We hope to hear more soon.</p>
> <p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>



if by the next year, you mean next 12 months, time has passed.


----------

