bill_goldman Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 Although it has been stated in this and other forums that the distance data is not a primary factor in E-TTL II, and in fact, it works essentially as well without the distance data, it appears people are still obsessed with the distance data factor. So here�s the latest scoop on the distance factor: It appears that two older (discontinued) lenses, which were said NOT to provide lens distance data to E-TTL II, according to Chuck Westfall, actually DO. These are the 28-70L and 17-35L. See the following thread on the Ron Galbraith site for details: http://www.robgalbraith.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB18&Number=215491&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark u Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 I've noted that Chuck seems to avoid answering questions about situations when the distance data could be positively misleading (e.g. when using a 500D on the end of your lens, or using a diffuser). Still, I suppose the workaround for that is to tilt your flash (switching off distance input) and hold it on an offshoe cord. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew robertson Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 Personally, I'm in LOVE with E-TTL II. I very seldom use flash, but everybody is going to freak out and sell their excellent lenses which don't relay distance data. I LOVE progress! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill_goldman Posted March 4, 2004 Author Share Posted March 4, 2004 I don't know why, but people continue to believe the distance data is a definitive factor in determining exposure in E-TTL II. The truth is E-TTL II weights and averages the flash metering for the subject and all other objects at the same distance as the subject. In other words, it doesn't matter what the actual distance is; only whether the distance of questionable areas are the same distance as the subject (i.e., relative distance). Therefor, using an Omnibounce or a close-up filter will not compromise the E-TTL II system as long as the flash is aimed directly at the subject. At least, that's my understanding, based on everything I've read about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eos 10 fan Posted March 4, 2004 Share Posted March 4, 2004 Chuck Westfall <a href="http://www.robgalbraith.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB18&Number=217765&Forum=f18&Words=Lens%20Distance%20Information%20Westfall&Searchpage=0&Limit=250&Main=215491&Search=true&where=bodysub&Name=&daterange=0&newerval=&newertype=&olderval=&oldertype=&bodyprev=#Post217765">writes</a>: <p> As promised, here is the updated list of Canon EF lenses that supply distance data to the EOS-1D Mark II for use with E-TTL II:<p> Lens Distance Information<p> EF14mm f/2.8L USM <br> EF20mm f/2.8 USM <br> EF24mm f/1.4L USM <br> EF28mm f/1.8 USM <br> EF35mm f/1.4L USM <br> MP-E65mm f/2.8 1-5x Macrophoto <br> EF85mm f/1.8 USM <br> EF100mm f/2 USM <br> EF100mm f/2.8 Macro USM <br> EF100mm f/2.8 Macro* <br> EF135mm f/2L USM <br> EF180mm f/3.5L Macro USM <br> EF200mm f/2.8L II USM <br> EF200mm f/2.8L USM* <br> EF300mm f/2.8L IS USM <br> EF300mm f/4L IS USM <br> EF300mm f/4L USM* <br> EF400mm f/2.8L IS USM <br> EF400mm f/4 DO IS USM <br> EF400mm f/5.6L USM <br> EF500mm f/4L IS USM <br> EF600mm f/4L IS USM <br> EF1200mm f/5.6L USM<p> EF16-35mm f/2.8L USM <br> EF17-35mm f/2.8L USM* <br> EF17-40mm f/4L USM <br> EF20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 USM <br> EF24-70mm f/2.8L USM <br> EF24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 USM <br> EF28-70mm f/2.8L USM* <br> EF28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 USM* <br> EF28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM <br> EF28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 USM* <br> EF28-105mm f/4-5.6 USM <br> EF28-105mm f/4-5.6 <br> EF28-200mm f/3.5-5.6 USM <br> EF28-200mm f/3.5-5.6* <br> EF28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM <br> EF35-135mm f/4-5.6 USM* <br> EF70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM <br> EF70-200mm f/2.8L USM <br> EF70-200mm f/4L USM <br> EF70-210mm f/3.5-4.5 USM* <br> EF70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM <br> EF90-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM <br> EF90-300mm f/4.5-5.6 <br> EF100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM <br> EF100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM<p> EF-S18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM <br> EF-S18-55mm f/3.5-5.6<p> *Indicates discontinued product<p> If your Canon EF lens doesn't show up on this list, it does not feed distance data back to the camera through the electronic mount.<p> As a reminder, distance data is never the only factor that controls flash exposure in E-TTL II. It is an optional data point, no more and no less. E-TTL II remains functional with *all* Canon EF lenses, but when using direct flash, E-TTL II is at its best when distance data is available. <p> -------------------- <br> Chuck Westfall <br> Director/Technical Information Dept. <br> Camera Division/Canon U.S.A., Inc. <br> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awindsor Posted March 4, 2004 Share Posted March 4, 2004 Anyone else notice a missing focal length ? EF35mm f/1.4L USM EF85mm f/1.8 USM Is there any more infortmation on the production status of the f1.4 and f1.8 50mm lenses ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_peters1 Posted March 4, 2004 Share Posted March 4, 2004 From what I understand - the 50mm lenses do not provide distance information. This may be why the 50/1.8's are out of stock. Canon is trying to sell their current 50/1.4's so that when the 50/1.4 USM mk II is released - they won't have a bunch of the current 50/1.4's in a warehouse that have to be sold dirt cheap. If we see a price drop on the 50/1.4's next month then I will be even more sure I am correct. One thing I will say - I'm glad the 100/2.8 Macro non USM is on that list. I didn't think it would be. That means the only *prime* lens I have that isn't compliant is my 50/1.8 MKI. Not that it really matter for me - I rarely ever use flash anyway - and I'm guessing I won't be in *that* many situations where not having distance info will be any kind of a real hinderance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eos 10 fan Posted March 5, 2004 Share Posted March 5, 2004 Maybe Canon will roll out three new ~50mm lenses...<p> 50mm f/1.8 USM <br>50mm f/1.4 USM <br>55mm f/1.2L USM <p> I figure the 55/1.2L would be a nice little speed demon <br>(optimized for use wide open of course) <br>that would fit perfectly between the 17-40/4L and 70-200/4L. <p> -- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_larson1 Posted March 5, 2004 Share Posted March 5, 2004 My three favorite lenses are not on the list: 24/2.8, 35/2, 50/1.8. Frankly, I do not expect all of these lenses to be replaced. Maybe a 50/1.4 II and a 24/2.8II, but I think that since the popularity of primes is *in general* is dropping, only some will be replaced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_larson1 Posted March 5, 2004 Share Posted March 5, 2004 My three favorite lenses are not on the list: 24/2.8, 35/2, 50/1.8. Frankly, I do not expect all of these lenses to be replaced. Maybe a 50/1.4 II and a 24/2.8II, but I think that since the popularity of primes is *in general* is dropping, only some will be replaced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernard_odonovan Posted March 5, 2004 Share Posted March 5, 2004 1998 USA Canon press release EF Lenses:EF 24mm f/1.4LUltrasonic Lens Mount Type: Canon EF mount Signal Transmission: 5 items of EOS-dedicated information (no absolute distance information) (1) Lens mode (2) Lens type (3) Metering information (4) Focal length (5) AF drive information Chuck Westfall may wish to double check this and confirm which is correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eos 10 fan Posted March 8, 2004 Share Posted March 8, 2004 <p> I emailed Chck Westfal<br> Here is my question: <br> "On another forum someone posted this: "1998 USA Canon press release<p> EF Lenses: EF 24mm f/1.4L Ultrasonic Lens<p> Mount Type: Canon EF mount Signal Transmission: 5 items of EOS-dedicated information (no absolute distance information) (1) Lens mode (2) Lens type (3) Metering information (4) Focal length (5) AF drive information"<p> Can you please clarify what the press release meant by "no absolute distance information" (if that is indeed an accurate quote from the press release)." <p> Here is CW's reply:<br> ">>Can you please clarify what the press release meant by "no absolute distance information" (if that is indeed an accurate quote from the press release). << <p> I don't have a copy of that particualr press release on hand, so I can't verify that the spec quoted here was printed there. But whether it was or was not, Canon Inc. has confirmed that the EF24/1.4L USM does indeed provide distance data for use with E-TTL II." <p> Chuck Westfall <br> Director/Technical Information Dept.<br> Camera Division/Canon U.S.A., Inc.<p>-- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eos 10 fan Posted March 8, 2004 Share Posted March 8, 2004 <i>"On another forum..."</i> <p> I had started my email to CW talking about the Rob Galbraith forums: I wanted CW to know that the question was coming from somewhere other than the RG forums. <br> It reads a little funny to me here on Photo.net when I read 'on another forum' when I know I am speaking of this Photo.net forum.<p> hth<br>-- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_larson1 Posted March 8, 2004 Share Posted March 8, 2004 Frankly, based upon past experience, I would trust Chuck's comments more than the initial press release. Not that I would ever buy a 24/1.4L. . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernard_odonovan Posted March 8, 2004 Share Posted March 8, 2004 Hi Guys Thanks for sending that on to CW. It was a copy paste edited down from the first main US release for the EF24 F1.4 L. IE non of my words added. My concern is amplified by observing the following: EF 50 F1.8 - two normal contacts with one big and one small then, five, assume signal, contacts EF 24 F1.4 L - ditto EF 135 F2 L - ditto but 8, assume signal, contacts! Oh dear, its not looking good. Another EF on the list also has 8 contacts. Another EF off the list has 5 contacts! Verdict, it does look like the original release may have been correct? This assumes the other two contacts are for DC voltage supply. Feel free to forward this on, apologies, I have no access to CW, so thanks again Dan. B PS The CANON UK Brochure suggests the EF 24 1.4L 'AL' lens element is resin hardened by UV, formed over a glass spherical base lens (Replicated AL). Canon Japan WWW site says it is ground AL glass? Not that any of this worries me, it is there to be used, but it is clear proof they may get mixed up :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now