DO lenses and the future

Are the DO lenses a thing of the past? Will they go away? New DO lenses don´t appear anymore it seems

Liu

Looks like it's still up to date to me.

http://www.usa.canon.c​om …tegoryid=150&mo​delid=9996

http://www.bhphotovide​o.com …00mm_f_4_5_5_6_​DO_IS.html

It seems like diffractive optics has a long way to go before it can compete with refractive lenses.

In a world of physics where the finest lenses are "diffraction limited", sponsoring the diffractive optics approach can be a blasphemy in itself, however, leaving jokes aside, there are certain merrits in the DO technology.

Lack of CA is one thing and small size-low weight is another.

It might just be like zoom lenses, 30 years ago, were considered a joke for the laymen. Even if currently primes can be considered better, there are several zoom lenses that can give most primes a very hard run for their money.

Perhaps the trick in DO is finding the right material and process to create so fine sculpturing that the lens behaves in a linear fashion like curved glass.

Aspheric surfaces were science fiction 20 years ago. They are commonplace nowadays.

The trick question is, will DO survive through it's adolescence and reach maturity? The competition is fierce. It is perhaps a question of using them in compact and ultra thin pocket sized cameras.

Ting_Liu wrote in post #4530114
Are the DO lenses a thing of the past? Will they go away? New DO lenses don´t appear anymore it seems

Like SaSi put so well, it's more like DO lenses are in their infancy - rather than the other way around. Canon introduced DO with the EF 400mm f/4 DO IS USM lens. The problem is that it's rather pricey - but does seem to be very capable of great images. The next lens introduced is the controversial EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM. Controversial because there are people that love and hate the lens. Apparently DO is not a perfect technology yet and does have some shortcomings (odd halo in OOF areas, target-shapped OOF highlights and prone to flare being the common issues reported). Despite being DO, the lens isn't as light as you'd expect and DO or not, when fully extended it's still a bit long. Otherwise, it makes a great travel lens as at its shortest, it's quite small and compact. The EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM is lighter and better - just not as compact at 70mm.

I'd love to see DO mature as it has a lot to offer. The price needs to come down as well.

Ting_Liu wrote in post #4530114
Are the DO lenses a thing of the past? Will they go away?

DO is not inferior, but different than normal refractive lenses. It's quite a daring move from Canon to propose two upmarket diffractive lenses, and a technical achievement that they made a DO IS zoom. Both are in fact special purpose lenses.

Whether Canon will continue developing them will solely depend on sales. Production cost of DO elements is allegedly cumbersome and very expensive because of the percentage that is rejected. DO lenses will probably remain niche products for some time to come.

With professional wildlife/landscape shooters, both DO's are quite popular, especially the 400/4 DO IS, since it really cuts down the weight and is actually very good.

SaSi wrote in post #4530305
Aspheric surfaces were science fiction 20 years ago.

Francis Smethwick made the first aspheric lenses in 1667. Surfaces?

cosworth wrote in post #4535242
Francis Smethwick made the first aspheric lenses in 1667. Surfaces?

http://www.europa.com/​~telscope/bldlp5.txt

"...aspherizing surfaces."

Thanks for that. I recall this from a while back and the z was they key.

cosworth wrote in post #4535283
Thanks for that. I recall this from a while back and the z was they key.

It sounded completely weird to me... And still does.