« on: July 21, 2014, 08:06:24 AM »
I recently got a 10 month old 35mm f2 IS. On top of my two month old 40mm pancake.
I love the pictures coming out from pancake when it came, so sharp, so cute, so light, no distortion, i can make head shots with no enlarge parts.
6D and 40mm combination as light as like i was holding my nexus 7.
Recently, I invested on 35mm f2 IS.
I could not love the pictures at f2, portrait subject is not sharp, and its just giving me a headache looking at it.
at f2.8 picture almost identical on both lens.
I shoot 1/60 and faster so i eliminate the love for IS.
Field of view wise, with 40mm i can take one step backward and field of view is the same.
Maybe I'm doing it wrong. And need more time to play with 35mm. Or I could rent a 35L and see how it fairs.
again f2 is not a keeper at all. or my copy is not sharp as per normal.
Agree with others to take another look at AFMA. It is unusual to have poor focus at f/2 and good focus at f/2.8 if the AFMA is set correctly. I once had a lens that had poor focus and had to be sent in to Canon to be recalibrated/focus adjusted but that lens gave soft pictures even at f/5.6. When you recheck the AFMA, check to see that lens elements don't show major signs of decentering (uneven blur from corner to corner). Also see if shots taken at f/2 with live view can satisfy your requirements for this lens.
The fact that both the 40 and 35 appear similarly sharp at f/2.8 and smaller is a credit to the value/performance of the 40. The 35 may be better at f/2.8 but it won't matter or be noticeable in many situtations.
The 35 does have a bit more distortion than the 40, but it is more likely that the increased distortion that you see with the 35 is a function of the closer distance between you and the subject to achieve similar framing. That one step difference can make a big difference in perspective when the subject is close...