April 20, 2014, 02:44:58 PM

Author Topic: Canon 35mm f/2 IS Review  (Read 5072 times)

dswatson83

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 243
    • View Profile
Canon 35mm f/2 IS Review
« on: December 28, 2012, 04:54:29 PM »
New review of the Canon 35mm f/2.

http://learningcameras.com/reviews/7-lenses/89-canon-35mm-f2-is-review

Canon 35mm f/2 IS Review Small | Large
« Last Edit: December 28, 2012, 09:37:01 PM by dswatson83 »

canon rumors FORUM

Canon 35mm f/2 IS Review
« on: December 28, 2012, 04:54:29 PM »

BruinBear

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 99
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 35mm f/2 IS Review
« Reply #1 on: December 28, 2012, 06:31:58 PM »
Does it bother anyone else that he thinks f2.0-f/2.8 is 3/4 of a stop and f/1.8 to f/2.8 is a full stop
6D, 60D, 17-40L, 70-200L 2.8 IS II, 24-105L, Sigma 35mm 1.4, 40mm Pancake, Helios 44-M4 (55mm f/2), 1.4X Extender III, 430EX II, Yongnuo YN-622 Flash Triggers.
EOS-M, 22mm, EF Adapter.
And Canonet QL-17 GIII Film!

Quasimodo

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 801
  • Easily intrigued :)
    • View Profile
    • 500px.com
Re: Canon 35mm f/2 IS Review
« Reply #2 on: December 28, 2012, 06:36:54 PM »
New review of the Canon 35mm f/2.

http://learningcameras.com/reviews/7-lenses/89-canon-35mm-f2-is-review

Canon 35mm f/2 IS Review


Thanks for the post. I just bought the Siggy 35, but still interesting to watch this. He makes a strong argument for the video shooters (of which I am not one of). Apart from the vignetting issue at F2.0,... Am I the only one that thought that the bokeh did not look particularly good on this lens?
5DII w/grip, (1Ds III), 3x600 EX RT, ST-E3
Canon: 8-15L, 16-35L II,  24-105L , 70-200L IS II, (200/2L) 17L TS, 135L, 100L, 2x III TC, 40 F2.8 STM, 50 F1.4. Sigma 35 F1.4 Art, Sigma 85 F1.4, Sigma 150-500.
www.500px.com/gerhard1972

CharlieB

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 302
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 35mm f/2 IS Review
« Reply #3 on: December 28, 2012, 08:13:19 PM »
Its a fluff review.  Technically flawed.. .. and too much price ranting

JoeDavid

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 92
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 35mm f/2 IS Review
« Reply #4 on: December 28, 2012, 08:22:27 PM »
Does it bother anyone else that he thinks f2.0-f/2.8 is 3/4 of a stop and f/1.8 to f/2.8 is a full stop

Just because he can buy a lens doesn't make him a reviewer; it doesn't even make him a photographer  ::)

barracuda

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 53
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 35mm f/2 IS Review
« Reply #5 on: December 28, 2012, 08:44:43 PM »
Does it bother anyone else that he thinks f2.0-f/2.8 is 3/4 of a stop and f/1.8 to f/2.8 is a full stop

It sure does damage his credibility. The review starts with an overall bias against the lens due to the cost of it, and he seems unable to do an objective review.
5D3, 5D2, 6D, 60Da, T4i, SL1, EOS M, G15, G11 converted to 720nm infrared, Powershot S100, Sony RX100, and lots of lenses.

dswatson83

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 243
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 35mm f/2 IS Review
« Reply #6 on: December 28, 2012, 09:30:30 PM »
The review starts with an overall bias against the lens due to the cost of it, and he seems unable to do an objective review.
Why would price not be a valid part of a review, especially for a non-L lens. The price is the first thing that happens when you buy a lens and open the box so that would obviously be the first thing you would talk about. If you are going to produce a lens 2-3 times that of the original 35mm f/2, it better be awesome. The review was also based on a bunch of tests later on and not just his random opinion so i'm not sure how biased it can be.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 35mm f/2 IS Review
« Reply #6 on: December 28, 2012, 09:30:30 PM »

Zv

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1036
    • View Profile
    • Zee-bytes
Re: Canon 35mm f/2 IS Review
« Reply #7 on: December 29, 2012, 04:07:13 AM »
Hmmm .... Not the best review in the world. I think he mentioned the price about 15 times, we got it mate!!!  Though where I live the Canon 35 f/2 IS is about $100 cheaper than the Sigma. He also talked a lot about the vignetting, then went on to say it can easily fixed in post. So why mention it over and over? That is a known issue with all wide lenses.  Also I didn't like his bokeh test, what the heck was that? Surely this time of year there are Christmas lights all over the place??

 ???
5D II | 7D | EOS M + 22 f2 | 17-40L | 24-105L | 70-200 f4L IS | 135L | Samyang 14mm f/2.8 | Sigma 50 f/1.4

barracuda

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 53
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 35mm f/2 IS Review
« Reply #8 on: December 29, 2012, 04:21:45 AM »
The review starts with an overall bias against the lens due to the cost of it, and he seems unable to do an objective review.
Why would price not be a valid part of a review, especially for a non-L lens. The price is the first thing that happens when you buy a lens and open the box so that would obviously be the first thing you would talk about. If you are going to produce a lens 2-3 times that of the original 35mm f/2, it better be awesome. The review was also based on a bunch of tests later on and not just his random opinion so i'm not sure how biased it can be.

Point well taken. Of course price should always be an integral part of any lens review, but I just felt that price had a disproportionate weighting in this case. I prefer reviews that concentrate on the merits of the lens, leaving cost and value to the discretion of the reader.

Also, keep in mind that the inclusion of IS will generally add a few hundred dollars to the cost of a lens, so we're not exactly comparing apples to apples.
5D3, 5D2, 6D, 60Da, T4i, SL1, EOS M, G15, G11 converted to 720nm infrared, Powershot S100, Sony RX100, and lots of lenses.

meli

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 162
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 35mm f/2 IS Review
« Reply #9 on: December 29, 2012, 07:49:53 AM »
18-55 has IS too, it doesnt add 500$ over the normal 18-55

dswatson83

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 243
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 35mm f/2 IS Review
« Reply #10 on: December 29, 2012, 11:18:23 AM »
18-55 has IS too, it doesnt add 500$ over the normal 18-55
Good point. I think Canon made a good but safe lens for the price of something awesome. How do you not make a good f/2 prime lens. Even the 50mm f/1.8 looks good at f/2 and like you said, the IS added $30 to the price of the 18-55. The build too is on par with most $400 lenses. Felt just like the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 cropped sensor lens to me.

barracuda

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 53
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 35mm f/2 IS Review
« Reply #11 on: December 29, 2012, 02:02:10 PM »
18-55 has IS too, it doesnt add 500$ over the normal 18-55

Rather than cherry picking one of Canon's least expensive lenses out there, average the cost of IS over its non-IS counterpart throughout Canon's lineup. Some of the 70-200mm lenses come to mind.

Btw, I'm not defending Canon nor this particular lens. I don't even have it. The lens is expensive, even if the street price were to come down a couple hundred dollars a few months after its introduction, as was the case with the new 24/28mm 2.8 IS lenses.  My comments were about the review, which I didn't find very credible, especially when the reviewer didn't appear to understand a fundamental concept like f-stops. If someone is going to publish a lens review, at least get that right...
5D3, 5D2, 6D, 60Da, T4i, SL1, EOS M, G15, G11 converted to 720nm infrared, Powershot S100, Sony RX100, and lots of lenses.

Sporgon

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1453
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • View Profile
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: Canon 35mm f/2 IS Review
« Reply #12 on: December 29, 2012, 02:29:15 PM »
Regarding the f stop - it is a review by Learning cameras after all !  ;)

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 35mm f/2 IS Review
« Reply #12 on: December 29, 2012, 02:29:15 PM »

kubelik

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 796
    • View Profile
    • a teatray in the sky
Re: Canon 35mm f/2 IS Review
« Reply #13 on: December 29, 2012, 03:35:06 PM »
this guy has some real-world samples of the 35mm f/2 IS: http://eyvindness.zenfolio.com/35mmf2isusm/h4ed589de#h4f0f869e

I do see the slight ringing effect in the bokeh but overall it looks good.  I'm also annoyed by the fact that the reviewer in this video can't get his stops right ... he even refers to the lens as an f/2.8 at one point.

need to see some head-to-heads between this lens and the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 before we can determine which one has the better overall image quality.  I'm fairly sure that sharpness will favor the Sigma, but I'm not so sure about other things.  and I know it's a niche usage, but I really wish some of the reviewers would take a look and see how the coma and astigmatism on these lenses are.

CharlieB

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 302
    • View Profile
Re: Canon 35mm f/2 IS Review
« Reply #14 on: December 29, 2012, 05:11:30 PM »
I'm holding off....

Gotta see what Canon brings out soon.  Would I trade a little image quality for IS on the 35/2 ?  Probably.
Would I get a 50/1.4 IS before the 35/2 IS - hard choice.  I'm a real "35" type of shooter, but, I've got the 16-35 and the 24-105 that both cover that range - and the shooting I do with the 35 is mostly for social events, and I'm getting to appreciate the flexibility of the zooms.  Tough call.

I'm gonna hold out, see what they do... if there's no 50/1.4 IS coming soon... I'll probably do the 35/2.0IS.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon 35mm f/2 IS Review
« Reply #14 on: December 29, 2012, 05:11:30 PM »