October 30, 2014, 07:54:02 PM

Author Topic: 35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott  (Read 18652 times)

JumboShrimp

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 144
    • View Profile
35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« on: April 05, 2014, 03:42:25 PM »

canon rumors FORUM

35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« on: April 05, 2014, 03:42:25 PM »

drjlo

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 645
    • View Profile
Re: 35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« Reply #1 on: April 05, 2014, 04:33:03 PM »
A nice read for those deciding among the 35 mm options out there.  I especially concur with this point:

"But one of the things I do besides reading reviews when I am doing research before purchasing is to look at pictures taken WITH the lens.  I realize that there will always be a very wide disparity in the quality of photos because of the skill level of the photographer.  But after a while you start to get a sense of how the lens performs in a variety of situations.

Lenses are more than the sum of their parts or even review scores, and I find that particularly true with fast prime lenses.  The 35L, for example, produces images with a frequently beautiful “feel” to them that goes beyond technical merit.  The images frequently look “pro” or “magic” (and that’s a good thing!)  I kept waiting for the WOW images from the Sigma…but I rarely saw them.  The Sigma just seems more clinical."

privatebydesign

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2600
  • Ermintrude says "moo"
    • View Profile
Re: 35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« Reply #2 on: April 05, 2014, 05:07:09 PM »
The IS is not Hybrid IS, it is just OIS, it does not allow for shift like the HIS in the 100 L Macro.

The IS does not switch off one axis when you pan, it still runs both but doesn't try to counteract the steady motion of the pan, this means you can pan at any angle and still get the full benefits of the IS.

But nice insight into the lens and, as always, some nice illustrative images to go along with it.
Never look down on anybody, unless you are helping them up.

RavePixel

  • SX60 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
    • Rave Pixel LLC
Re: 35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« Reply #3 on: April 05, 2014, 05:16:09 PM »
I used this lens to take one of my best pictures (see below).  It is a spectacular lens for the price, and IMO as a whole superior to the aging 35L - the 35 IS is slightly sharper, has better bokeh stopped down, it is smaller, lighter, more economical, and as a bonus has IS.  Whenever I go to NYC this is the lens I take.

On the flipside, I would like to see a more modern 35L II design.
« Last Edit: April 05, 2014, 06:38:51 PM by RavePixel »

KKCFamilyman

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 459
    • View Profile
    • Nicholas J Allo Photography
Re: 35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« Reply #4 on: April 05, 2014, 11:53:00 PM »
Nice review. Thanks for taking the time.
1Dx, 5D3, 16-35 f4 L IS, 24-70L II, 70-200 f2.8 IS II L, Sigma 35mm 1.4, 85mm 1.2 ii L, 100mm 2.8L macro, 70-300 L, 40mm 2.8, 3 x 600ex rt, ST-E3

zlatko

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 354
    • View Profile
    • http://www.zlatkobatistich.com
Re: 35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« Reply #5 on: April 06, 2014, 12:58:05 AM »
Great review!  I agree with every point.  It is one of my favorite lenses.

Eldar

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1666
    • View Profile
    • Flickr
Re: 35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« Reply #6 on: April 06, 2014, 02:34:13 AM »
Very nice review Dustin!

It is good to see an image and photography based review, rather than chart porn. I have the Sigma and despite it´s phenomenal sharpness, I can relate to all your concerns and worries and why you decided not to get one. Clinical is a descriptive word.
5DIII, 1DX, 8-15/4L, 16-35 f4L IS, 24-70/2.8L II, 70-200/2.8L IS II, 70-300/4-5.6L IS, 200-400/4L IS 1.4x, Zeiss 15/2.8, 17/4L TS-E, Zeiss 21/2.8, 24/3.5L TS-E II, Zeiss 35/1.4, Zeiss Otus 55/1.4, Zeiss Otus 85/1.4, 100/2.8L IS Macro, Zeiss 135/2, 600/4L IS II

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« Reply #6 on: April 06, 2014, 02:34:13 AM »

LOLID

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile
Re: 35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« Reply #7 on: April 06, 2014, 03:31:23 AM »
This is the third review I read from Dustin Abbott. Great review once again. Very honest.

I was seriously considering the reviewed lens but got caught up by the announcement of the Sigma 50 1.4 Art (not sure I want to buy a 35mm AND a 50mm). Anyway I might end up just buying the 40mm instead, so here comes my

question: how does the 35mm f/2 IS compare to the 40mm f/2.8?

I understand the max aperture small difference, the 300$ price tag gap, and the former being a tad wider, but what in terms of:
- sharpness (@ 2v2.8 and 2.8v2.8)
- distortion
- bokeh rendering
- Dustin's "WOW" effect

Thanks in advance.
O.

Sporgon

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1991
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • View Profile
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: 35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« Reply #8 on: April 06, 2014, 07:20:23 AM »
question: how does the 35mm f/2 IS compare to the 40mm f/2.8?

I understand the max aperture small difference, the 300$ price tag gap, and the former being a tad wider, but what in terms of:
- sharpness (@ 2v2.8 and 2.8v2.8)
- distortion
- bokeh rendering
- Dustin's "WOW" effect
O.

I don't have the 35 IS but have researched it and seriously considered it but I already have the 40.

Sharpness at 2.8 is very similar. If you're going to go test charts the 40 is slightly ahead, more so in the corners despite being fully open. So when both are fully open the 40 is ahead.

The 40 has virtually zero distortion (0.6 barrel), the 35 IS 1%, which is actually really good for the focal length and better than the old 35/2.

Personally I think the bokeh of the 40 at 2.8 is very pleasing. With my limited time on the 35IS I can't comment.

The WOW effect ? Again I think the 40 has it.

With the 35 IS you're getting IS, better manual focus ring, F2, distance scale and less money left in your pocket. You are not getting better 'IQ'; the 40 is exceptional value for money in that respect.

However if I hadn't already got the 40 I think I'd go for the 35IS now it's come down in price.

StudentOfLight

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 323
  • I'm on a life-long journey of self-discovery
    • View Profile
Re: 35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« Reply #9 on: April 06, 2014, 08:03:10 AM »
This is the third review I read from Dustin Abbott. Great review once again. Very honest.

I was seriously considering the reviewed lens but got caught up by the announcement of the Sigma 50 1.4 Art (not sure I want to buy a 35mm AND a 50mm). Anyway I might end up just buying the 40mm instead, so here comes my

question: how does the 35mm f/2 IS compare to the 40mm f/2.8?

I understand the max aperture small difference, the 300$ price tag gap, and the former being a tad wider, but what in terms of:
- sharpness (@ 2v2.8 and 2.8v2.8)
- distortion
- bokeh rendering
- Dustin's "WOW" effect

Thanks in advance.
O.
Sharpness:
f/2 vs f/2.8 - They are very similiar wide open however the 35IS has more vignetting and softer corners
f/2.8 vs f/2.8 - The 35IS is sharper in the centre and mid-frame with the corners sharpness being similar. The vignetting also starts clearing up nicely by f/2.8.

Distortion: (For me this is a non-issue with these lenses)
The 40mm pancake is slightly better, neither of them is bad.

Bokeh:
The 35mm blurs the background better and has a better rendering.

I can't comment on Dustin's WOW factor...

I think more significant factor in your purchasing decision is build-quality. The 35IS is a more solidly built tool whereas the pancake needs to be carefully looked after. The 35IS has USM which focuses faster, the 40mm has STM which allows smoother focus transitions for video on STM-compatible bodies?

Do you intend shooting video? Is your camera body STM compatible?
Fantasy Gear:
TS-E: 45mm f/2.8 L-II,  EF: 40mm f/0.8,  100mm f/1.4,  35-85mm f/1.8, 
EF with 1.4xInt: 100-300mm f/4 ,  500mm f/5.6 L

LOLID

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile
Re: 35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« Reply #10 on: April 06, 2014, 12:08:46 PM »
Thanks Sporgon and Studentoflight for your prompt and helpful responses.

It looks like in terms of IQ (all factors combined) the 35 /2 IS and 40 /2.8 are quite similar.

I do not intend to shoot video (yet). I have a 5D3 and I believe firmware updates (since 1.1.3) made it compatible. Please let me know if it is not the case.

Unless I get comments leaning strongly towards the 35 IS with compelling arguments, I am going to purchase the 40mm. Even though the f/2 and IS would be a clear advantage in low light situations (let apart the build quality as I take great care of my equipment) it cannot justify a $400 (or 300%) difference in price.

Dustin Abbott rightly pointed out that the original pricing of the 35 IS by Canon was clearly off. But even at $599, and even with an excellent build quality, I have psychological barrier to spend such amount on a non-L lens. But that might just be me!

Thanks again.

Dylan777

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4217
    • View Profile
Re: 35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« Reply #11 on: April 06, 2014, 01:46:21 PM »
Very nice review Dustin!

It is good to see an image and photography based review, rather than chart porn
. I have the Sigma and despite it´s phenomenal sharpness, I can relate to all your concerns and worries and why you decided not to get one. Clinical is a descriptive word.

+1
Body: 1DX -- 5D III
Zoom: 16-35L f4 IS -- 24-70L II -- 70-200L f2.8 IS II
Prime: 40mm -- 85L II -- 135L -- 200L f2 IS -- 400L f2.8 IS II

batotman

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Re: 35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« Reply #12 on: April 06, 2014, 01:48:17 PM »
I've had this lens for the last month. I think he nails it. I also have the old 35F2 and it is nice but it's definitely not close to the new one.

As for the 40 2.8, I've never cared for it. I tried to make myself like it but found myself unimpressed with both copies I've owned. The images are okay but the focal length is odd on both my 6D and T4i. For the money it's good, but I don't think it's a great lens.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« Reply #12 on: April 06, 2014, 01:48:17 PM »

Arctic Photo

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 168
    • View Profile
Re: 35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« Reply #13 on: April 06, 2014, 02:03:43 PM »
Finally, thank you!

Frodo

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 71
    • View Profile
Re: 35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« Reply #14 on: April 06, 2014, 02:24:01 PM »
Yes, I like Dustin's reviews - thanks Dustin.
And yes, I like this lens - thanks Canon.
I bought it for the small size, the sharpness and relatively small depth of field wide open, and for the IS.
Its weakness is bad coma wide open - I've posted elsewhere on this site about that.
If gear matters: 5DII, 7D, G11, Samyang 14/2.8, EF 24-105/4, EF 35/2.0IS, EF 50/2.5 macro, EF 85/1.8, EF 200/2.8II, EF 400/5.6, Ext 1.4x, Lifesize conv, Ext tube EF25, 430EXII, 270EX, Yongnuo 603C

canon rumors FORUM

Re: 35/2 IS Review by Dustin Abbott
« Reply #14 on: April 06, 2014, 02:24:01 PM »