35mm f/1.4L II rumors?

[Marsu42]

I'd like to see a revamp but I've already got the 24mm, which is a much better lens IMO.

Is your preference based on your personal experience (with your possibly bad 35L copy) or on reviews? I'm asking because I'd like to get a 35L as my next lens but I'm unsure if the 24L isn't more versatile for event photography. But the reviews I read say the 24L is very similar to the 35L or the latter even has an edge.

 

[Loswr]

From what I've seen, the 35L has a very slight IQ edge, and definitely less vignetting, too. Practically speaking, I think it's foolish to pick one of the two over the other based on IQ, they're too equivalent. The real difference is focal length - I set my 24-105mm to each FL for a while, and preferred the 35mm framing (found myself cropping the 24mm shots). Also, the 35L can be used for environmental portraits, whereas with the 24L you'd probably need to be close enough to result in distortion of the subject's features. Another factor is weather sealing if you need to shoot in the rain - the 24L has it, the 35L doesn't.

 

[prestonpalmer]

Another factor is weather sealing if you need to shoot in the rain - the 24L has it, the 35L doesn't.

Another reason im waiting for the 35L II! I get caught in the rain all the time with wedding photography. Ruined only 1 5d2 last year from rain. Stoked about the new 5D3 sealing. And a sealed 35 with a little better IQ than the current one would be a wonderful addition!

 

[RLPhoto]

I'd like to see a revamp but I've already got the 24mm, which is a much better lens IMO.

Is your preference based on your personal experience (with your possibly bad 35L copy) or on reviews? I'm asking because I'd like to get a 35L as my next lens but I'm unsure if the 24L isn't more versatile for event photography. But the reviews I read say the 24L is very similar to the 35L or the latter even has an edge.

The proof is in the pudding for me. Here is the 35mm 1.4L compared to my 50mm 1.4 at the time.

For 1300$ My expectations were the 35mm at least meet the same sharpness level as the baseline 50mm. It didnt and these self-portraits i did that night showed the 35mm's weakness, sharpness wide open, which the 50mm didnt have much of a problem doing. Whatever, people have there preferences and the 24mm 1.4L II is a much much better lens if you don't mind that focal length. Then again, it could have been a bad copy but i doubt it.

 

[Random Orbits]

The proof is in the pudding for me. Here is the 35mm 1.4L compared to my 50mm 1.4 at the time.

For 1300$ My expectations were the 35mm at least meet the same sharpness level as the baseline 50mm. It didnt and these self-portraits i did that night showed the 35mm's weakness, sharpness wide open, which the 50mm didnt have much of a problem doing. Whatever, people have there preferences and the 24mm 1.4L II is a much much better lens if you don't mind that focal length. Then again, it could have been a bad copy but i doubt it.

You probably have a bad copy or one that needs to be retuned by Canon. My 35L focuses more accurately and consistently than my 50L.

 

[RLPhoto]

The proof is in the pudding for me. Here is the 35mm 1.4L compared to my 50mm 1.4 at the time.

For 1300$ My expectations were the 35mm at least meet the same sharpness level as the baseline 50mm. It didnt and these self-portraits i did that night showed the 35mm's weakness, sharpness wide open, which the 50mm didnt have much of a problem doing. Whatever, people have there preferences and the 24mm 1.4L II is a much much better lens if you don't mind that focal length. Then again, it could have been a bad copy but i doubt it.

You probably have a bad copy or one that needs to be retuned by Canon. My 35L focuses more accurately and consistently than my 50L.

Please post some examples of the 35 1.4L @ 1.4. I'd love to see them and it may sway me to get another CPS loan for re-evaluation. Its a lens I'd like to like and see what it can do.

 

[lessmore]

The proof is in the pudding for me. Here is the 35mm 1.4L compared to my 50mm 1.4 at the time.

For 1300$ My expectations were the 35mm at least meet the same sharpness level as the baseline 50mm. It didnt and these self-portraits i did that night showed the 35mm's weakness, sharpness wide open, which the 50mm didnt have much of a problem doing. Whatever, people have there preferences and the 24mm 1.4L II is a much much better lens if you don't mind that focal length. Then again, it could have been a bad copy but i doubt it.

You probably have a bad copy or one that needs to be retuned by Canon. My 35L focuses more accurately and consistently than my 50L.

Please post some examples of the 35 1.4L @ 1.4. I'd love to see them and it may sway me to get another CPS loan for re-evaluation. Its a lens I'd like to like and see what it can do.

There is a full group (with updates daily) for the 35mm f/1.4L on Flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/27449914@N00/pool/

You can get a good idea of how versatile (and sharp) the lens is by checking its actual use by a bunch of different photographers.

 

[Loswr]

The proof is in the pudding for me. Here is the 35mm 1.4L compared to my 50mm 1.4 at the time.
My expectations were the 35mm at least meet the same sharpness level as the baseline 50mm.... self-portraits i did that night showed the 35mm's weakness, sharpness wide open...Then again, it could have been a bad copy but i doubt it.

I can't say for sure that you got a 'bad copy' but assuming the setup for the two shots was the same and your intended focus point was on the near eye, judging by the reflection of the light source, it seems that the 35L is not focused where you intended. Most likely, this just means the lens needed AFMA on your body. The shot with the 35L is suffering from misfocus, meaning you can't fairly judge sharpness (of course, you can certainly unfairly judge the lens to be soft based on a misfocused shot!).

 

[RLPhoto]

The proof is in the pudding for me. Here is the 35mm 1.4L compared to my 50mm 1.4 at the time.
My expectations were the 35mm at least meet the same sharpness level as the baseline 50mm.... self-portraits i did that night showed the 35mm's weakness, sharpness wide open...Then again, it could have been a bad copy but i doubt it.

I can't say for sure that you got a 'bad copy' but assuming the setup for the two shots was the same and your intended focus point was on the near eye, judging by the reflection of the light source, it seems that the 35L is not focused where you intended. Most likely, this just means the lens needed AFMA on your body. The shot with the 35L is suffering from misfocus, meaning you can't fairly judge sharpness (of course, you can certainly unfairly judge the lens to be soft based on a misfocused shot!).

Ok here are three photos linked from pixel-peeper.com (not my photos) <-------Great website if your looking into lenses.

This is the similar performance of my loaned 35mm 1.4L.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/inaffablegong/4020051441/#sizes/o/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/pixelmixture/3959096398/#sizes/o/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/pixelmixture/3957146026/#sizes/o/

These are the best performers I could ever find.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/inaffablegong/3682397859/#sizes/o/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/pixelmixture/3859486209/#sizes/o/



Once again, Here I go again on my own.

My point is that i still don't understand why the 35mm 1.4L is praised so much. If you compare the very best photos from the 35mm to the 24mmII, Its a no brainer.

The 24mmII is a much better piece of glass than the 35mm.(Id expect it to, afterall the 24mmII is NEWER!)
The 24mmII has the color of the 85L, its tack sharp wide open, its weather sealed and its newer.

Here are some 24mm 1.4L II Examples to compare to the 35mm 1.4L

http://www.flickr.com/photos/alex12ga/6249236255/#sizes/o/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/instantvantage/4596003923/#sizes/o/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/instantvantage/4924693402/#sizes/o/

I've also did a quick photo outside also to add these 24mm 1.4L II shots. For 1300$ the 35mm 1.4L couldn't even match what I was getting out of my 350$ 50mm 1.4. The 24mm II did that and even more!

Plus if your on APS-c and full frame is a great combo with the 50L and 135L because...

24mmL - Full Frame

35mm FOV w/24mmL - APSC

50mmL - Full Frame

85mm FOV w/50mmL - APSC

135mmL - Full Frame

200mm FOV W/ 135mmL - APSC

Its a perfect three lens setup w/ 2 Bodies.

 

[keithfullermusic]

i don't think waiting would be wise for this. look at the reasons:

1) canon has been dirt slow at releasing things after announcing them (1DX, 24-70II, etc.)
2) canon hasn't even announced one, let alone CR announcing any serious rumors.
3) canon has increased their prices like woah - and you bet a new 35L, a lens that everyone wants, is going to be priced like woah.
4) buy it used now, and you can sell it if the new one ever comes out. it is a beloved lens, and you would have absolutely no problem selling it because the new one will be waaaaaaaay more expensive. you might lose a 100 bucks, but that would be like paying 100 bucks to rent it for a year or so.
5) the current one is old, but amazing. how much can a new version really be improved (which is probably the reason they haven't made a new one in so long)?

 

[Deleted member 7828]

I have one. I think it's an excellent lens- two main improvements would make it top-notch:

1) weather sealing (a piece of hair/long dust somehow got behind the rear element of mine while outside on a windy day- kind of aggravating but I can't seem to see it in pictures at least, so that's a relief)

2) slight IQ improvement/less purple fringing at 1.4 (at 1.8 and above it's great- peaking around 2.8 in my opinion)

 

[JR]

I have one. I think it's an excellent lens- two main improvements would make it top-notch:

1) weather sealing (a piece of hair/long dust somehow got behind the rear element of mine while outside on a windy day- kind of aggravating but I can't seem to see it in pictures at least, so that's a relief)

2) slight IQ improvement/less purple fringing at 1.4 (at 1.8 and above it's great- peaking around 2.8 in my opinion)

Weather sealing was one of the main reason I did not get the existing model. I am anxious to see the new version annouced though! UNless the new 24-70 II is so good that it will make us forget about prime!

???

 

[Marsu42]

version annouced though! UNless the new 24-70 II is so good that it will make us forget about prime!

I don't think a f2.8 lens will make you forget about a f1.4 one due to the noticeable difference in dof...

 

[JR]

version annouced though! UNless the new 24-70 II is so good that it will make us forget about prime!

I don't think a f2.8 lens will make you forget about a f1.4 one due to the noticeable difference in dof...

Maybe, but it would make for a nice consolation prize in the mean time

 

[keithinmelbourne]

The current 35L is so good, I'm not sure there is much need of improvement. There are other lenses that need more of an update such as the 50 F1.4 or the 17-40L.

 

[matfotografia]

Hello, I am willing to get the 35L 1.4, but i have read that there is one Version 2 is coming soon; how much money do you think it will be on the market? beacause seeing the price of the new 24-70 is almost 1000USD of difference.

Regards,

Miguel