AF speed of the new EF-S 35mm macro

leadin2 said:
Looks good! Is it shipping already? Looking forward to see reviews of this lens. Thanks for sharing!
Seems like reviewers already have the lens in hand, no idea when it ships as I have it on preorder and still waiting for confirmation from my dealer. Also in the mean time have a look at sample pics posted by Dpreview: https://www.dpreview.com/samples/0531178962/canon-ef-s-35mm-f2-8-is-stm-macro-sample-gallery

certainly looks like a good lens.
 
Upvote 0
Hi everybody, I shoot this video.

If you want see a detail review you may check this page to see the pictures. Unfortunately language is in Turkish.

http://www.mertgundogdu.com/canon-ef-s-35mm-f2-8-makro-is-stm-incelemesi/

But if you have questions I want to answer them.
 
Upvote 0
No love for this lens here? Found this on amazon, 15 found it helpful. :)

"The Canon EF-s 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM is optimized for macro photography and only fits Canon APS-C cameras like the EOS 80D and Rebel series. Here are my thoughts on this lens after a couple weeks of use:

The reason to buy this lens over the excellent EF 40 2.8 STM or EF 35 3.0 is for the macro mode. Being able to quickly take a tight closeup of a tiny flower, coin or insect is great. However, realize at 1:1 the front element is only about one inch from the subject. That’s okay for inanimate objects but not wee moving critters. Also, a one inch working distance blocks most ambient light, so the integral LED ring light is essential. The LED light, activated with a button on the barrel, is handy albeit only bright enough for a macro subject a few inches from the lens. You’ll still need stronger external illumination once beyond the high magnification macro range.

BUILD: Although lightweight—190g—construction seems reasonably robust: sturdy plastics in barrel and metal mount. For a 1.0x macro lens it’s compact but considerably larger than an EF 40 2.8 STM. Focus distance and depth of field marks are absent from this lens.

A quasi lens hood is provided, the ES-27, but is silly small. It’s sturdy aluminum but more of a fat 49mm filter adapter. I’d rather have a normal sized twist-on hood but at least a hood was provided.

IMAGE QUALITY: Wide open it's sharp and vivid but oh so slightly soft in the corners. Bokeh is pleasantly smooth in defocused areas. By F4.0 it’s pin sharp across the frame. It’s surprisingly flare resistant and landscapes with prominent horizons and/or vertical lines have no noticeable distortion. In short, image quality is very good open wide and excellent a stop down.

AUTO FOCUS is peppy for a macro lens but slower than typical USM zoom. Most significantly, AF is accurate and rarely misses on my 80D. Focus is buttery smooth and great for touchscreen pulls during video. The focus motor is inaudible to my ears.

Like other STM lenses, manual focus is "focus-by-wire"; i.e., the MF ring activates the focus motor but isn’t mechanically coupled to the lens. MF is only active when the shutter button is half-depressed. The MF ring is small but grippy and a lot better than the MF ring on my EF 40 2.8 STM.

IMAGE STABILIZER (IS) yields about three stops of additional hand holdable range for normal photography. IS is quiet and isn't audible on video when using built-in mics. However, unless you can brace you hand on something, most photographers will need to use a tripod when at full macro magnification.

FINAL BLURB: I want excellent image quality in an easy to carry package. And the EF-s 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM hits that mark, making it a great lens for macro on my 80D. While it works fine for general photography it isn’t especially fast nor can it zoom. So if you’re not into macro, this lens is not for you. I found it a dream for quick photos of small flat objects—coins, documents and art work—as there is virtually no distortion in both macro and normal ranges and the IS allows sharp images without busting out my tripod all the time. All in all a wonderful lens for macro loving photgraphers."
 
Upvote 0
My primary gear is a Mark IV, but bought the SL1 for a lighter walk around option. Had been wanting a 35 mm pancake for a good light option and when I saw this, it was as good or better than a pancake. So bought it last week and immediately tested it. Not only was the macro great, but I was surprised how sharp it was using it as a regular lens. Wanted to make sure I had a good lens option before upgrading the SL1. Now just grab it walking around the yard and so far have taken a lot more macro photos in the last week than the last year. About 2 pounds lighter than the other set up and really great quality. Since I was not crazy about the consistency of focusing with the SL1 and seeing the same 9 points on the SL2, added another whopping 3-4 ounce and am using the Rebel 7Ti as the new back up. This lens is really good both on the new rebel and the full frame.
 
Upvote 0
Chaitanya said:
... sample pics posted by Dpreview: https://www.dpreview.com/samples/0531178962/canon-ef-s-35mm-f2-8-is-stm-macro-sample-gallery ...

In the sample gallery posted by Dpreview there's not even a single insect photo – not even dead(!) – since as I said earlier it's very unlikely that you can get this close to any insect. Therefore for insect photography the lens is mostly useless. Last weekend I was walking on the shore of a small stream and I was not able get closer phisically(!) to any of the spiders or insects than 75 cm. So what we need is an EF-S 250mm f/5.6 IS USM Macro with an MFD about 75 cm or more.
 
Upvote 0
You are correct in it depends on what you are photographing. Most of my macro shots are bees, butterflies, flowers and I took one of a fly that happened to be on a flower last week. Sometimes spiders. The shots I took last week were within 3 inches (less than 8 cm), but the bees and butterflies are busy with the pollen so I can just sit there and slowly move closely. So for my use, it works very well. After having fun with this lens last week I went back and pulled out my 100 mm macro and definitely needed the extra distance to capture dragon flies. So definitely need more reach for some macro shots, but since I wanted this for the 56mm light option, the macro is just a nice extra. Like you, not sure this would be my first choice if I only wanted the macro feature. Since you already have the 60 (from your post on the earlier section), I doubt that I would add this either.
 
Upvote 0
Most have decided that its a food photography lens, which requires close focusing, but not 1:1. The working distance at 1:1 is pretty short for a 35mm lens, 100mm or better yet 180-200mm gives a reasonable working distance. I remember back in 1967 when I put a reverse lens ring on my 50mm FL lens for my first CANON SLR. I had to get so close that lighting the subject was extremely difficult.
 
Upvote 0