Canon EF 35 f/1.4L II [CR2]

[Canon Rumors]

<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=10909"></g:plusone></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=10909"></a></div>
<strong>The next 35mm…</strong>


The oft rumored EF 35 f/1.4L II is being talked about again. We’re told an announcement for the new “L” prime will only happen once the new <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/843008-USA/Canon_5175B002_EF_24_70mm_f_2_8L_II.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank">EF 24-70 f/2.8L II</a> begun shipping in decent quantity.</p>
<p>That would put the announcement sometime in 2012 with availability probably being in early 2013. One patent for the optical forumla has <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/07/patent-canon-ef-35-f1-4l/" target="_blank">been around for a while</a>.</p>
<p>I’m told as many as 3 prototypes exist, though they have only made it to a very select few photographers.</p>
<p><strong>CRs Take


</strong>I’m pretty confident this lens will be announced sooner than later, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see it paired with a new high megapixel camera.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r </strong></p>

 

[Etienne]

This has to be one of the oldest on-going rumors on the site.

 

[TrumpetPower!]

Considering today's 35 f/1.4 is already superlative...what, aside from the price tag, will be different with the new one?

b&

 

[Canon Rumors]

It could use improvements at 1.4. It CA's pretty badly. Updating coatings and that sort of thing too.

 

[dolina]

Finally!

Now where is the rumor for the 400/5.6 with IS?

 

[Loswr]

Considering today's 35 f/1.4 is already superlative...what, aside from the price tag, will be different with the new one?

Weathersealing, new coatings, and improved corner sharpness come to mind…

 

[dafrank]

Dolina, +1. Those same two, plus the new 24-70 (replacing my current version) and a 17mm TSE would be my most wanted additions to my current lens line-up that would pretty much hold me over for many years to come. My 5D3 and 85 f/1.2 plus a new 35 f/1.4 would be a great and relatively small but super low light knock-around kit.

 

[Dylan777]

Could be my next prime...hope my current 50 f1.4 will survive by then

 

[Stevo2008]

Considering today's 35 f/1.4 is already superlative...what, aside from the price tag, will be different with the new one?

b&

Current 35 1.4 does not have any UD elements. This revision should feature UD elements to reduce chromatic aberration.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I love my 35mm L, but it definitely could be improved by a significant amount. One of the weaknesses is the tendency to front focus closer than 5 ft. I set mine at about 10 ft, which works fine for most images, but its off if I get close.
The depth of field is very shallow near mfd.

 

[CJRodgers]

After months of choosing between the 24 1.4 mkii and 35 1.4 i just bought the 35mm 1.4. Im a bit gutted now because i would have rather had a weather sealed lens. I only paid £750 on ebay though! I wonder if the price of the new lens will increase the value of mine, or if I should consider selling it before it loses too much value.

Ive justified buying L glass to myself that it should hold its value incase I ever need to sell it, but I guess its value really depends on the new price.

 

[Etienne]

After months of choosing between the 24 1.4 mkii and 35 1.4 i just bought the 35mm 1.4. Im a bit gutted now because i would have rather had a weather sealed lens. I only paid £750 on ebay though! I wonder if the price of the new lens will increase the value of mine, or if I should consider selling it before it loses too much value.

Ive justified buying L glass to myself that it should hold its value incase I ever need to sell it, but I guess its value really depends on the new price.

Canon glass, especially L glass, holds it's value well. I've actually sold some lenses for more than I paid.

But the new 35L II will be very pricey to be sure.

 

[dstppy]

We've gotten this far without this? Fine, I'll do it if no one else is gonna:

What? No IS? How could they release it without IS? If they do that, I'm moving to Nikon.

;D

 

[CJRodgers]

After months of choosing between the 24 1.4 mkii and 35 1.4 i just bought the 35mm 1.4. Im a bit gutted now because i would have rather had a weather sealed lens. I only paid £750 on ebay though! I wonder if the price of the new lens will increase the value of mine, or if I should consider selling it before it loses too much value.

Ive justified buying L glass to myself that it should hold its value incase I ever need to sell it, but I guess its value really depends on the new price.

Canon glass, especially L glass, holds it's value well. I've actually sold some lenses for more than I paid.

But the new 35L II will be very pricey to be sure.

Yeah i think it will be pricey, and hopefully mean that my copy holds its value. I definately noticed this as I missed out on the chanced to buy the 24-70 mki just before the new version was released, and now the mki costs an extra 30% used easily.

Thanks for easing my mind though!

 

[preppyak]

I wonder if the price of the new lens will increase the value of mine, or if I should consider selling it before it loses too much value

Well, a few things.

1. The new lens doesn't actually exist. Canon's history for the past year would indicate that by the time they announce the lens, you have a 6ish month waiting period for it to actually arrive at your door, and the possibly return it because something is wrong to get fixed. Even if you avoid the latter part, it's 2013 before you can get it. Which leads to 2:

2. You can use the current 35L and take pictures. That has monetary value, especially if you are a pro who makes money from your camera. Even if you are not, the ability to take quality photos at 35mm doesn't go away cause Canon might release a new version.

3. All lens prices are doubling, not just Canon's. The original 35L is retailing at $1479, which means the new one is probably $2k+. If it's like the 24-70 market, it'll only increase the value of your lens. For example, you paid as much used as what someone would have paid for a new 35L on its release: http://www.canonpricewatch.com/product/00026/Canon-EF-35mm-f1.4L-USM-price.html

All those combine to say that, unless you never use your 35L, you should keep it. And if they end up releasing the new 35L at $1500 and it hurts the value of your current lens, well, consider it a blessing that Canon released the lens you want at a reasonable price

 

[Etienne]

After months of choosing between the 24 1.4 mkii and 35 1.4 i just bought the 35mm 1.4. Im a bit gutted now because i would have rather had a weather sealed lens. I only paid £750 on ebay though! I wonder if the price of the new lens will increase the value of mine, or if I should consider selling it before it loses too much value.

Ive justified buying L glass to myself that it should hold its value incase I ever need to sell it, but I guess its value really depends on the new price.

Canon glass, especially L glass, holds it's value well. I've actually sold some lenses for more than I paid.

But the new 35L II will be very pricey to be sure.

Yeah i think it will be pricey, and hopefully mean that my copy holds its value. I definately noticed this as I missed out on the chanced to buy the 24-70 mki just before the new version was released, and now the mki costs an extra 30% used easily.

Thanks for easing my mind though!

The 35 1.4 is a pretty safe investment. It costs about $100/week to rent it here. You may own it for two - three years, and get many thousands of shot with it, and then resell it at nearly what you paid. It's a bargain in that light.

Several years ago I bought a 40D on sale for $900 and a 17-55 2.8 IS for $850 (Adorama had a one day sale, and B&H matched it). After about 18 months, and perhaps 40,000 shots, I sold the 40D for $600 and the 17-55 for $950. My net cost was about $200 (all figures approximate). You couldn't by a crappy point and shoot for that.

In my experience, buying good gear is cost effective.

I now have the following lenses:

Canon 16-35 II, 24-105 f4 IS, 70-200 2.8L IS II, 50 1.4, 50 1.8
Tokina 11-16 2.8, 50-135 2.8

On 5DII, and 60D(bought for my son)

If I sold all my lenses, I'd get pretty close to what I paid, so no regrets. BTW ... good sales come up regularly. Take advantage of them and you'll do very well with pro gear.

Tip: look at kits and their discounts. I bought the 60D kit with 55-250 IS, for $59 more than without the zoom. I immediately sold the zoom for about $200 and the kit 18-55 for $95 (net $295) new in boxes on eBay. B&H was also offering the 70-200 at an additional $200 off the existing $200 off sale when paired with the camera. So in the end, my price on a new 70-200 2.8L IS II was $1850!

 

[sarangiman]

How about 9 aperture blades, please?

 

[TrumpetPower!]

How about 9 aperture blades, please?

And here I thought <a href="http://www.theonion.com/articles/******-everything-were-doing-five-blades,11056/">five blades</a> was overkill....

b&

 

[sarangiman]

Haha. 5-blades would still give you more sunstar rays than Canon's current 8-blade apertures do.

My point is that by simply adding one extra blade, you'd go from 8-point sunstars to 18-point sunstars.

No downsides. No-brainer, really. All pro-Nikon lenses have 9-blade apertures.

 

[wickidwombat]

woo hooo happy days, i think ill get this instead of the 24-70 since i just picked up a 24-70 mk 1 for $800 which is quite sharp much better than previous versions i have tried anyway. ive nearly broke down and bought the 35 mk1 a few times already