Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II Mentioned [CR1]

[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=13764"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=13764">Tweet</a></div>
<p><strong>A new 35L

</strong>We haven’t heard anything in regards to a replacement for the <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/162614-USA/Canon_2512A002_Wide_Angle_EF_35mm.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank">Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L</a> lens in a long time, however this weekend it was mentioned that the EF 35 f/1.4L II is in fact in testing. There is no imminent announcement date,  and it may be held until a new full frame camera is ready to go in 2014.</p>
<p>We’ve talked about this lens a lot in the past and it has been rumoured to be replaced since the EF 24 f/1.4L II was announced. We also know that <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/07/patent-canon-ef-35-f1-4l/" target="_blank">patents do exist for the optical formula</a>.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/898831-REG/Sigma_340_101_35mm_f_1_4_DG_HSM.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank">Sigma’s 35mm f/1.4 DG</a> seems to be taking a lot of sales from the current Canon equivalent, here’s hoping that forces Canon’s hand on getting a replacement ready.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

 

[teedidy]

I have already saved up for this lens twice! Instead I picked up the 24-70 f/2.8 and the 70-200 f/2.8 IS. Hoping 3rd time is the charm.

 

[jdramirez]

still too wide for my tastes, but it is good to hear.

 

[rpiotr01]

God bless Canon, who only makes good things now when forced to by a competitor.

 

[MK5GTI]

God bless Canon, who only makes good things now when forced to by a competitor.

well said, but my $ already goes to Sigma.

but i guess i will keep buying body from them

 

[Ellen Schmidtee]

Sigma’s 35mm f/1.4 DG seems to be taking a lot of sales from the current Canon equivalent, here’s hoping that forces Canon’s hand on getting a replacement ready.

The Sigma is cheaper than the EF 35mm f/1.4L mk1, and would be all the more so compared to a mk2.

So Canon would have to either cut the mk2's price or make it a magnificent performer. I wouldn't bet a fart on 1st option, so I guess Canon is taking it's time to make the best 35mm f/1.4 mk2 it can make.

 

[rpiotr01]

I don't own the Siggy, but from what I've seen I'm not sure how Canon could make it optically better. Build quality and QC are another story, but is it worth a likely $1,000 premium over the Sigma?

 

[LuCoOc]

Sigma’s 35mm f/1.4 DG seems to be taking a lot of sales from the current Canon equivalent, here’s hoping that forces Canon’s hand on getting a replacement ready.

The Sigma is cheaper than the EF 35mm f/1.4L mk1, and would be all the more so compared to a mk2.

So Canon would have to either cut the mk2's price or make it a magnificent performer. I wouldn't bet a fart on 1st option, so I guess Canon is taking it's time to make the best 35mm f/1.4 mk2 it can make.

If they make it a 35mm f/1.2 and/or insert IS they can bumb up the price to 1.8K - 2K for me. IS-version is never going to happen, though.

 

[Sella174]

Why can't Canon also make L-primes alongside these with more "normal" apertures, like a 35mm f/2 lens?

 

[Hobby Shooter]

God bless Canon, who only makes good things now when forced to by a competitor.

Really? How long do you think the development cycle is for a product like this? A couple of months? Get real dude!

What we have here is a fantastic lens that will be even better.

 

[Viggo]

All of you that is raving on about the super-slowmo AF'd Sigma like it's the end all lens, there is a thread or ten for the people who love it here, please let me enjoy every little word that's rumor and fact about the 35 L II that I've been waiting for for the last 8 years

I do not care what it costs, because if it's anywhere near as much better than the 35 L as the recent upgrades from Canon (70-200, 24-70, TS-E24, all the super teles and so on) it will eat all other primes for breakfast.

I think it will be by far the fastest and best focusing prime under 200mm, and yes I realize that includes the 135.

I can't wait! ;D

 

[shutterlag]

They've gotta be feeling the pain at this point. With the Tamron and Sigma lineups, many of the core lenses everyone buys (18-35 APS-C, 24-70, 70-200, 35, etc.) are as good if not better from 3rd parties. It has to be taking a toll on sales. In this particular case, everyone who needed a better 35mm F1.4 already has or will have the Sigma by the time this mk2 comes out. The remaining mk1 owners that didn't upgrade will have a choice of the Sigma for $900 or the mk2 likely for $2200 minimum $1800? And barring some massively revolutionary engineering break through, it will only be as-good as the Sigma, not better.

I wouldn't be surprised to see changes from Canikon soon, as far as technology lock-down. It's the only way they're going to maintain profit margins. "Foreign Lens Detected, disabling feature XXXX".

 

[deleteme]

I wouldn't be surprised to see changes from Canikon soon, as far as technology lock-down. It's the only way they're going to maintain profit margins. "Foreign Lens Detected, disabling feature XXXX".

Edit: "Foreign Lens Detected, disabling AF"

 

[Hobby Shooter]

They've gotta be feeling the pain at this point. With the Tamron and Sigma lineups, many of the core lenses everyone buys (18-35 APS-C, 24-70, 70-200, 35, etc.) are as good if not better from 3rd parties. It has to be taking a toll on sales. In this particular case, everyone who needed a better 35mm F1.4 already has or will have the Sigma by the time this mk2 comes out. The remaining mk1 owners that didn't upgrade will have a choice of the Sigma for $900 or the mk2 likely for $2200 minimum $1800? And barring some massively revolutionary engineering break through, it will only be as-good as the Sigma, not better.

I wouldn't be surprised to see changes from Canikon soon, as far as technology lock-down. It's the only way they're going to maintain profit margins. "Foreign Lens Detected, disabling feature XXXX".

Yes we all know the Tamrons and Sigmas are much better than the latest 70-200 2.8 and 24-70 2.8 from Canon. Also I am very dissatisfied with my 35L as it has been underperforming since the day I got it.

 

[Loswr]

With the Tamron and Sigma lineups, many of the core lenses everyone buys (18-35 APS-C, 24-70, 70-200, 35, etc.) are as good if not better from 3rd parties.

Except for the Sigma 35/1.4, 'decent or nearly as good from 3rd parties' would be a lot more accurate than 'as good if not better'. Of course, they're cheaper...and there's always a market for cheaper stuff.

 

[KyleSTL]

there's always a market for cheaper stuff.

And there's always a market for the best-of-the-best at any price, but you already knew that. And that is why these things can co-exist, and each can be successful doing what they do.

 

[roadrunner]

there's always a market for cheaper stuff.

And there's always a market for the best-of-the-best at any price, but you already knew that. And that is why these things can co-exist, and each can be successful doing what they do.

And currently, the best of the best happens to be cheaper (The Sigma 35mm f1.4). I'm not a sigma fanboy by any means, as the 35mm is the only sigma I own, but it is absolutely excellent, and cheaper to boot. That is why everyone is saying canon has their hands full.

That said, the sigma isn't perfect. I had to buy 2 copies, as the first one's focus was way off, and the focus slows down greatly in really dark environment. Since I'm a wedding photographer, that's really important to me. So, if this new canon can be just as good optically as the sigma, better quality control, is weather sealed, and maintains quick focus in low light, I would gladly pay a premium over the siggy, maybe around $1300-1500. The problem is, canon will likely price this new lens much higher. It will definitely be interesting.

 

[shutterlag]

With the Tamron and Sigma lineups, many of the core lenses everyone buys (18-35 APS-C, 24-70, 70-200, 35, etc.) are as good if not better from 3rd parties.

Except for the Sigma 35/1.4, 'decent or nearly as good from 3rd parties' would be a lot more accurate than 'as good if not better'. Of course, they're cheaper...and there's always a market for cheaper stuff.

I would submit the Tamron 24-70 definitely better than the Canon, depending on your use case. The equivalent to the 18-35mm F1.8 Sigma doesn't even exist in the Canon or Nikon lineups, so that would also be "better" if not "holy crap better". That leaves the Tammy 70-200, which dxomark has as edging out the Canon mk2 by a hair. I'll stand by my "as good if not better" statement.

 

[Etienne]

I'll probably get the 35 f/2 due to it's smaller size and lower weight, if the price drops.

Other than that, I'd rather have a new and improved, cracking sharp 16-35 f/2.8L III, 50 f/1.4 II (L), 50 f/1.2L II, or a really good 20mm f/2.8 (L), a 135mm f/2L IS II that can take teleconverters, a 200 f/2.8L IS II that can take teleconverters ... In that order. The 35 f/1.4 II comes after all these for me.

 

[switters]

Not a Sigma fan boy by any stretch of the imagination, but have to agree that it will be difficult to improve on the Sigma 35 optically. The thing is razor sharp at f/1.4 and doesn't really have any optical flaws to speak of. There's a reason people rave about it.

AF is another story. I'm on my 3rd copy of this lens. The first two were erratic and inconsistent, so I returned them (which was a shame, because it's such an incredible lens). This 3rd copy is better, and using the USB dock I think I've been able to calibrate it so that it's very accurate. Still, that's taken a lot of time and effort (and 3 copies, to boot). If the Canon 35L II was out now, I probably would have been willing to pay $1,500 for it if it matched the Sigma's optics but had more consistent AF out of the box (like my other Canon lenses typically do).