EF 35 f/1.4L and EF 35 f/1.4L II MTF Comparison
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
Han said:
The price, while it "feels very high" is not out of reality for a premium, top-of-the-line Canon branded L series. Let me explain. Everyone likes to compare Canon with the Sigma Art Series, and while it is a valid comparison, at least from an optical viewpoint, a better comparison is to compare it with something more similar. For example, one can make a comparison between a Corvette and a Lamborghini (spelling?) for horsepower, straightline acceleration, etc. But the reality is, for a true "autophile", there is no real comparison between the two. Likewise, with a Canon L series, not only are you buying a lens that is guaranteed to work with all current Canon bodies, but also with future bodies seamlessly. Moreover, resale value, for some, will also be a consideration. Another guarantee: Canon will hold resale way above and for a much longer time than the Sigma (or any other third-party lens). The only exception to this rule, and in my opinion, a better comparison, is to the Zeiss 35mm 1.4 Distagon T lens for Canon. This lens is currently selling from B&H photo for $1,543USD. And note this price is with an instant savings of $300USD.
The other point I would make, is that Canon doesn't necessarily drive business decisions based on what the competition is doing. (Certainly this has some weight on what they do and bring to market, but is not the sole driver.) This new lens is looking like another "world beater" like another poster referred to a few other of Canon's more recent offerings. And with the new BR lens group/element sounds like this might be a stellar performer for astrophotographers and those that like to do nighttime landscapes - virtually no Coma. But we shall see.
A caveat: I will in all likelihood never own this lens, as I am not a professional photographer, nor equipped with a bottomless wallet. But I am very excited by what Canon continues to do. Especially when one considers all of the different businesses/products they make. (Similar to Nikon)
Obviously not as versatile as a zoom, but this could be a fantastic lens for weddings/environmental portraits. Especially if wanting or limited to using available light. Just think of the images one could capture in low light with this mounted on a 6D...
Cheers.
Upvote
0
mackguyver said:
This lens is a remarkable upgrade after looking at those samples!
In particular the one I know the MkI 35 would ruin is the shot of the binoculars http://www.canon.co.uk/Images/L262_5DS_CINC_Sample_Image_10_tcm14-1290743.JPG the right side, highlight edge of that would be a horrible mess of CA.
Upvote
0
[/quote]
resale value, for some, will also be a consideration. Another guarantee: Canon will hold resale way above and for a much longer time than the Sigma (or any other third-party lens).
[/quote]
This is quite valid for the most popular lenses. I bought the 35L new, used it for two years, sold it for a $50 profit. The 70-200 2.8 IS II I did even better, buying used and selling for almost $200 profit two years later. Both sold for the price of new at the time, the buyer only saved sales tax and risked buying unseen for that small savings. Canon is really incredible in this respect.
resale value, for some, will also be a consideration. Another guarantee: Canon will hold resale way above and for a much longer time than the Sigma (or any other third-party lens).
[/quote]
This is quite valid for the most popular lenses. I bought the 35L new, used it for two years, sold it for a $50 profit. The 70-200 2.8 IS II I did even better, buying used and selling for almost $200 profit two years later. Both sold for the price of new at the time, the buyer only saved sales tax and risked buying unseen for that small savings. Canon is really incredible in this respect.
Upvote
0
Random Orbits said:
+1
Consistent AF performance at f/1.4 would easily be worth +$500 to me over the Sigma. I am not joking.
You buy an autofocusing f/1.4 lens to autofocus at f/1.4. I don't mind the need to tune it with AFMA or a USB dock, but once it's dialed in, it should be consistent. In my hands, the Sigma was not, but I know a lot of people love that lens.
- A
Upvote
0
Hi there, Eldar, thanks for the note. I'm still aliveEldar said:
. My health has greatly improved and I even made it out to shoot recently. Unfortunately my job has gotten extremely busy, limiting my time on CR as well. This lens certainly intrigues me, but I'm actually more excited about the thoughts of a new 24L, 50L, and 85L in the years to come with less CA wide open. If they are as good as this lens looks to be, then Canon's got a whole new standard they will be rolling out. I guess the rumors of fast lenses being dead are false.
Long live the fast prime!
Upvote
0
mackguyver said:Hi there, Eldar, thanks for the note. I'm still aliveEldar said:
This lens certainly intrigues me, but I'm actually more excited about the thoughts of a new 24L, 50L, and 85L in the years to come with less CA wide open. If they are as good as this lens looks to be, then Canon's got a whole new standard they will be rolling out. I guess the rumors of fast lenses being dead are false.
Long live the fast prime!
I think you're right.. and I think it's strategic on Canons part.
The lensrentals MTF data shows canons latest lenses are being made far more consistantly, which means better build precision. Once you've got that production precision and a high MP sensor, then you can go about releasing higher resolution optics as you can now make them in volume and see the difference in the final image, yes they'll cost more, but photographers can see the difference.
That these three things have come together is, IMHO, no accident.
Upvote
0
There are plenary of photographers who want the best. I feel the price will be justified considering Leica,
Their 35mm is costlier and doesn't even autofocus.
As regards DXO. This will rate high.
The Zeiss Otus may have quality to contend with. Keep in mind, If Zeiss made an Otus 35mm it would cost $5k.
Their 35mm is costlier and doesn't even autofocus.
As regards DXO. This will rate high.
The Zeiss Otus may have quality to contend with. Keep in mind, If Zeiss made an Otus 35mm it would cost $5k.
Upvote
0
Eldar said:
Well, 2069 EUR in Czech republic, which is about 2333 USD. Sucks
500 USD difference? I may as well buy ticket to NYC, go to B&H, make myself a nice trip and still spend less than buying it in EU, dammit!
Upvote
0
Random Orbits said:
The Sigma AF definitely an issue. I own both the 35mm & 50mm Art lenses and the Sigma Dock. I went thru the ringer with it. I bought an 35mm first...and thought that the AF was "fine"...then I bought a 50mm and it was a nightmare...I could not get it to focus correctly even with the dock. It was "spotty. I sent it back to B&H and requested another copy...and, after "carefully" dialing in the focus on the Dock it has been fabulous. I usually only use single-point AF so....I do not know about other AF settings. The AF works with central or edge AF points....I then double checked my 35mm "very carefully" after my experience with the 50mm and found it to be "off" more than my new 50mm. So...I used the Dock to adjust the 35mm in all 4 focus zones as I had the 50mm and since that time...I have found that both lenses are just incredible. Yes..at f/1.4. I double checked before typing this...I tested at infinity, medium distance and close..very close at f1.4. They are spot on. Its funny while I was doing that I put my Canon 100mm Macro f/2.8L IS on the my 5DIII and it MISSED focus on a candle wick...focusing on the rim of the candle behind it when the focus point was dead on the wick. Second shot it nailed it, though.
So ...I guess no lens/camera AF situation is perfect....and I have to say...I do not blame anyone who does not want to go thru the process I had to go thru to get great results from the Sigma's....I mean..hey I spend almost a couple of thousand dollars on two lenses and I have to dedicate a lot of time, buy a dock and jump through hoops to get them to perform precisely. Yeah..its annoying...but for me ...for what is out there (and even this stellar looking new 35mm f/1.4II from Canon at $1800), I think I have two very stellar lenses for what I have paid for them. I know that some agree with that outlook and some don't....but I just love some of the images that I have been able to create with these lenses. Really love them when I want low DOF.
Upvote
0
Khalai said:Eldar said:
Well, 2069 EUR in Czech republic, which is about 2333 USD. Sucks
You'll have to wait for the grey imports
As a guide you can get grey imports of the 11-24 for £2099 inc VAT vs £2799 inc VAT and the 5Ds for £2375 inc VAT vs £2999 inc VAT. The 5Ds was released less than 3 months ago.. On that basis you ought to be able to get your mits on a grey 35LII by end of November at the very latest.
Upvote
0
Virtually all wide aperture lenses have issues with longitudinal CA's (Purple Fringing).
The BR lens is a huge advance in technology.
LOCA's cannot be removed by software. Lightroom will find the purple fringing and turn it to gray, but the fringing is still there.
Just the elimination of LOCA's alone will make wide aperture images appear to be sharper.
The BR lens is a huge advance in technology.
LOCA's cannot be removed by software. Lightroom will find the purple fringing and turn it to gray, but the fringing is still there.
Just the elimination of LOCA's alone will make wide aperture images appear to be sharper.
Upvote
0
Mt Spokane Photography said:
Surely, and I am not trying to pick a semantics fight, if it doesn't have LoCA's then it is sharper, not just appears sharper. If an edge blur is lower it is, by definition, sharper.
Upvote
0
infared said:
Thanks for sharing your story, but the USB dock will not solve inconsistent AF -- it will only solve front/back focusing, right?
See here: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-50mm-f-1.4-DG-HSM-Art-Lens.aspx
(Now this is Bryan Carnathan with the Sigma 50 Art, but I had a similar experience with the 35)
For the short version of what I'm concerned with, just pan down to the butterfly. Read the paragraph before the butterfly. Mouseover 1-10 and see what happens. Then read the last bit:
"A second copy of this lens shows similar inconsistent performance. Both this camera and the lens (via the dock) can be focus calibrated, but you cannot calibrate for inconsistency."
I thought the Sigma 35 Art on my 5D3 was razor, razor sharp. But it missed shots from f/1.4 to f/2 with glaring regularity, even with a very careful composition, no focus and recompose, single AF point instead of the '+' shaped cluster, etc.
In that light, paying 2x for the 35L II -- which is shaping up to be a sharper lens that also has fire-and-forget confidence with the AF -- seems a fair deal to me. Many may disagree with that, though.
- A
Upvote
0
mackguyver said:
I like the sample shots in full size. The portraits look great. Unfortunately the landscape shots don't look that good. The picture of the bright blue lagoon is not sharp. According to the Exif date it was shot at f8 1/320 ISO 100 but at 100% nothing is sharp. It might be noise reduction, JPEG compression or whatever but the picture lacks detail and sharpness. The daylight shot of Santorini was shot at f8 1/640 ISO 100 but it is not sharp at all, too. Hopefully it is just the JPEG compression... Such samples are not worth to be shown this way. The single house looks much better. There is detail and microcontrast where there should be one. Same for the large aperture samples, which look amazing.
I hope that this lens will just be the start of a series of updated lenses. A new 50mm and 85mm would be great. But I would love even more a new 40/45/50mm TS-E lens. I guess this new 35mm produces an image circle which is much larger than it needs to be. I guess this was the best way to achive this high corner performance. So how hard can it be to produce a new 40mm TS-E lens?
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Contains 1 staff post(s)
- Contains 1 staff post(s)
