Review: Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II Via TDP

[YuengLinger]

Samples here and on TDP unusually contrasty. Unpleasantly so.

Also, in the linked thread from cpisco, seeing some fringing on the hanging fan switch--fairly heavy on letters ''H'' and ''u.''

Thanks for these samples!

 

[Random Orbits]

I think its a wonderful lens, I posted some pictures on my own thread. I found the autofocus to be very accurate and consistent
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=27937.0

How's AF in servo?

I found the original 35L focuses poorly in servo wide open, so I usually end up using the 24-70 II for moving targets.

 

[Viggo]

I think its a wonderful lens, I posted some pictures on my own thread. I found the autofocus to be very accurate and consistent
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=27937.0

How's AF in servo?

I found the original 35L focuses poorly in servo wide open, so I usually end up using the 24-70 II for moving targets.

Which body?

 

[Random Orbits]

I think its a wonderful lens, I posted some pictures on my own thread. I found the autofocus to be very accurate and consistent
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=27937.0

How's AF in servo?

I found the original 35L focuses poorly in servo wide open, so I usually end up using the 24-70 II for moving targets.

Which body?

5D3

 

[Viggo]

I think its a wonderful lens, I posted some pictures on my own thread. I found the autofocus to be very accurate and consistent
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=27937.0

How's AF in servo?

I found the original 35L focuses poorly in servo wide open, so I usually end up using the 24-70 II for moving targets.

Which body?

5D3

Strange, I primarily shoot my kids on dim light and they are fast, the 35 L has been the one prime to trust, also on 1d4 and 5d3 before I bought the 1dx.

 

[cpsico]

I think its a wonderful lens, I posted some pictures on my own thread. I found the autofocus to be very accurate and consistent
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=27937.0

How's AF in servo?

I found the original 35L focuses poorly in servo wide open, so I usually end up using the 24-70 II for moving targets.

I didn't even think to test AI servo on this lens, perhaps this weekend!

 

[Random Orbits]

I think its a wonderful lens, I posted some pictures on my own thread. I found the autofocus to be very accurate and consistent
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=27937.0

How's AF in servo?

I found the original 35L focuses poorly in servo wide open, so I usually end up using the 24-70 II for moving targets.

Which body?

5D3

Strange, I primarily shoot my kids on dim light and they are fast, the 35 L has been the one prime to trust, also on 1d4 and 5d3 before I bought the 1dx.

So you found the 35L at f/1.4 to focus as well as the 24-70 II in servo?

 

[chrysoberyl]

I love TDP, don't get me wrong, but when's the last time Bryan Carnathan didn't rave about a Canon product? His reviews are overwhelmingly Canon-positive.

- A

That is the absolute truth! And that is why I haven't been to his site for years.

John

 

[Larsskv]

I love TDP, don't get me wrong, but when's the last time Bryan Carnathan didn't rave about a Canon product? His reviews are overwhelmingly Canon-positive.

- A

That is the absolute truth! And that is why I haven't been to his site for years.

John

I disagree with you on this one. He covers every aspect of a camera or lens in his reviews, and he points out weaknesses very precisely. He doesn't exaggerate the meaning of those weaknesses, like many other reviewers do, and I think that's fair and balanced. I don't think he covers other brands than Canon in another way either. In my opinion, he has the best written online reviews that I know.

 

[ben805]

I love TDP, don't get me wrong, but when's the last time Bryan Carnathan didn't rave about a Canon product? His reviews are overwhelmingly Canon-positive.

- A

That is the absolute truth! And that is why I haven't been to his site for years.

John

I disagree with you on this one. He covers every aspect of a camera or lens in his reviews, and he points out weaknesses very precisely. He doesn't exaggerate the meaning of those weaknesses, like many other reviewers do, and I think that's fair and balanced. I don't think he covers other brands than Canon in another way either. In my opinion, he has the best written online reviews that I know.

Agreed, TDP is well balanced IMO, similar to photozone but with more in depth and detail info. They are no where near bias or radical like Ken Rockwell and the like.

 

[Random Orbits]

I love TDP, don't get me wrong, but when's the last time Bryan Carnathan didn't rave about a Canon product? His reviews are overwhelmingly Canon-positive.

- A

That is the absolute truth! And that is why I haven't been to his site for years.

John

I disagree with you on this one. He covers every aspect of a camera or lens in his reviews, and he points out weaknesses very precisely. He doesn't exaggerate the meaning of those weaknesses, like many other reviewers do, and I think that's fair and balanced. I don't think he covers other brands than Canon in another way either. In my opinion, he has the best written online reviews that I know.

+1. The chart tests, OLAF LensRentals data and the review text and sample shots provide a very thorough review. Plus he's used all those lenses on multiple bodies. And what and when was the last Canon lemon? 50L? It's up to each individual to determine if each lens' features/weaknesses are worth the price.

 

[ahsanford]

I love TDP, don't get me wrong, but when's the last time Bryan Carnathan didn't rave about a Canon product? His reviews are overwhelmingly Canon-positive.

- A

That is the absolute truth! And that is why I haven't been to his site for years.

John

I disagree with you on this one. He covers every aspect of a camera or lens in his reviews, and he points out weaknesses very precisely. He doesn't exaggerate the meaning of those weaknesses, like many other reviewers do, and I think that's fair and balanced. I don't think he covers other brands than Canon in another way either. In my opinion, he has the best written online reviews that I know.

This isn't an attack on Bryan Carnathan, mind you -- his site is a spectacular resource and I'm there all the time. I'm not a smear-tactics sort of person (unless you are DXO ).

I'm simply stating that he always has a positive read on a new product from Canon. I'm hard pressed to find anything critical other than a few ergonomic preferences not being met or the odd lens + body combination weird AF findings.

- A

 

[Viggo]

I think its a wonderful lens, I posted some pictures on my own thread. I found the autofocus to be very accurate and consistent
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=27937.0

How's AF in servo?

I found the original 35L focuses poorly in servo wide open, so I usually end up using the 24-70 II for moving targets.

Which body?

5D3

Strange, I primarily shoot my kids on dim light and they are fast, the 35 L has been the one prime to trust, also on 1d4 and 5d3 before I bought the 1dx.

So you found the 35L at f/1.4 to focus as well as the 24-70 II in servo?

The 24-70 is too slow in poor light and it doesn't do 1.4. Never shot the 35 L at 2.8. But if I was going to use it 2.8, I would use the 2470 for multiple reasons.

 

[ahsanford]

The 24-70 is too slow in poor light and it doesn't do 1.4. Never shot the 35 L at 2.8. But if I was going to use it 2.8, I would use the 2470 for multiple reasons.

What application needs servo AF with a wide / large aperture prime? That's an odd combination of lens + AF settings. Are you shooting an underground illegal boxing match that's only it by torchlight? Or are you trying to shoot burst on a rockstar doing some jump kicks at a concert in a dimly lit bar?

I don't mean to dismiss the need as irrelevant or poke fun -- I'm actually curious. I only use servo for tracking things like sports or wildlife, where a fast zoom usually has enough light to track things.

- A

 

[Viggo]

The 24-70 is too slow in poor light and it doesn't do 1.4. Never shot the 35 L at 2.8. But if I was going to use it 2.8, I would use the 2470 for multiple reasons.

What application needs servo AF with a wide / large aperture prime? That's an odd combination of lens + AF settings. Are you shooting an underground illegal boxing match that's only it by torchlight? Or are you trying to shoot burst on a rockstar doing some jump kicks at a concert in a dimly lit bar?

I don't mean to dismiss the need as irrelevant or poke fun -- I'm actually curious. I only use servo for tracking things like sports or wildlife, where a fast zoom usually has enough light to track things.

- A

I shoot everything wide open as I like shallow dof and fast shutter speeds. With the kids, it's no way around it. I may have used One Shot twice last year, as in two pictures very rarely I go slower than 1/1000s, and try as much as possible to use 1/2000s to avoid motion blur.

 

[ahsanford]

The 24-70 is too slow in poor light and it doesn't do 1.4. Never shot the 35 L at 2.8. But if I was going to use it 2.8, I would use the 2470 for multiple reasons.

What application needs servo AF with a wide / large aperture prime? That's an odd combination of lens + AF settings. Are you shooting an underground illegal boxing match that's only it by torchlight? Or are you trying to shoot burst on a rockstar doing some jump kicks at a concert in a dimly lit bar?

I don't mean to dismiss the need as irrelevant or poke fun -- I'm actually curious. I only use servo for tracking things like sports or wildlife, where a fast zoom usually has enough light to track things.

- A

I shoot everything wide open as I like shallow dof and fast shutter speeds. With the kids, it's no way around it. I may have used One Shot twice last year, as in two pictures very rarely I go slower than 1/1000s, and try as much as possible to use 1/2000s to avoid motion blur.

Oh, so you are shooting wildlife with it. Got it.

- A

 

[Viggo]

The 24-70 is too slow in poor light and it doesn't do 1.4. Never shot the 35 L at 2.8. But if I was going to use it 2.8, I would use the 2470 for multiple reasons.

What application needs servo AF with a wide / large aperture prime? That's an odd combination of lens + AF settings. Are you shooting an underground illegal boxing match that's only it by torchlight? Or are you trying to shoot burst on a rockstar doing some jump kicks at a concert in a dimly lit bar?

I don't mean to dismiss the need as irrelevant or poke fun -- I'm actually curious. I only use servo for tracking things like sports or wildlife, where a fast zoom usually has enough light to track things.

- A

I shoot everything wide open as I like shallow dof and fast shutter speeds. With the kids, it's no way around it. I may have used One Shot twice last year, as in two pictures very rarely I go slower than 1/1000s, and try as much as possible to use 1/2000s to avoid motion blur.

Oh, so you are shooting wildlife with it. Got it.

- A

Lol, yeah, but I shoot all kinds of stuff, and I usually have the same approach..

 

[chrysoberyl]

I love TDP, don't get me wrong, but when's the last time Bryan Carnathan didn't rave about a Canon product? His reviews are overwhelmingly Canon-positive.

- A

That is the absolute truth! And that is why I haven't been to his site for years.

John

I disagree with you on this one. He covers every aspect of a camera or lens in his reviews, and he points out weaknesses very precisely. He doesn't exaggerate the meaning of those weaknesses, like many other reviewers do, and I think that's fair and balanced. I don't think he covers other brands than Canon in another way either. In my opinion, he has the best written online reviews that I know.

Agreed, TDP is well balanced IMO, similar to photozone but with more in depth and detail info. They are no where near bias or radical like Ken Rockwell and the like.

I do agree that his site is better than Rockwell's or DxO's, but not as objective or thorough as LensTip. One example is the flare comparison between the Canon 24mm 1.4 and the Samyang 24mm 1.4. Using a darkish or darkened sky for the Samyang and a light sky for the Canon is not a fair comparison. And when reviewing the Canon 24mm 1.4, he says 'expect some coma', which is a quite an understatement. I much more agree with LensTip's 'simply monstrous'.

 

[ahsanford]

I do agree that his site is better than Rockwell's or DxO's, but not as objective or thorough as LensTip. One example is the flare comparison between the Canon 24mm 1.4 and the Samyang 24mm 1.4. Using a darkish or darkened sky for the Samyang and a light sky for the Canon is not a fair comparison. And when reviewing the Canon 24mm 1.4, he says 'expect some coma', which is a quite an understatement. I much more agree with LensTip's 'simply monstrous'.

My principal example is how hard he hunts for (example) a Sigma AF issue, and to his credit, he found a whopper on the 50 F/1.4 Art. But he really worked at generating content to back up the statement. I just don't know if he's kicking the tires / shaking the tree as hard for 1st party products. What's his comparable f/1.4 hit rate on the 35L II? I'd love to know that data.

Again, I'm not saying it's a bias so much as a strong Canon benefit of the doubt based on his experience, which is his prerogative.

But my beef with TDP -- if there even is one, I do love that site -- is that if you curve everything to an A letter grade, the test doesn't mean as much. Perhaps I'm just looking for him to be a bit more critical -- curve to a B to make the real A's really stand out.

- A

 

[chromophore]

I do agree that his site is better than Rockwell's or DxO's, but not as objective or thorough as LensTip. One example is the flare comparison between the Canon 24mm 1.4 and the Samyang 24mm 1.4. Using a darkish or darkened sky for the Samyang and a light sky for the Canon is not a fair comparison. And when reviewing the Canon 24mm 1.4, he says 'expect some coma', which is a quite an understatement. I much more agree with LensTip's 'simply monstrous'.

My principal example is how hard he hunts for (example) a Sigma AF issue, and to his credit, he found a whopper on the 50 F/1.4 Art. But he really worked at generating content to back up the statement. I just don't know if he's kicking the tires / shaking the tree as hard for 1st party products. What's his comparable f/1.4 hit rate on the 35L II? I'd love to know that data.

Again, I'm not saying it's a bias so much as a strong Canon benefit of the doubt based on his experience, which is his prerogative.

But my beef with TDP -- if there even is one, I do love that site -- is that if you curve everything to an A letter grade, the test doesn't mean as much. Perhaps I'm just looking for him to be a bit more critical -- curve to a B to make the real A's really stand out.

- A

I pretty much agree with this. For me, TDP is primarily a learning resource: if I want to learn about what a new product does, what makes it different from previous or similar models, I go there to find out. If I want to know how many AF points a new body has, Bryan's got it. If I want to know what the MFD of a lens is, I can find it there and compare it against others. What TDP has done is compile a fairly comprehensive and uniform repository of information about all kinds of Canon EOS/EF products.

Of the reviews, I don't read much into them.

If I want to really get a sense of how a lens performs, for example, I compare against a few reliable resources. LensTip is one of them; LensRentals is another. DxO is not. I put ZERO credibility on EVERYTHING they say because it is abundantly clear that they are biased, as well as ignorant of objective measurement methodologies, to the extent that they are deliberately fraudulent.

I used to look at other sites as well (Photozone?), but I too found these to be guilty of bias. What I trust the most are real-world sample images taken by many different people over a long period of time. Ultimately, these are the best indicators of what a lens really does and how much impact the design of the lens has on the produced image.

In regard to the EF 35/1.4L II, however, the evidence is clear enough to me at this point to say that the level of chromatic aberration correction of this lens is good enough to justify an upgrade from the previous model. It's just a question of following through with selling the old lens and looking for a deal on the new one at some point.