Review: PhotoZone - 35L II on 5DS R

[ahsanford]

Photozone's take on the 35L II, with their go-forward reference camera, the 5DS R:
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/964-canon35f14mk2?start=1

A mixed endorsement for sure. It's absolutely off the charts in the middle of the frame, but wide open the Sigma 35 Art outresolved the 35L II in the corners -- with a 22 MP 5D3!

In the conclusion:

"Speaking of the competition we are primarily talking about the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art. Now we haven't tested this lens on the EOS 5Ds R yet but at least in terms of resolution we are having some strong doubts that it is inferior to this new Canon lens."

(Keep in mind that the Sigma 35 Art -- though stellar optically -- is pretty much dead to me based on a rental that showed a very poor hit rate with the AF when shooting wider than f/2. I've long said the 35L II is worth $1500 if it 'only' turns out to be a Sigma 35 Art with reliable autofocus.)

- A

 

[privatebydesign]

Like you, not interested, and never will be, in Sigma, so much angst when I moved from film EOS to digital EOS and Sigma basically washing their hands of their loyal customers.

What interests me in the various 35 f1.4 MkII bench tests so far is the very small differences in actual performance between it and the absolutely stellar EF 35mm f2 IS, so far I haven't seen anything that puts a clear distance between the two.

I used to use the 35mm a lot with film but never liked the 35 f1.4L on digital, I have the f2 IS and really fell back into the 35 prime market again and have contemplated switching to the MkII L, but just can't see the differences anywhere yet and I am really liking the IS......

 

[Shane1.4]

I shoot weddings every weekend with the Sigma 35A and 50A. Their hit rate is certainly as reliable my 85L and 135L all of which I shoot wide open 90% of the time.

 

[privatebydesign]

I shoot weddings every weekend with the Sigma 35A and 50A. Their hit rate is certainly as reliable my 85L and 135L all of which I shoot wide open 90% of the time.

I am sure there are many thousands of very happy Sigma owners and users that never have any issues with their lenses and focus. Unfortunately for me there are too many instances of people who are not, and given my experiences with Sigma lenses years ago it is a situation of once bitten twice shy, I will never buy another Sigma product, ever.

 

[chromophore]

PhotoZone's results are not reliable. I stopped reading that site years ago because it is clear that the author has a strong bias toward Zeiss, even when other brands perform just as well; and in general, the author has a bias toward alt lenses.

As evidence I submit that PZ does not test more than one copy, and they do not test the lens in a way that measures its actual optical performance, unlike Roger @ LensRentals.

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/11/lensrentals-reviews-the-canon-35mm-f1-4l-ii-lens

As you can see, the average MTF wide open for the 35/1.4L II is, at the very least, comparable in the image periphery to the Sigma 35/1.4 Art. And this is coming from a reviewer who has recently been impressed by the performance of a number of Sigma's offerings, most recently the 20/1.4.

Personally, I am down to two sources for lens performance information: LensRentals and LensTip. I don't need to see PZ or DxO or any other sources not capable of objective review.

 

[tron]

I shoot weddings every weekend with the Sigma 35A and 50A. Their hit rate is certainly as reliable my 85L and 135L all of which I shoot wide open 90% of the time.

I am sure there are many thousands of very happy Sigma owners and users that never have any issues with their lenses and focus. Unfortunately for me there are too many instances of people who are not, and given my experiences with Sigma lenses years ago it is a situation of once bitten twice shy, I will never buy another Sigma product, ever.

I am with you on that. I was about to make an exception for Sigma 20mm 1.4 since I would use it for astro and I wasn't interested in AF. Unfortunately it has coma so...

 

[chromophore]

...
As evidence I submit that PZ does not test more than one copy, and they do not test the lens in a way that measures its actual optical performance, unlike Roger @ LensRentals.
...

Photozone is not a commercial venture - it is hobbyist based testing - unlike LensRentals.

Insulting Comment removed by Moderator

 

[privatebydesign]

Firstly, leave the personal comments out. If you can't argue a point without getting personal then you lose.

That's not a rule. You can be correct, and win and be insulting, just ask Neuro ;D

 

[sanj]

PhotoZone's results are not reliable. I stopped reading that site years ago because it is clear that the author has a strong bias toward Zeiss, even when other brands perform just as well; and in general, the author has a bias toward alt lenses.

As evidence I submit that PZ does not test more than one copy, and they do not test the lens in a way that measures its actual optical performance, unlike Roger @ LensRentals.

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/11/lensrentals-reviews-the-canon-35mm-f1-4l-ii-lens

As you can see, the average MTF wide open for the 35/1.4L II is, at the very least, comparable in the image periphery to the Sigma 35/1.4 Art. And this is coming from a reviewer who has recently been impressed by the performance of a number of Sigma's offerings, most recently the 20/1.4.

Personally, I am down to two sources for lens performance information: LensRentals and LensTip. I don't need to see PZ or DxO or any other sources not capable of objective review.

No kidding. Hmmm.

 

[sanj]

Firstly, leave the personal comments out. If you can't argue a point without getting personal then you lose.

That's not a rule. You can be correct, and win and be insulting, just ask Neuro ;D

LOL

 

[martti]

What Photozone is finding out is the law of diminishing returns.
The last two percent of a Perfect Product are difficult to achieve and cost a lot of money.
Very much attention is paid to the curves and resolution and distortion but a lot less to reliability.
For instance I had just a little knock on my Tamron 24-70 and it ceased to autofocus. The twelve years I had the Canon 24-70 it was knocked around but it took pictures. That's basically what lenses are for.
Now imagine you are in Tierra del Fuego and you knock your lens..."Sorry mr. Elephant Seal, could you back up a bit, my wide angle broke..."

Roger Cicala is a very good source of information. I cannot imagine anybody else having such a living experience of how lenses perform when they are thrown around in FedEx conveyors and used by people who do not care much. What he says about post sales service is also interesting: How Canon and Tamron take care of their products while some others don't...how long does it take to get a Leica lens serviced, for instance.

If photography was my source of income, I would stay away from third party lenses. Like Ken Rockwell! 8)
As thing are, I can afford playing around with Tamron and Sigma. Which is cool.

 

[chromophore]

Insulting comments removed by Moderator

 

[TeT]

Gotta go with Dilbert on this one, he is annoying and irritating and often seems wrong, he wasn't rude or being a dick.

 

[raptor3x]

So which focus distance should they test at? All of them? (I will point out that nobody tests at all focus distances.) Criticizing them for not choosing distance X just means that people will bitch at them whichever way they go and to be frank, testing at infinity focus is not going to be very useful - in fact none of the reviews that you read will be able to do a meaningful (is measurable) focus at infinity. That includes Lens Rentals and Lens Tips.

Not true, Lens Rentals has been doing lens testing for some time now with an optical bench. The optical bench takes measurements at infinity focus. All of those fancy MTF curves they've been showing for the last two years or so have been taken at infinity focus.

Roger's methodology is very similar to what others do - using imatest. Roger at Lens Rentals is just lucky to have the luxury of getting multiple copies to test because of the business they run.

As mentioned before, you're a bit out of date. Lens testing is done with an optical bench although they did post some LMAtest results when they wanted to show the effect of the 5DsR sensor.

So either Lens Rentals, Lens Tip and Photozone all use the same good technique (imatest) or they both use a flawed technique. "Oh, but Lens Rentals does ..." - read all of the above page from Lens Rentals first. It's all trade offs.

You might want to double check that you actually read everything, not just the article that confirms your idea, before you criticize others for doing the same.

 

[chromophore]

Gotta go with Dilbert on this one, he is annoying and irritating and is often wrong, he wasn't rude or being a dick.

I fixed that for you. Look, I call it like I see it. If someone is factually incorrect--which he very clearly is--and refuses to own up to it, then he deserves to be ridiculed. If he were a decent human being and acknowledges that he has been spreading misinformation, then I would not be hostile toward his behavior.

Everyone makes mistakes, including myself. Everyone says or believes things from time to time that are not true. But what defines the integrity of one's character is not whether or not one gives the mere appearance of politeness or civility, but rather, whether one is mature enough to own up to being factually incorrect after being proven wrong.

It's like politicians these days--after being caught lying or spreading misinformation, their reaction is to double down and insist they were truthful, or to deflect and talk about something else entirely. There's no accountability. That is the kind of behavior I have zero respect for.

 

[TeT]

Thanks, for the fix.

Dilbert the Politician might be almost appropriate

 

[StudentOfLight]

...
Oh, it isn't personal at all. That you are an idiot that makes weak to nonsensical arguments with no meaningful contribution to the education of other photographers is an objective fact apparent to all but yourself. So no, it's not personal. If you're going to put yourself in the line of fire, don't whine about being hit.

Discussing cameras does not require personal insults to be exchanged. There are other places you can go if you want to call someone an idiot. I will add that hurling insults at people does not add to the quality of the discussion or the forum (nor does saying things to others about "being hit.") If you really feel the need to insult someone, go out and start hurling abuse at a lamp post on the street - it will be about as effective as doing so online, will probably help with any personal issues you have that make you feel like you need to do that and as an added bonus you get to swear until you're black and blue in the face and nobody will care. It will also likely be a better use of your time and effort.

A wrong methodology consistently applied does not somehow magically make it correct. Photozone's methodology is intrinsically flawed for multiple reasons; like DxO, they don't test lens MTF directly. They don't test at infinity focus.

So which focus distance should they test at? All of them? (I will point out that nobody tests at all focus distances.) Criticizing them for not choosing distance X just means that people will bitch at them whichever way they go and to be frank, testing at infinity focus is not going to be very useful - in fact none of the reviews that you read will be able to do a meaningful (is measurable) focus at infinity. That includes Lens Rentals and Lens Tips.

If you think that ONE reviewer testing ONE lens in a stupid (but at least consistent, so it's *got* to be right!) way is somehow evidence in favor of calling into question Canon's manufacturing tolerances and overall quality, when Roger has done his testing on MULTIPLE copies, using careful and correct methodology, with the correct instruments, and his conclusions are completely different, then you deserve all the ridicule you get.

Roger's methodology is very similar to what others do - using imatest. Roger at Lens Rentals is just lucky to have the luxury of getting multiple copies to test because of the business they run.

Read here:

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/10/there-is-no-perfect-lens-test-either

Computerized target analysis, using either Imatest (used by Lensrentals.com, Photozone, Lenstip, and others)

So either Lens Rentals, Lens Tip and Photozone all use the same good technique (imatest) or they both use a flawed technique. "Oh, but Lens Rentals does ..." - read all of the above page from Lens Rentals first. It's all trade offs.

If you'd like to respond, please do so in a manner that adds value by means of providing references, links, etc - something of value beyond just your own opinion.

FYI, here is a good post on test methodology (and sources of errors) from someone who is actually studying optics:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=26782.msg529529#msg529529

 

[Kwwund]

I joined Canon Rumors to learn more about photography but I'm learning a lot more about the sorry state of human relationships.

Is anybody out taking photos?

 

[privatebydesign]

I joined Canon Rumors to learn more about photography but I'm learning a lot more about the sorry state of human relationships.

Is anybody out taking photos?

I am..........

 

[9VIII]

I joined Canon Rumors to learn more about photography but I'm learning a lot more about the sorry state of human relationships.

Is anybody out taking photos?

Out of all the forums I've signed up for since I started reading about photography in 2012, this group is one of the most technically competent. And Canon Rumors is still a family friendly environment which is somewhat rare in this industry, so it seems like no matter how many times I try to frequent other forums I always end up back here.

There's always a few feathers flying but that's not entirely unexpected, Canon and Nikon are known for having a fanatical following. I'd hate to see what forums would have looked like in the 90's.