- Dec 17, 2013
$750 less than the Canon mark ll, it will be very interesting to hear about the comparisons when Bryan, Dustin and other reputable reviewers get their hands on it.
Yeah, I have shot my 35/1.4 ASPH on my EOS R more than my 50/1.2 or 24-105/4IS. I actually think the Canons are equivalent sharpness (50/1.2 probably better), but it's massively portable and makes seriously nice photos.I enjoy my excellent tiny little Leica Summilux 1,4/35 Asph. more and more
Not too many f1.4 lenses with stabilization out there, especially from 3rd party manufacturers. At f1.4 a tripod might more sense anyway.
Well yes, that's the point of the quizzical responses. They seem to have abandoned the nice line of unique 1.8 VC lenses they were building, instead of continuing down to a 28 / 24 / 18 and going up to a 100. Instead they're getting into a dick-waving competition against Canon, Sigma and Tokina in the 35mm 1.4 space. Why?
My first 35mm camera was a rangefinder with a 45mm lens. I took many of my all-time best pictures with it. The slides have faded somewhat, but the black and white negatives and prints still look good. When I finally got an SLR, I accumulated a good range of prime lenses. Zooms were not so great back then. I found that my trinity was 28, 85, and 200. If those were along, I didn’t miss the others. These days 24 is the new 28 for me. In traveling I find that the 24-100mm equivalent of the G7X II covers almost everything, and the exceptions are almost always covered by stitching to get a wider effect. Likewise, the kit 24-105mm on the 6D2 is my “walkabout” lens. With the 16-35 and the 100-400, I am satisfied with the range covered. I realize that I’ve never taken all three lenses anywhere at the same time or taken any two of them with one of my primes. Most of the time I have enough of an idea what I will shoot that I take just the one lens I need. Probably all of that says more about me than about the market or anything relating to anyone else.There are classic Prime lens trinities but everyone's needs and interests very so much I do not think the market is solely based upon them any longer. I am one of those in what used to be a minority that prefers 28 over 24...it's not so crazy these days. 40 is also one of my favorite focal lengths. The other factor is that going that wide is usually covered by any one of the fantastic ultra wide zooms available and only for specific and not general needs is a 'fast' wide needed. (astro for one)
Let's not forget that Tamron's wonderful 15-30 has VC, but that lens is a beast and "only" f/2.8. The VC worked very well on the one I had. Due to my great experience with that lens I would be willing to consider Tamron again in the future.This lens has been anticipated for some time now and touted as Tamron's finest optics yet. I think the lack of stabilization falls into the camp of VC/IS is for tele primarily and they want to showcase the other optical aspects and keep it from being too large. The 85 is a great lens but it is very heavy. I am very satisfies by the images I can get with it and from what I hear and read, the 35 will be far better. I expect a 35 1.4L ll rival with newer coatings and Canon level AF in a 3rd party lens.
I am completely surprised that the 85 SP does not get more accolades. It is a marvel of a lens, I liken it to my 135 f/2L. The color, the contrast, sharpness and amazing AF speed and accuracy for a 3rd party lens. If the 35 1.4 is better as they say, it will be a giant slayer (EF 351.4L ll)Let's not forget that Tamron's wonderful 15-30 has VC, but that lens is a beast and "only" f/2.8. The VC worked very well on the one I had. Due to my great experience with that lens I would be willing to consider Tamron again in the future.
I reckon a 65 f/1.4 or 65 f/1.2 might be good! I've been saying for a while that I'd be interested in a fast prime around 60 to 65 mm. I reckon 35, 60/65 and 135 might make a good set.Shoot crop with a 40! (ok, there aren't any that 'fast' I know but you are the first 65mm fan I have heard, it may take a while for that petition to get enough signatures)
I am completely surprised that the 85 SP does not get more accolades. It is a marvel of a lens, I liken it to my 135 f/2L. The color, the contrast, sharpness and amazing AF speed and accuracy for a 3rd party lens. If the 35 1.4 is better as they say, it will be a giant slayer (EF 351.4L ll)