jrscls wrote:
Based on previous experiences with Sigma lenses (50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.4), I plan to keep my Canon 35 L.
Same as myself. But not worse to argue about since more Sigma, Nikon, Zeiss, Canon not happy owners here than one who just like Canon lenses and bodies as they are and careless about any other brands
I got the canon (again) even though I could have gotten the Sigma. The 35L has always been the most accurate focusing lens in my bag so I really do not see an need to change. I am glad others like the sig but my experience with them has always been less than favorable. When they introduced the 50 1.4 is was touted as a canon killer but as time went on the reviews and feedback dropped off. We'll see on their new 35, but the fact is the canon is very good, sharp, proven, solid, stable and accurate focusing. Not really much more I could want.
Breitling65 wrote:
....
- Not as great build and finish as L's.
....
From what I read for my Typcial Lens Defects page the Canon 35mm f/1.4 seems like the Canon EF "L" lens with worst build quality.
I am sure this is exact reason why (I don't know how many) professional photographers prefered to buy "L" and shoot weddings, news, sports, wild life, etc. They all need to read this page ...
Breitling65 wrote:
I am sure this is exact reason why (I don't know how many) professional photographers prefered to buy "L" and shoot weddings, news, sports, wild life, etc. They all need to read this page ...
What fast 35mm alternatives they have?
The EF 35mm/2.0 is one f-stop slower.
Do you know a EF "L" lens that has more problems / defects (the 50mm L lenses are a bit problematic too - but I am not sure about how much is Canon made, and how much from users with not performing good focus accuracy tests and such).
And most need AF, so the Zeiss ZE 35mm/1.4 is no option for them.
And still, the Canon 35mm f/1.4L was long time the best fast 35mm AF lens. Now probably the Sigma is better.
ZoneV wrote:
What fast 35mm alternatives they have?
The EF 35mm/2.0 is one f-stop slower.
Do you know a EF "L" lens that has more problems / defects (the 50mm L lenses are a bit problematic too - but I am not sure about how much is Canon made, and how much from users with not performing good focus accuracy tests and such).
And most need AF, so the Zeiss ZE 35mm/1.4 is no option for them.
And still, the Canon 35mm f/1.4L was long time the best fast 35mm AF lens. Now probably the Sigma is better.
So, I can't figure build or af is your concern? Would you mind reading about Sigma AF issues as well when you will have time? This is probably second lens after macro they did good for long time. Neither 50mm nor 85mm got any great success, people mostly returning them including myself.
It is very possibly good lens, but doesn't change 35L position anyhow and only mk II will. Actual 5% poll difference is very small and could be ignored as statistical significance
Breitling65 wrote:
... Would you mind reading about Sigma AF issues as well when you will have time? This is probably second lens after macro they did good for long time. ...
I donīt have the time to read about Sigma AF issues - they seems uncountable :-)
I am very (!) happy to have zero problems with AF accuracy with my 35mm f/1.4 and other lenses
ZoneV wrote:
I donīt have the time to read about Sigma AF issues - they seems uncountable :-)
I am very (!) happy to have zero problems with AF accuracy with my 35mm f/1.4 and other lenses
Same as myself. But not worse to argue about since more Sigma, Nikon, Zeiss, Canon not happy owners here than one who just like Canon lenses and bodies as they are and careless about any other brands 
