35/1.4 – This is ridiculous

FM Forum Rules
Canon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell	Search Used
1 2 3 4 end

Archive 2008 · 35/1.4 – This is ridiculous

Spyglass
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #1 · 35/1.4 – This is ridiculous

Dear Yakim and Friends,

This is my first post and I apologize if I offend. I come from a time when ISO 10 and 25 were the standards and an f/3.5 maximum was nearly biblical. Over the years I have tended to own the "fastest" lenses that money could buy - I still love my Noctolux 50mm f/1.0.

You might think of your 35 1.4 as a parachute if you were a pilot. I wouldn't fly an SR 71 at 3,000 mph without one. Even so, I would hope to fly well enough that I would never need to bailout.

High speed lenses give you the advantage of letting your camera see better. If you have to, you can continue shooting as the sun goes down but as Shane suggests there are other apertures. Give some thought to the DOF preview button before you commit.

The biggest weakness in digital photography is the absence of DOF markings on most of the lenses, focusing screens which are not much more advanced, i.e. bright, than 100 year old ground glass view cameras and the assumption of users that the camera is smarter than we are.

May I suggest that you consider a Katz focusing screen with the bright screen option. This screen allows even those of us using little sensors and small viewfinders the advantage of split image focusing centers surrounded by microprisms so we can see what autofocus is actually doing and be more selective as need be.

Jerry

Nov 02, 2008 at 05:49 AM

Yakim Peled
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #2 · 35/1.4 – This is ridiculous

Spyglass wrote:
May I suggest that you consider a Katz focusing screen with the bright screen option. This screen allows even those of us using little sensors and small viewfinders the advantage of split image focusing centers surrounded by microprisms so we can see what autofocus is actually doing and be more selective as need be.

I installed the EF-S screen. Very good.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Nov 02, 2008 at 09:14 AM

Yakim Peled
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #3 · 35/1.4 – This is ridiculous

kidtexas wrote:
Yeah, use the 35 at a smaller aperture. You say you want to use it at 1.4 but you don't like the results (in this case). Stop down then and get a picture that you like *with* a DOF that you like too. Who cares if its 1.4 or 2.2?

I do. As I said before, it's that damn 17-55/2.8 IS that bugs me. It's so good that I decided to keep an EF-S body just to be able to use it (and the 10-22). At 2.8 and onwards it's equally good as the 35/1.4, and it's a zoom, and it has IS….

It's just that I am far from being wealthy. I can not afford to keep expensive lenses which I don't use. This is an expensive hobby and I have Snowhite and the three dwarfs at home expecting me to perform like prince charming…..

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Nov 02, 2008 at 09:21 AM

Yakim Peled
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #4 · 35/1.4 – This is ridiculous

retrofocus wrote:
Congrats, finally somebody is realizing that is is a simple user issue to handle this shallow DoF correctly! I only use MF every time I take photos at f1.4 with my Canon 50 mm f1.4 lens. AF ist too unreliable at such wide open apertures, especially with amateur DSLR cameras.

With that tiny APS screen? I envy you.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Nov 02, 2008 at 09:23 AM

Yakim Peled
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #5 · 35/1.4 – This is ridiculous

lindabrowne wrote:
Is anyone aware this is a very old thread brought back to life?

I guess it's too good to be forgotten.....

lindabrowne wrote:
I wonder how Yakim is doing with this lens now.

FWIW, I put it up for a sale/trade.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Nov 02, 2008 at 09:27 AM

Luis Pacheco
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #6 · 35/1.4 – This is ridiculous

FWIW, I put it up for a sale/trade.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Ah ah ah.
I did the same!
By the way, did you read my post in page 3 of this thread?
Coincidence?
Happy shooting (with your 17-55mm)
Luis

Nov 02, 2008 at 11:43 AM

Steady Hand
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #7 · 35/1.4 – This is ridiculous

Jimmy Ho wrote:
Yakim,

Looks like distance is the primary culprit here. A similiar composition (although different perspective) can be obtained using higher focal lengths with greater depth of field. This is probably why you haven't seen the same problems with a 50mm/85mm.

The point of using the 35/1.4 or any wider angle/larger aperture lens, in my opinion, is for low light photos where you need a wider angle, or for simply any photo where you need to include more in the photo. For your photo above, which is a closeup candid portrait, I would have reached for my 85/1.8 or 70-200 f/2.8L IS and probably shot at around f/2.8 or f/4 and not have to step as close. This would ensure that the subject is entirely in focus, while the background still has a nice creamy bokeh effect.

+1

Almost exactly my thoughts. Seems to me to be a matter of subject closeness to the lens.

Hello Yakim. Good luck with the new lens.

Ooops...

Just read this was an old thread and the 35mm is no longer in your stable.

Nevertheless...I enjoyed reading it (and the allusion to Snow White was not missed). Good light to all.

Nov 02, 2008 at 01:02 PM

luant16
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #8 · 35/1.4 – This is ridiculous

few months ago when i'm about to upgrade my camera to 5D, i wrote in the forum complaining that its very hard to make bokeh with 1.6x camera even with 50 1.4. Then someone pointed to me that few FF shooter have same sh*t at different location. They keep wishing it has more DOF.

Luckily i dint upgrade to FF so i can shoot 2 person at night with fast aperture (of course with enough DOF)

Nov 02, 2008 at 01:26 PM

retrofocus
Online
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #9 · 35/1.4 – This is ridiculous

retrofocus wrote:
Congrats, finally somebody is realizing that is is a simple user issue to handle this shallow DoF correctly! I only use MF every time I take photos at f1.4 with my Canon 50 mm f1.4 lens. AF ist too unreliable at such wide open apertures, especially with amateur DSLR cameras.

Yakim Peled wrote:
With that tiny APS screen? I envy you.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Maybe my eyes are still young enough

....I never had issues with MF and the smaller APC-S camera viewfinder. I use MF always for macro photographies and for shooting with wide open apertures.

Nov 02, 2008 at 01:43 PM

mike reid
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #10 · 35/1.4 – This is ridiculous

this lens drove me nuts for about a year until i got it right...its about 90% user talent. The good thing was that when i got it right, it set me up nicely to learn the 85L that much faster

Nov 02, 2008 at 06:37 PM

kidtexas
Online
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #11 · 35/1.4 – This is ridiculous

retrofocus wrote:
bluetsunami wrote:
I shoot with a 50mm f/1.4 on a Rebel XT and yeah, even when the I focus on something that the camera should bang out easily, it'll hunt a bit or lock on but not correctly. Don't have this issue when stopped down.

Even on the Rebel XT, I'll try to eyeball it with AF lock on then tweak with with MF>

Fully agree. I made the same experience with this combination (Rebel XT+50 f1.4). Stopped down at f>2.0 AF works very reliable. The combination of locking the AF at open apertures and then tweaking with MF works, too.

Just wanted to say that Canon (and more or less all other) SLRs focus with the aperture wide open. So even if you have it set to f/8, the camera is focusing at the largest aperture of the lens. You guys must be experiencing something else...

Nov 02, 2008 at 06:54 PM

Gochugogi
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #12 · 35/1.4 – This is ridiculous

Spyglass writes, "You might think of your 35 1.4 as a parachute if you were a pilot. I wouldn't fly an SR 71 at 3,000 mph without one. Even so, I would hope to fly well enough that I would never need to bailout.

High speed lenses give you the advantage of letting your camera see better. If you have to, you can continue shooting as the sun goes down but as Shane suggests there are other apertures. Give some thought to the DOF preview button before you commit."

I know what you're saying (sorta F8 and be there to put it crudely) but that's not why many buy large aperture optics. Many of these creatures tote these massive apertures for crazy smooth bokeh and, hence, mainly shoot wide open. Paper thin DOF is merely a price they pay for such cravings.

Incidentally, most primes do still have DOF markings. Just not as extensive as yesteryear's optics.

Nov 02, 2008 at 08:19 PM

PetKal
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #13 · 35/1.4 – This is ridiculous

Geez guys, I don't understand what the fuss is about.
I think the 35L has ample DoF wide open. What would you say if you'd shoot
the 50 f/1.0 wide open at say 3 ft distance......the DoF is 1/3 of what the 35L would have.

Nov 02, 2008 at 08:45 PM

rextter
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #14 · 35/1.4 – This is ridiculous

I think the images you have with it are amazing!

Nov 02, 2008 at 10:10 PM

Yakim Peled
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #15 · 35/1.4 – This is ridiculous

Luis Pacheco wrote:

FWIW, I put it up for a sale/trade.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Ah ah ah.
I did the same!
By the way, did you read my post in page 3 of this thread?
Coincidence?
Happy shooting (with your 17-55mm)
Luis

Of course I did. It's just that I had nothing to say. You were echoing me to the finest details….

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Edited on Nov 03, 2008 at 07:35 AM · View previous versions

Nov 03, 2008 at 07:33 AM

Yakim Peled
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #16 · 35/1.4 – This is ridiculous

kidtexas wrote:
retrofocus wrote:
bluetsunami wrote:
I shoot with a 50mm f/1.4 on a Rebel XT and yeah, even when the I focus on something that the camera should bang out easily, it'll hunt a bit or lock on but not correctly. Don't have this issue when stopped down.

Even on the Rebel XT, I'll try to eyeball it with AF lock on then tweak with with MF>

Fully agree. I made the same experience with this combination (Rebel XT+50 f1.4). Stopped down at f>2.0 AF works very reliable. The combination of locking the AF at open apertures and then tweaking with MF works, too.

Just wanted to say that Canon (and more or less all other) SLRs focus with the aperture wide open. So even if you have it set to f/8, the camera is focusing at the largest aperture of the lens. You guys must be experiencing something else...

Thank you for the reminder but I don't think it's necessary. It's a well known fact.

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Nov 03, 2008 at 07:34 AM

cineski
Online
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #17 · 35/1.4 – This is ridiculous

With my 2 f/1.2 lenses, I really had to rethink how I use auto focus. It forces my brain to think in a plane that I didn't use before. Sometimes it's where you put the focus, sometimes it's simply taking more shots, focusing on a new point for each shot. Sometimes it's spraying images while gently rocking back and forth, racking where the focal plane hits your subject (I'm not using this one much, but some photogs do.)

Nov 03, 2008 at 02:26 PM

bluetsunami
Online
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #18 · 35/1.4 – This is ridiculous

kidtexas wrote:
retrofocus wrote:
bluetsunami wrote:
I shoot with a 50mm f/1.4 on a Rebel XT and yeah, even when the I focus on something that the camera should bang out easily, it'll hunt a bit or lock on but not correctly. Don't have this issue when stopped down.

Even on the Rebel XT, I'll try to eyeball it with AF lock on then tweak with with MF>

Fully agree. I made the same experience with this combination (Rebel XT+50 f1.4). Stopped down at f>2.0 AF works very reliable. The combination of locking the AF at open apertures and then tweaking with MF works, too.

Just wanted to say that Canon (and more or less all other) SLRs focus with the aperture wide open. So even if you have it set to f/8, the camera is focusing at the largest aperture of the lens. You guys must be experiencing something else...

Yeah, I had to rethink what I posted. It's possibly that such a larger aperture is showing some slight backfocusing/frontfocusing issues that I'm not seeing when stopped down.

Nov 03, 2008 at 02:28 PM

kidtexas
Online
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #19 · 35/1.4 – This is ridiculous

bluetsunami wrote:
Yeah, I had to rethink what I posted. It's possibly that such a larger aperture is showing some slight backfocusing/frontfocusing issues that I'm not seeing when stopped down.

Quite possible. I've been reading about the phenomena known as focus shift which is an inherent 'feature' of some designs. I'm not aware of which Canon lenses exhibit this trait other than the 50/1.2 L.

But, I would think that with the way Canon SLRs focus and stop down, they shouldn't exhibit focus shift wide open...

Nov 03, 2008 at 04:39 PM

Tom K.
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #20 · 35/1.4 – This is ridiculous

Here are two visual examples. Both shot at f/1.4 with the 35L.

In this first photo I was right up close using the minimal focusing distance. Focus on the cross. It's a gravestone.

The second photo is still shot f/1.4 but I was back several feet.

2012 © Tom K.

Canon EOS 5D 35 mm f/1.4 1/40 sec 100 ISO +0.7 EV

Dec 14, 2008 at 05:15 PM

Canon Rumors
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #21 · 35/1.4 – This is ridiculous

I got a 35L and I found the same thing, i was blaming the lens. Turns out, after a few weeks it had become my favourite lens with lots of practice.

Now, get an 85L and the 35L becomes easy as heck to use! That was a whole new level of self frustration.

Dec 14, 2008 at 06:40 PM


FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 end