Canon 35mm f/2 IS now in stock!
/forum/topic/1175680/1

1      
2
       end

Lars Johnsson
Registered: Jun 29, 2003
Total Posts: 33650
Country: Thailand

didierv wrote:
jonrock wrote:
I think I rather just put up the extra money for the new Sigma 35mm f1.4 for a slightly higher price.

Actually the Sigma is almost the same price, within 50 bucks.
I really do not understand the point of this lens at that price.
You can almost get a used Canon 35, 1.4 on this forum for that price.


Why don't you understand it?

With the Sigma you get a new lens for less money. You also get a lens that outperforms the Canon lens in everything. Every test have confirmed that the Sigma is a better lens.



h00ligan
Registered: Jan 03, 2010
Total Posts: 2158
Country: United States

I'm not always in agreement with Lloyd either. Sometimes I think people don't discuss character.



hugodrax
Registered: Dec 07, 2003
Total Posts: 894
Country: United States

I have to send my 35mm 1.4L to CPS due to it falling out of a helicopter for repairs (still works but its AF is a bit out) l could use a backup 35 and that lens seems to offer features I can definitely put to use. (ie 4 stop IS) and reports seem to indicate its good glass. I make plenty of use of the wider primes.

B&H is out of stock.



zlatko
Registered: Jan 16, 2002
Total Posts: 298
Country: United States

h00ligan wrote:
I'm not always in agreement with Lloyd either. Sometimes I think people don't discuss character.


You're right, of course. A lens is more than just a few parameters that people choose to test. Character is often overlooked. We haven't gotten to a discussion of character, which awaits more extensive usage at various f-stops and with various subjects.

People who say the Sigma outperforms the Canon in "everything" overlook at least a few things. The Sigma is much bigger and heavier, as it needs to be in order to offer the extra stop. But, as a result, it doesn't outperform the Canon in size, weight or discreteness. In a bag of other lenses, sometimes adding another big lens is a non-starter. And it certainly doesn't outperform the Canon in image stabilization.



didierv
Registered: Apr 30, 2005
Total Posts: 316
Country: United States

Lars Johnsson wrote:
didierv wrote:
jonrock wrote:
I think I rather just put up the extra money for the new Sigma 35mm f1.4 for a slightly higher price.

Actually the Sigma is almost the same price, within 50 bucks.
I really do not understand the point of this lens at that price.
You can almost get a used Canon 35, 1.4 on this forum for that price.


Why don't you understand it?

With the Sigma you get a new lens for less money. You also get a lens that outperforms the Canon lens in everything. Every test have confirmed that the Sigma is a better lens.


Lars
You are right, as long the Sigma can focus properly...
Didier



Lars Johnsson
Registered: Jun 29, 2003
Total Posts: 33650
Country: Thailand

didierv wrote:
Lars Johnsson wrote:
didierv wrote:
jonrock wrote:
I think I rather just put up the extra money for the new Sigma 35mm f1.4 for a slightly higher price.

Actually the Sigma is almost the same price, within 50 bucks.
I really do not understand the point of this lens at that price.
You can almost get a used Canon 35, 1.4 on this forum for that price.


Why don't you understand it?

With the Sigma you get a new lens for less money. You also get a lens that outperforms the Canon lens in everything. Every test have confirmed that the Sigma is a better lens.


Lars
You are right, as long the Sigma can focus properly...
Didier


Also if the Canon can focus properly.........the same goes for both lenses.....

Why shouldn't it? Every website & Photo magazine that have tested it, say the AF is ok. And all the people that own it here at FM also say that. So why should it not focus properly then ?



Gunzorro
Registered: Aug 28, 2010
Total Posts: 6768
Country: United States

Thanks Lars! As I mentioned on another thread, I recently re-purchased a used 28-135 IS, which I had been without for six years or more. This copy is much sharper in the center 50% and better on the edges too, but not so dramatically. Mechanically, my earlier one was very loose and sloppy with its multiple extensions and plastic construction. The first one was a convenient stopgap lens before I go the 24-70L. Anyway, I never knew why anyone recommended this lens, but now I do, having a sharper version with its rudimentary IS. I can really grab some nice shots at the 1/40 range for 135mm, and that's a reported 2-stop single axis IS, nothing very special. So, if the new 35 IS improves the IQ over this zoom (which I have no doubt it will!) and had the reported 4-stops IS on multi-axis, I don't see how I could not love it, provided I can afford it. The Sigma sounds nice, but without IS it is at a disadvantage to me for hand-holding.

This new year I'll have this 35 IS on my watch list, and keep my eyes peeled for a new high MP body.



1      
2
       end