about | support
home
 

Search Used

Canon EF 35mm f/2

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
132 359381 Apr 7, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
92% of reviewers $400.06
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
7.53
9.05
8.8
ef35mmf2_1_

Specifications:
Fast 35mm wide-angle lens. With a minimum focusing distance of only 0.8 ft. (25cm), you can approach the subject closer and still obtain a more natural wide-angle effect. You can even obtain good background blur for portraits.


 


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9  next
          
ray_lam5
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 18, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 71
Review Date: May 10, 2007 Recommend? | Price paid: $180.00

 
Pros: so so sharp and punchy
Cons:
none

Since posting the review a while back, I have found that this lens provides really amazing performance and images for the money. I will never part with this lens now its so small and sharp. Would rate it a 10 in hindsight..

May 10, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add ray_lam5 to your Buddy List  
Seth Tower
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Oct 9, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 3751
Review Date: Mar 24, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Fast. Ridiculously sharp wide open. Very compact. Perfect "normal" lens for a 20D/30D.
Cons:
5 blade aperture makes for awful bokeh when stopped down. No full time manual AF.

I love this lens! Sure it takes a back seat compared to the 35 L, but it's a shocking 1/5 the cost of the L. It's also just plain fun to use. It's small and light and is a perfect "normal" lens for the 30D. Bokeh is pretty bad when stopped down, but keeping it wide open makes creamy out of focus backgrounds. This lens is on my camera 95% of the time. I highly recommend it!

Mar 24, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Seth Tower to your Buddy List  
Daniel Kobb
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 22, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 7
Review Date: Mar 22, 2007 Recommend? no | Price paid: $229.00 | Rating: 4 

 
Pros: Better built than the EF 50mm f/1.8 II.
Cons:
Poor AF in low light. Very soft wide open.

I really wanted a great fast prime for indoor candids of my kids.
This lens is not it. My EF 50mm f/1.8 II performs much better.

The AF is poor in low light. It usually front or back focuses.
When it does focus properly, it is still quite soft wide open.
I expected much better. Perhaps it is a poor copy.


Mar 22, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Daniel Kobb to your Buddy List  
ray_lam5
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 18, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 71
Review Date: Feb 21, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $190.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: light, sharp and cheap
Cons:
washed out contrast, colour but only requires a little pp increase contrast and saturation forexcellent images

Bought 2nd hand to complement my 350D before selling and upgrading to a 1D. Its a good lens images are sharp and good 1stop down, excellent 2 stops down and usable at f2.

I only shoot raw so the natural saturation and contrast levels recorded on this lens only require slight adjustments to create excellent sharp images.

Not quite as beautiful as images from my 70-200 F4L but infinately more usable indoors.


Feb 21, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add ray_lam5 to your Buddy List  
ShaneEngelking
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 11, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 2005
Review Date: Jan 22, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $209.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Small, fast, cheap, great images, fast AF, inconspicuous, favorite focal length for Canon 20D, great for indoors, great close-up capability.
Cons:
If you drop it onto a concrete floor it can jam up the autofocus :), and the hood is way overpriced and does not come with the lens.

90% of the time, this is the lens that sits on my camera. I am really into getting spontaneous pictures, and carrying my camera EVERYWHERE. With this lens, it is so small that on my 28mm it looks very non-intrusive, so i get more natural shots, as people are not intimidated by its appearance. Combine its f/2 aperture with a 20D's 1600 ISO and you can get some amazing shots in very low light. I have never had any problems with the image quality, but to me getting the picture ASAP is what matters to me the most. I am not a pixel peeper. There are people that complain about the noise of the AF, but with USM, it would have to be bigger, and in reality it is quieter than my camera's shutter. All told, believe it or not, i would rather have this lens than any other in the world. It seems to be made for me. And the fact that it is only 200.00 is pretty neat.

Jan 22, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add ShaneEngelking to your Buddy List  
henris
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jun 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 23
Review Date: Jan 18, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $225.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: relatively inexpensive, light, small, handy, "normal" view on a 1.6 crop DSLR
Cons:
AF wasp sound, cheap build

AF sound was a surprise, even though I read about it. Got some chuckles from some of my students, but no big deal. Nothing like USM.

The narrow depth of field needed some getting used to (never try to focus/recompose, and just press the shutter without pressing halfway and waiting). Just a little lean forward or backward will throw things out of focus.

AF ring spins freely when in AF mode. I wonder if all non-usm lenses are like this? I don't remember that when I owned a 50 1.8.

Very useful lens. Equivalent to about a 56mm on a crop sensor, so it is much more valuable to me than the 50 1.8 I had. I love using it indoors. I haven't really used it outdoors, though, but that's what my other lenses are for.

Some photography books recommend getting a 50mm (FF equivalent) lens to practice photgraphy with, and it has been an interesting experience doing this. Half as expensive as 28 1.8.


Jan 18, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add henris to your Buddy List  
JohnHollywood
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jul 7, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 39
Review Date: Jan 16, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Sharp as a tack, great contrast,inexpensive,light, and good color.
Cons:
Af can miss sometimes and can be somewhat noisy. Build quality is poor, manual focus is not easy, though the color is good, it is not of L calibur.

I first started out with the 24-70 L and this thing blows it away. I shot a focus chart at the same F stop and this was way sharper with better contrast and believe it or not brighter. I don't know if the ratings on the the 24-70 were wrong I didn't compare it to a light meter but I think this is more accurate since I don't have to compensate the exposure as much. On my 20D it gives me a nice 50mm effect of a natural field of view. Overall I think it is an excellent buy!

Jan 16, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add JohnHollywood to your Buddy List  
Tario
Offline
[ X ]



Registered: Mar 23, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 256
Review Date: Jan 9, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Great value, fast and sharp for this price..you can't go wrong. Excellent focal length and great for the 20D.
Cons:
Flimsy build, could have been built a lot better. No usm.

I wanted to try a prime 35mm lens. I have the 16-35 2.8L and shot with it just recently and noticed that i really like the 35mm aspect.
So, knowing the price tag of the 35mm f/1.4L ...I opted for this baby..the 35 f/2. I was amazed at it's quality. It rocks and 35mm is such a fun f.l. I enjoy this lens much much more than the 50mm f/1.8.

For th emoney it is excellent and sharp and crisp..even at f/2.0. My only complaint is build quality..I think they cut major corners here and they shouldn't have. They shoudl have kept it as well built as the 85 f/1.8 with USM and all the built quality that is in there.
You can feel the flimsy material used for this lens...but it is fast and works fine. A definite buy for anyone just buying a Canon body.


Jan 9, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Tario to your Buddy List  
mufutau
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 564
Review Date: Jan 1, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $210.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Very sharp and good contrast on my Canon 20D. Excellent price from www.beachcamera.com after my extensive search on the web.
Cons:
Very loose focus ring when in AF mode that makes me think something was wrong with it. But after asking about this on the forum, I learnt it was normal because it has no USM.

Very sharp and good contrast on my Canon 20D. This should be the normal lens on a Digital camera. I tested this lens from f/2 to f/22 and the sweet point is at f/8. Not too bad indoor with higher ISO.

Very loose focus ring when in AF mode that makes me think something was wrong with it. But after asking about this on the forum, I learnt it was normal because it has no USM.

This is a good lens for the money, same build and optical performance or a little better than the Canon 50mm f/1.8.
I do wish it has a USM ring though.


Jan 1, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add mufutau to your Buddy List  
Kenneth Lai
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 11, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Dec 11, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Sharp and good contrast when used with 20D
Cons:
Note quite as sharp as 50mm f1.8. Focus error when used with 300D

I bought this lens when I had the EOS300D (Digital Rebel)

I was utterly disappointed as almost every photo that I shot with the 300D were lacking in sharpness characteristic of most primes.

After I upgraded to 20D, I tried on the lens again. To my surprise, the lens took very sharp and good contrast photos similar to those taken with the 50mm.

I suspect it is the more accurate centre focusing point in the 20D which made the difference in sharpness.





Dec 11, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Kenneth Lai to your Buddy List  
Hans im Glueck
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 6, 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 17
Review Date: Dec 8, 2006 Recommend? no | Price paid: $250.00 | Rating: 6 

 
Pros: cheap, lightweight, quite solid build
Cons:
soft wide open, medium sharp stopped down

First of all, it is not too expensive. But if you pick up a bad copy like I did, it is probably not worth the money. My 24-105 L is much sharper @f4 than that prime , especially the corners at my 5D. If you really want a 35mm, wait till You can afford a 35/1.4 L ,that is a really nice lens.

Dec 8, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Hans im Glueck to your Buddy List  
Nimnar
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Nov 5, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 5
Review Date: Dec 4, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $230.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Great value for money, sharp, fast, great colors. Lots of fun for a crop camera and a good wide prime on a 35mm frame.
Cons:
auto-focus is noisy, occasionally misses and is not quite USM quality. But it's really good overall.

This is a totally recommended lens. I've gotten some of my best candids of my kids and family using this lens. Definitely a lens for specific purposes (e.g. kids indoors). If you're looking for wide to medium prime this is a great one. Don't know about the 28mm f/1.8 but it's almost twice as much. Put the difference to a great zoom or the 85mm f/1.8. Happy shooting!!

Dec 4, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Nimnar to your Buddy List  
Geisterfahrer
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Nov 30, 2006
Location: Italy
Posts: 0
Review Date: Dec 2, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Very sharp; lightweight; gives more than acceptable results when used wide open; accurate color rendition; great quality-price ratio
Cons:
AFD motor is not as fast as USM; noticeable vignetting until f/4

35mm is my favorite focal lenght, it is the one I find myself using most of the time. This lens does an excellent job in providing images while not costing you an arm and a leg.

The first, and best, feature of this lens is its sharpness. The detail resolution is simply amazing. Even when used wide open and with scarce available light, the lens manages to capture images which are more than adequate as far as technical quality is concerned. On a full frame camera the edges and corners begin to come out as sharp as the center at about f/4. Color rendition is accurate and does not sway on either the cool or the warm side. The lens is small, unobtrusive and weights a mere 210g.

The weaknesses of the lens are the old-style AFD autofocus system - accurate, but obviously not as fast as USM, while not being, to my ears, nowhere near as loud and annoying as other people seem to believe - and a noticeable vignetting at the widest apertures, until f/4.

However, given all the good points of the lens, and considering its price, I cannot but recommend this lens to anyone!


Dec 2, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Geisterfahrer to your Buddy List  
boomzfoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 5, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 44
Review Date: Nov 26, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $229.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Very sharp, light, fast, and extremely affordable.
Cons:
Focusing is little noisey (high pitch sound).

Very sharp even when wide open (f2.0). Focuses fast even without USM. Light weight. Great indoor lens on a 5D (both day and night). Colours are good. Almost distortion free images on a 5D. This has become my primary indoor lens for food photography in restaurants (candid reviews) where 99.99% of the time the lighting isn't exactly ideal. Before I got this I was using the 50 f1.8 (minimum FD too long and 50mm not wide enough to capture the whole room) and 17-40L f4.0 (too slow for under ISO400 use and not discrete enough) on a 5D. This 35mm f2.0 will replace both. It's perfect for my purpose. I should have purchased this a long time ago.

Nov 26, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add boomzfoto to your Buddy List  
marcelo.h
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jun 3, 2006
Location: Brazil
Posts: 0
Review Date: Aug 14, 2006 Recommend? | Price paid: $230.00

 
Pros: The best you can by for this price.
Cons:
Noise AF

Red... your peice surely is not representative. Bad quality control.

Aug 14, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add marcelo.h to your Buddy List  
RedRebel
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 183
Review Date: Jul 24, 2006 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 6 

 
Pros: 35mm is usefull, litle barrel distortion, price
Cons:
Flare, CA, contrast, sharpness, focussing

Last year I bought the 350D together with a 17-85IS lens, which is quite a good general purpose combo. a few months ago I added the 35mm/2, because I wanted a faster lens for indoor use and creative shooting.

My opinion is quite negative, but it is my honest opinion about my copy of this lens:
- Very soft wide open and comparable with my 17-85 starting from f4, f5.6 etc...
- Lots of CA (purple fringing) when used wide open, which disapears mostly from f2.8, f3.5 etc...
- Very prone to flare, it shows up as lack of contrast
- Extreme lack of contrast as soon as an image is only 1 stop over exposed
- Focussing often hunts in less contrasty situations
- Focussing makes some noise, but thats only a small problem

In standard light conditions, this lens performs no better then my 17-85IS. In dark situations and using the larger apertures, it produces soft images. In more tricky light situations, this lens is close to unusable. Every time I pick up my 17-85IS lens in those *tricky* situations, it almost never lets me down, while this one is causing trouble time after time. Even an old 28-80 3.5-5.6 II lens performs more consistent.

If my copy is representative for this lens, I would not recomend it, especially when you are looking for quality at low f numers (f2 - f2.8).


Jul 24, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add RedRebel to your Buddy List  

   



Canon EF 35mm f/2

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
132 359381 Apr 7, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
92% of reviewers $400.06
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
7.53
9.05
8.8
ef35mmf2_1_


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9  next