 |
|
|
2bruce
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: May 18, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 280
|
|
Review Date: Dec 13, 2009
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: $1,037.00
|
|
Pros:
|
awesome colors, bokeh, low light, IQ,
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
this lens is amazing as a walkabout hard to beat on 5d mk 11
see shots
http://gallery.me.com/brucegilling#100441
|
|
 Dec 13, 2009
|
|
waterboiler
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 15, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 149
|
|
Review Date: Dec 12, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Speed, Image quality, Build, AF Speed
|
|
Cons:
|
Only thing that held me back for year was price
|
|
|
I bought this lens for low light work and am very happy with it. I mostly use it for events - quite often with a bit of flash. For night / indoor events like wedding receptions, it is the 1st lens I break out on a FF body. You do need to be careful at f/1.4 - DOF is quite shallow so it does not work well for group shots close up but stop it down a bit for those situations.
I do like it as a general purpose walk-around lens. The speed is second to none and while I miss the range of my 24-105 zoom at times, I never get tired of the shots I get at f/1.4 in lower light situations. A lot of travel type shots are taken in locations with 'no flash' rules - this is the lens for those situations.
While expensive ( compared to the similar Canon 50/1.4 ) I suspect this is the price you pay for the image quality ( general & edge sharpness ) but I do find it a bit over priced.
|
|
|
Dec 12, 2009
|
|
vk2109
Offline
Registered: Jan 5, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 142
|
|
Review Date: Oct 13, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,299.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Build Quality, F1.4, Size, Bokeh and Color
|
|
Cons:
|
Price I would say :-(
|
|
|
I got this lens as I wanted to have a low light prime lens. I used to shoot around 35-40mm with my 24-70L so I got this lens and wasn’t disappointed at all. The lens is really sharp and produces so nice colors. With this lens you can shoot in low light without bumping your ISO. I always keep it as a complement to my 24-70L. One thing that is hard to master at the beginning is the shallow depth of field and at F1.4 shooting family group photo isn’t the best solutions.
Overall it’s a great lens and you really feel you are holding a piece of rock (actually glass !!!)
|
|
|
Oct 13, 2009
|
|
bluefox9er
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 10, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 361
|
|
Review Date: Oct 11, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp,sharp,sharp and low light dream come true
|
|
Cons:
|
price..it's DISGUSTINGLY over priced
|
|
|
I stand by the many, many, many positve virtues of this lens..it's incredibly sharp wide open and renders the most amazing shots my camera has ever taken.
the *only* negative is the price. for some stupid reason canon hae otally over priced this lens..I am certain the pricing is set because it's a lens that a pro shooter would have and usually rite off on expenses, much like hiltons/sherratons etc charging $100 fo lunch etc.
phenomenal lens , but at price that makes you wonder how crazy this world has become
|
|
|
Oct 11, 2009
|
|
kelvinjayw
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 6, 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 6, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,800.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
My copy is incredibly sharp, even at f/1.4.
|
|
Cons:
|
More CA than I thought there would be wide open and purple fringing
|
|
|
My first test shots left me slightly horrified by the amount of CA the 35L produced at f/1.4. On close up shots, areas of high contrast on metallic objects showed purple fringing, and out of focus areas showed a green/magenta cast. I was not impressed.
But after a few more days of testing though, the sheer quality and sharpness of this lens won me over. I checked my copy against that of other owners, and saw that my copy was similar in performance to theirs.
Away from lens torture tests and used in regular shooting situations, the 35L is capable of producing amazing results. On a full frame 5D2 it creates stunning shots, where the ultra shallow DOF and razor sharpness really does create a 3D quality. I love it, especially for B&W environmental portraits.
I don't think this lens is for everyone, it's quite a specialist piece of equipment. I wasn't sure it was for me at first, but the more I use it and get to know it, the more I like it. I'd recommend renting it before buying it.
|
|
|
Oct 6, 2009
|
|
victoriae
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 13, 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 17, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
An amazing lens, superb colour and contrast easy to use.
|
|
Cons:
|
A little CA in some shots
|
|
|
Without a doubt my favourite L lens and i use this with all 3 bodies (5D,50D,1D MK iii) and always gives excellent pictures.
Colour and contrast is the best of any of the L's i have. Very easy to use when compared to the 50mm 1.2 and 85mm 1.2. This would be the last lense that i would sell and the first to replace if it went walkies. I cannot recommend it enough.
MK ii version? they will have their work cut out to do better i think.
|
|
|
Sep 17, 2009
|
|
Haring
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 11, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Sep 17, 2009
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
Color, sharpness, ....
|
|
Cons:
|
Price
|
|
UPDATE! I just had a wedding session over the weekend. I totally covered the whole range with the 35L and 85L (85L was placed onto a 40D to cover the longer range). I also have a 17 40L and a 28 70L. I am going to out the 28 70 on ebay this week! the 35L is an amazing lens!
There are a couple of excellent shots on my site. http://www.haringphotography.com
Look for the blond girl and the guy on the beach in the engagement session. The wide lens was the 35L but the other pictures were created with the 85L 1.2…:):):)
I hope it helps.
|
|
|
Sep 17, 2009
|
|
Haring
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 11, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Sep 11, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
BEST PRIME from Canon so simple
|
|
Cons:
|
price?
|
|
|
I use this along with a 85L for low light photography. Before I had the 24mmL. This is MUCH better. Image sharpness and contrast is superb. Blurr is great. Colors are amazing. It is expensive but you just buy it and try to forget its price...
|
|
|
Sep 11, 2009
|
|
swnow
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 29, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 254
|
|
Review Date: Sep 8, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
If you plan to keep only 1 lens of Canon, this is the One to keep. This lens is even better than Leica.
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 8, 2009
|
|
GeneO
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 10, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 9098
|
|
Review Date: Aug 19, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,275.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast aperture, Sharpness very good wide open as well as overall color, contrast
|
|
Cons:
|
Vignetting even on 1.25x crop, but livable. Cost. QA
|
|
|
I bought this lens to fill a FL void. I like it very much. Great color, contrast and sharpness.
Vignetting is livable (and I even like the effect, but of course I would rather have none and add the effect in PP than the other way around). But to be expected at this aperture and focal length,
It was off by 12 MA clicks out of the box. Works fine adjusted on my 1D3, but unusable on 1D Mk2n. Need to send it in, shouldn't have to have.
Would have been a 10 if I didn't have to send it in.
|
|
|
Aug 19, 2009
|
|
Keith Broad
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Aug 14, 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 117
|
|
Review Date: Aug 7, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Angle of view, bokeh, contrast and colour.
|
|
Cons:
|
Steep learning curve. Difficult (for me) to focus. Hard to live without.
|
|
|
I thought a great deal before buying this focal length. I was torn between a 50mmL or an 85mmL, but after seeing the type of shots this lens can deliver I opted for the 35mm. I figured that if I was desperate for the 85 or 50 F/L, Canon had two non L versions that are highly thought of - ones I could afford. So, I went for the 35, because there is nothing else like it. I have had this lens for a month. At first, I thought I had bought a dud. I couldn't focus it. I fiddled, did some micro-adjustment, practiced with it and, finally, I think I understand it.
It's not an easy lens to use, but it is worth mastering. It's a bit slower than my zooms (to focus) but it likes the dark. It's a 100% sharper at f2, but there is still a limited place for f1.4. It's bokeh is magic, it's contrast rich and it's the nearest I have come across that is close to the human eye. This, alone, makes it a lens worth taking the time to learn and savour. I am now uncomfortable when it's NOT on the camera I'm holding.
|
|
|
Aug 7, 2009
|
|
sunpole
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 3, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 314
|
|
Review Date: Jul 20, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,250.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very Fast + very sharp, AF is accurate. Compact size, fits well on my 5D2. Very useful focal length
|
|
Cons:
|
Plastic, build can be more solid
|
|
|
The most useful prime I have. I couple 35L and 135L, the really work wonders. Light weight set up and not compromising any IQ. Tack sharp and fast. I sold my 24L after getting this lens, IMO this is a much more useful lense in many situations.
|
|
|
Jul 20, 2009
|
|
dclement7
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 12, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 63
|
|
Review Date: Jun 20, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,230.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
I have been reading reviews of this lens for almost two years now and finally decided to invest the money for my own lens. I have been shooting with it for a couple of weeks now and we are still getting used to one another :) Wide Open the DOF is very shallow and if you do not put your subject at the correct distance, it is easy to get a blurred subject. This just takes practice and when done correct, the subject will be very sharp with a very nice blurred background.
The images have sort of a 3D look to them as if the subject could step right out of the photo. None of my other L-Series lens have this attribute. The lens is extremely sharp wide open and stepped all the way down. The lens produces a very nice bokeh when wide open which is pleasing to the eye. I just love shooting with this lens, and hate when I have to take it off the camera. I have read some reviews complaining of poor build quality, but my copy is solid. Their are no squeaks, rattles or anything that feels flimsy. Other than not being weather sealed, this lens is just about perfect.
|
|
Cons:
|
I have nothing bad to say about this lens.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2009
|
|
9callaway
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 15, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 23
|
|
Review Date: Apr 15, 2009
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $1,299.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
small, light weight (compares to my zoom lenses), high contrast
|
|
Cons:
|
35mm FL is not fit into my style of shooting, resolution @ f/1.4 is not as high as my 24-70mm and 28-70mm f/2.8 lens.
|
|
|
I used Air Force 1951 resolution targets tested 3 lenses (aperture fully open~f/2.8, FL @ 35mm) on my EOS 5D at 3 meter away under room light condition.
The results show Canon 24-70mm and 28-70mm f/2.8 lenses are equally good in resolution measurement. Surprisingly, EF 35 f/1.4 prime lens is not as good as the zoom lenses in resolution.
However, EF 35 f/1.4 got the highest contrast score among the three.
I sold the EF 35 f/1.4 the next day on eBay.
|
|
|
Apr 15, 2009
|
|
trajan
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 3, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 130
|
|
Review Date: Apr 1, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,300.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp at all distances and apertures, good contrast and colors, high resolution, small and not intrusive, very fast focusing, flare well controlled, low distortion
|
|
Cons:
|
bokeh a bit too busy/harsh,
build quality ok, but still plastic, and not comparable to Zeiss or others,
small chromatic aberrations may appear at high aperture
|
|
I have lots of top quality lenses (such as EF 85L mk2, EF 135L, Voigtlander 125mm apo macro, Sigma 50mm 1.4, etc), and this is one of my most useful lenses. Note, I didn't say favorite, but useful. The thing is that this is a lens for reporters, because it captures more than the standard 50mm. It's very sharp, with high resolution at all apertures, with good colors and very fast focus. Where it is a bit short is at the bokeh. I like for most of my photos to have a smooth bokeh. This lens doesn't quite deliver this. However, if I had to have only 1 lens, this would be it! It's just very good for most of my photos. Also, very even light (unnoticeable vignetting). Chromatic aberrations can be seen at high aperture.
Here are some photos taken with the 35L, on full framed Canon 5d mk2 and on cropped Canon d40.
on Canon 5d mk2:
- haunted house in sepia: http://highaperture.com/h/a/haunted_house/haunted_house-0.html
- lake in central park: http://highaperture.com/l/a/lake/lake-0.html (taken at f/9)
- financial district: http://highaperture.com/f/i/financial_district/financial_district-0.html
- brooklin in HDR: http://highaperture.com/b/r/brooklyn/brooklyn-0.html
on Canon d40:
- benches in central park: http://highaperture.com/b/e/benches_in_central_park/benches_in_central_park-2009.html (the bokeh came ok in this picture, I had to control it by stopping down to f/4)
- bridge in central park: http://highaperture.com/b/r/bridge/bridge-0.html
- picture taken indoors in black&white: http://highaperture.com/m/i/mirroring/mirroring-0.html
- picture taken outside (with lots of light) http://highaperture.com/m/o/mohonk_skytop_tower/mohonk_skytop_tower-0.html (you can see how sharp this lens can be)
Bottom line: this lens is close to perfection for most use cases. I'm never selling mine. Zeiss 35mm f/2.0 macro is supposed to be slightly better in IQ, but you lose f/1.4 and AF.
|
|
|
Apr 1, 2009
|
|
Jman13
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: May 2, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 8076
|
|
Review Date: Feb 22, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,206.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp at all apertures, very nice bokeh, fast and accurate AF, beautiful colors and skin tones, high build quality.
|
|
Cons:
|
Umm...slightly larger than you'd expect from a 35mm?
|
|
|
I've had this lens for about two weeks now, and it has quickly become my favorite lens (other lenses include the 85 f/1.2L, 70-200 f/4L IS, 17-40 f/4L and Sigma 150 f/2.8). Mine is sharp straight from f/1.4, and blisteringly sharp by f/1.8. Colors are beautiful and skin tones are perhaps the best and smoothest of any lens I own. The contrast curve is near perfect...good darks, nice lights, but not too steep a curve between them, allowing for beautiful gradation of middle tones.
AF is fast and accurate (as to be expected), and the build is very solid. The outer plastic shell may look a bit odd to those first picking it up, but the tolerances are VERY tight, and the lens is very, very solid.
Bokeh is very even, providing evenly illuminated specular highlights and smooth blurring in most situations. It can get somewhat busy if you're not super close to something, but I think it's more the larger background captured vs most large aperture lenses due to the FL. Looking at the specular highlights, it's excellent.
Honestly, there's really nothing to complain about. Wide open performance is excellent, though if you're up close, the DOF is extremely thin, but we all know that. The lens is quite pricey, but it does its job extremely well.
|
|
|
Feb 22, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
214
|
468664
|
Mar 23, 2013
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
96% of reviewers
|
$1,192.72
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.38
|
8.24
|
9.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
