I was curious how my 35L, 35mm f/2 and 24-70L @ 35mm compared in sharpness.
My 5D2 was fixed in position (about 1,5-2 meters from target) on a tripod. I shot RAW and converted through LR2.3 at default values. I did this test a few times, both with AF and MF (Live View) and came to the same conclusion each time:
Center sharpness:
At f/1.4 the 35L is sharpest
At f/2.0 the 35L is sharper than the 35mm f/2.
At f/2.8 the 35L and 35mm f/2 are very similair and stay that way when stopped down. The 24-70L @ 35mm @ f/2.8 is still a bit soft, but catches up with the other lenses at f/4 and smaller.
Corner sharpness followes a somewhat different pattern... I will come back to this later.
One of the sequences (AF) - 100% crops of the center:
I didn't do these comparisons to be surprised... Only to get a better understanding on how these lenses differ
But I was actually kind of surprised to see how well the 24-70L @ 35mm could keep up with the primes (from f/2.8 and smaller) when it comes to center sharpness. What is even more surprising, is that the 24-70L has the best (extreme) corners as well (sharpest and less CA's than the 35L).
Maybe I'm trying to justify my purchase but I think the 35L does look to be the winner (as it should be) not just in sharpness, but the contrast and pop of the image. The 24-70 seems to be darker (less t stop) or maybe the light just changed but yeah I agree the 24-70 puts in a decent performance for what it is
fwiw, my copy of the 35L clearly bests my copy of the 24-70L (nice as it is, it's still a zoom) in pure sharpness. i'll take this as representative, because they both appear to be working as intended.
Dawei Ye wrote:
Maybe I'm trying to justify my purchase but I think the 35L does look to be the winner (as it should be) not just in sharpness, but the contrast and pop of the image. The 24-70 seems to be darker (less t stop) or maybe the light just changed but yeah I agree the 24-70 puts in a decent performance for what it is
The 35L is a great lens... with a f/1.4 aperture! Really, it should be glued to f/1.4-f/2. At these apertures there is no comparison and this is also where the 35L shines with regards to bokeh (see my other 35mm bokeh comparison thread).
You are also right in your observation that the 35L produces the images with the most clarity. The 24-70L produces a somewhat darker/muddier image. But nothing that can't be dealt with in PP.
Unfortunately, the 35L is no landscape lens. Both my 35mm f/2 and 24-70L at 35mm produce sharper (extreme) corners at f/8 and smaller and show less CA's in the (extreme) corners too. The 35L is actually really bad when it comes to corner CA and center frame fringes (as most wide aperture lenses are). Especially, since they can't be fully corrected in PP. Here I see definetely room for some improvement for the 35L II.
abam wrote:
fwiw, my copy of the 35L clearly bests my copy of the 24-70L (nice as it is, it's still a zoom) in pure sharpness. i'll take this as representative, because they both appear to be working as intended.
When I purchased my 35L, I conducted a similar comparison on a 40D with my trusty 35/2 (a very good lens for the price). My conclusions were very similar to yours, and I found that the 35L was better wide open than the 35/2. I was always satisfied with the 35/2 but a bit of pixel peeping showed my 35L to be better. I also like the AF on the 35L a lot better than the 35/2 . I decided quite soon after the comparison to sell the 35/2.
Now that I have a 5D2, I'm trying to get used to the 35mm focal length on a FF. But, the 35L certainly remains a great performer on FF, so this is purely a personal issue related to the focal length. But, I'm slowly warming up to the view...
tmr_wa wrote:
I also like the AF on the 35L a lot better than the 35/2 .
Yep, me too. The 35L seems more consistent in its focusing. And a LOT faster too. I also think MF is better implemented on the 35L. A nice damp focus ring of comfortable size. The 35mm f/2's MF ring feels flimsy and small. You have to switch an AF/MF knob to use MF also. I noticed that my 35mm f/2 even got OOF when I touched the camera (on a tripod using LiveView). It is THAT flimsy/loose. But maybe this isn't suppose to happen. My 35mm f/2 is from 1991... so quite an "oldie"
Still, I like my 35mm f/2 for hiking and when I don't want to carry something heavy. I paid almost nothing for it (got it used)... so, you won't hear me complain. In fact, comparing the IQ of these 3 lenses, the 35mm f/2 must be the best bargain out there
