 |
|
|
ruicarv79
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 8, 2014
Location: Portugal
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 8, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $500.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Light, compact, IS, close focus ability and... fantastic image quality!
|
|
Cons:
|
It's not f/1.4. :)
NOTE: No lens wood is provided with the lens.
|
|
This lens is glued to my Canon 6D. I love the 35mm on FF and I'm in love with this lens. It really delivers great image quality. I have no problems shooting with it right from maximum aperture (you will have some visible vigneting but I kind of like it). At around f/4 this lens reaches perfection!
The IS works very well and the focus is fast and so accurate!
The bokeh is very nice also (much better than the old version).
As it is lighter, smaller and cheaper than the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 I ended up going for it. I do not regret my decision, I have zero complaints!
The only downfall is that it is not f/1.4.... 
You can find my personal review of it here:
http://ruicarv.wix.com/ruicarphotolover#!canon-35-f2-is-usm/c1n3k
|
|
 Sep 8, 2014
|
|
artyH
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 29, 2011
Location: N/A
Posts: 15
|
|
Review Date: Aug 16, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $549.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent sharpness, contrast and resistance to flare. Flare was a real weakness of the old 35F2. The AF is very fast and accurate. If you can see it, you should be able to photograph it with this lens.
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
This is a fine lens, and is sharp corner to corner on my 60D. It is very flare resistant, even if you have to shoot towards the light. It is very sharp, as was the older version. It has become my favorite lens, with minimal optical flaws. While there are times when you can get some color distortion shooting onto the light with high contrast, the corrections are good. I find the out of focus blur is pretty smooth.
|
|
|
Aug 16, 2014
|
|
dinkar
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 19, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 13, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $550.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp, excellent colors. IS works very well
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
This is a very sharp, quick focusing lens. Paired with a full frame camera you can shoot in virtual darkness with very good results. This has become my standard lens on a 6D, replacing the 24-105 kit lens. Subject isolation is not as dramatic as it would be with say a f1.4 lens, but you know that going in. If subject isolation is what you are looking for, the 35mm f1.4 is probably the lens for you. However if you are looking for a sharp, low light capable walk around this is a fantastic choice.
|
|
|
Aug 13, 2014
|
|
grueber34
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 10, 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 12
|
|
Review Date: Jul 24, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $550.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Everything
|
|
Cons:
|
Nothing
|
|
|
This thing performs like the best of Canon's L-series. Gorgeous images wide-open and the IS is flawless.
|
|
|
Jul 24, 2014
|
|
DLP
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 17, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 2563
|
|
Review Date: Jul 15, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $500.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
IS, Lightweight, Sharp, Color rendition
|
|
Cons:
|
Hood is expensive and hard to find
|
|
|
This has become my standard lens on a 5DMKIII. Fast glass that won't break the bank and combined with the ISO capability of the MKIII it makes a killer combination.
Sure the Bokeh could be better but then again you could spend $1,000 more and still be saying the same thing.
A piece of glass that's just a pure joy to use.
|
|
|
Jul 15, 2014
|
|
pifatore
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 13, 2008
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 10, 2014
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
Reasonably well built. Is. Good colors (better than the non-is). Quieter af and usable mf ring. Bokeh quality is a bit better for my taste, but ther΄s not a huge difference. (compared to old version)
|
|
Cons:
|
Not huge difference in image quality overall compared to old version. Field curvature phenomenon that was not present in the older 35.
Qc issues.
|
|
|
I passed through 4 copies from different retailers before finding one that worked fair enough, and even this one is not stellar at all.
First copy didn΄t focus at infinity (from 20 m. onwards).
Second one frontfocused at almost every focusing distance.
Third one backfocused and had notable decentering.
The last one΄s resolution was not as high as the others.
To sum up I have to firmly manifest my disappointment about canon quality control. I have owned many canon and third party lenses, and I do own the older 35 model and have to say that only a try was needed to find a copy that worked properly. That was some years ago. Nowadays it seems to be difficult to find a good one.
|
|
|
Jun 10, 2014
|
|
Robin Smith
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 19, 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 1259
|
|
Review Date: Mar 25, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fantastic image quality, IS
|
|
Cons:
|
None really, although as usual with the non Ls you have to buy the expensive ($50+) hood (which I found hard to find)
|
|
|
I sold my 35L and got this instead. The 35L is a superb lens with lots of character, but after 4 years with it I got the 35/IS because of its much smaller size and weight. The 35L is a large lens and, after a while, this becomes wearing as the number of shots I took at f1.4 are a small percentage of the total, so I was carrying the extra bulk to little advantage. To me, for a 35mm, f2 is plenty fast enough.
It has great build quality and imagery is as good as it gets - to my eyes superior to the 35L at f2 and then there is IS on top. It's not a small lens but not large either. AF is accurate all the time - probably not something you can say about the Sigma 35/1.4 (as good as it is). If you want a big, "prestige" optic you can brag about to your friends then this lens won't do it, but if you just want to take great 35mm shots with an equivalent light gathering power of an f1 lens or so, together with excellent performance, then this is the lens for you.
|
|
|
Mar 25, 2014
|
|
Shield
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 29, 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 1221
|
|
Review Date: Feb 24, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Lightweight, sharp even wide open, fast to focus, built in IS is a treat for video and static handheld shots in poor light.
|
|
Cons:
|
Vignettes quite a bit wide open. Not F/1.4.
|
|
|
Great lens; don't leave home without it!
|
|
|
Feb 24, 2014
|
|
slee915
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 4, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 526
|
|
Review Date: Dec 19, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $520.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
IS, f/2, sharpness, contrast, light weight, beautiful bokeh
|
|
Cons:
|
strong vignetting
|
|
|
This is a great little lens. I settled with this over the 35L and sigma f/1.4 because of IS and the light weight. I am willing to tradeoff 1 stop at this aperture & FL (e.g. won't do it at f/2.8 or at 50mm) with IS.
The pictures are very sharp, color rendition is extremely good; comparable to my 24-70II. This is a L quality lens w/o the L build and sealing.
The bokeh is excellent with the 8-blade, better than the old (5-blade) and even the 35L IMO. The 35L has busy bokeh while the 35f/2 is smooth.
The main issue is vignetting, it is very noticeable. I usually overexpose about 2/3 stop in order to cut down the darkness around the corner and fix overall exposure in PP.
|
|
|
Dec 19, 2013
|
|
caMARYnon
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 29, 2013
Location: Romania
Posts: 36
|
|
Review Date: Oct 20, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
excellent sharpness, colors and contrast even at f2.0; useful IS; very good AF; very good built quality and very good close-up capabilities
|
|
Cons:
|
strong coma
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2013
|
|
Gochugogi
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 25, 2003
Location: Mongolia
Posts: 12226
|
|
Review Date: Sep 30, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $549.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Petite Sharp Natural perspective IS Smooth MF
|
|
Cons:
|
No hood included Hood costs $54
|
|
|
I've owned several prior 35mm optics and found the semi-wide perspective (63 degrees) easy to use, perfect for low light and ideal for showing a subject in its environment. Unfortunately, the $899 debut price of this lens was silly expensive and I held off purchasing it. When the MAP dropped to $599 I clicked and the EF 35 2.0 IS USM landed on my doorstep.
APPEARANCE AND BUILD
The EF 35 2.0 IS USM is compact but a notch larger than the older EF 35 2.0. The slightly textured matte finish is attractive and surprisingly fingerprint resistant. The plastics in the barrel feel solid and sturdy. It features ring-type USM, yielding fast yet silent AF. If you like to manual focus you'll be in hog heaven: smooth turning, long throw for fine adjustments and no play or slop. It also has full-time manual focus override: grab the well ribbed MF ring and turn it. No need to flip a switch.
The front element does not rotate during AF operation, making polarizing filter use a breeze. Speaking of filters, the 67 mm filter threads are a less common size but shared with the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 L IS USM.
It has a basic DOF scale for hyperfocal shooters but markings only at F11 and 22.
USING THE 35 2.0 IS USM
On an EOS 5D MKII, this lens is balanced, nimble and a joy to use. While no pancake, it's liberating to shoot with such a petite lens after using the bulky 24-105 4L IS USM.
I sold my EF 35 2.0 prior to buying this lens so I couldn't compare them side by side. However my impression is this new lens sports vastly improved build quality, faster and more sure-footed AF and greatly improved sharpness along the edges of the frame. It's also noticeably larger than the old design. The older 35 was no slacker--very sharp in the center--but this one is better in every way save for being larger and heavier. No hesitations about shooting wide open. This lens delivers tack sharp images.
If you're used to the distortion typical of the wide side of zooms, it is refreshing to experince virually no barrel distortion: lines in doorways and artwork are rendered straight as long as you center correctly.
IMAGE STABILIZATION
The IS feature sends this optic over the top. I'm not as steady as I used to be so having 3 stops of slower hand holdable shutter speeds is a Godsend. The Canon spec of 4 stops was a no-go for me. Nevertheless F2.0 with IS engaged and I can get sharp images in dim bars, restaurants, casinos or alleys until the cows come home! Yee haa!
NO LENS HOOD INCLUDED
The only gotcha is the lack of a lens hood. For $600 Canon should toss one in. And, if you want the dedicated EW-72 hood, it will cost you $54. Ouch!
FINAL BLURB
The EF 35 2.0 IS USM is one of my favorite walk around lenses on my 5D MKII. It is easy to carry and take pictures with due to its natural perspective and petite size. Moreover, the EF 35 2.0 IS USM is an extremely sharp lens, sharper than the 35 mm end of Canon's best zooms and sharper than the EF 35 2.0 that came before it. There is virtually no flare or ghosting but a wee bit of light falloff wide open. With its ultra fast F2.0 aperture and IS, I can take a picture in nearly any available light situation. Finally, the fast aperture makes for bright viewfinders, a great feature if you shoot in dark interiors or twilight. Highly recommended!
|
|
|
Sep 30, 2013
|
|
G. Kretschmer
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 20, 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 14
|
|
Review Date: Jun 14, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
image quality, fast reliable and accurate AF, very good and near-silent IS
|
|
Cons:
|
price, no lens-hood included
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2013
|
|
JPdeR
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 30, 2013
Location: Germany
Posts: 7
|
|
Review Date: May 1, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Light, well-built, very reliable AF, high contrast and sharpness even at 2.0, great IS.
|
|
Cons:
|
One may think it is a bit expensive.
|
|
I had first bought a Sigma 35mm 1.4 because many people said it was so great and not much more expensive, but that lens front-focused and was not well centered (looked like some kind of field curvature), and Sigma did not want to fix or replace it (blamed my camera which focuses perfectly well with my 10 other lenses). So I got a refund and then bought the canon, and was amazed by how good it is.
Not only is it sharp at 2.0, but esp. the contrast (which is often more important) was very impressive wide open. It is sharper than then Sigma at 2.0 (see link at bottom if you don't believe me). Mechanically, the lens is great too. And the IS is just fantastic. Within weeks it became my favorite lens.
A note: having a 1.4 is attractive because of the coolness (status symbol) aspect, but I have found that I do not need it. Of course 1.4 stops more subject motion, but with the shallow DOF at 1.4 a moving subject is very hard to get in focus. And if I need shallow DOF I just use a 85mm or longer prime. I don't really like shallow DOF on wide angle pictures that much.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=824&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=829&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2
|
|
|
May 1, 2013
|
|
rudyt
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 26, 2013
Location: Germany
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 26, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 26, 2013
|
|
barmaley
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 23, 2009
Location: Russia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 12, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
very good IQ
|
|
Cons:
|
relatively large, price
|
|
I've tried this lens for a few days and I really like it.
It is well built. It delivered excellent IQ: it is sharp across the frame, CA a barely noticable, it has nice bokeh. Carl Zeiss Distagon 35mm f/2.0 ZE is superior optically, but the difference is not big...
Af is very accurate and Image Stabilizations works fine. Very attractive lens.
here is my experience with this lens and sample images:
http://alexsukonkin.com/reviews/Canon-EF35-f20-IS-USM_en.shtml
|
|
|
Apr 12, 2013
|
|
sv2dgi
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 2, 2013
Location: Greece
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 2, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp even wide open, mechanically stable, tight manual focusing ring (maybe too tight)
|
|
Cons:
|
No lens hood. Strong coma aberration giving trouble with strong lights during night time photography.
|
|
|
I have mixed feelings with this lens. In short it was a pleasant surprise during daytime photography but not a very good performer in night photography.
During daytime, everything comes out sharp. Even the corners of the 5D MkII frame are sharp and without significant chromatic aberration.
Vignetting at f/2 is strong and up to now there is no profile for EOS Utility/DPP/Adobe Raw Converter to upload into the camera to correct this.
Sharpness is exceptional. During daytime at f/4 - f/8 it easily outperforms both the 17-40 and the 24-105. The 24-105 output seems heavily blurred compared to this lens. I really love all photos (even flower "macro" photos) I take with this lens during daytime.
During night time, you can go easily down to 1/8 seconds and still get stable photos. The IS is working fine helping you a lot. However do not put any strong lights far from the center of the image. The closer to the edge a strong light is, the more it resembles a gull-wing, typical coma pattern. This also affects dark areas close to much lighter areas, spreading a "halo" around the lighter areas. To see this you have to have some clipped values (flashing areas) inside the lights/light areas. As a result it is a great indoor lens for night-time photography but a mediocre-at-best landscape night-time photography. During the twilight even the moon in the corner of the full-frame gets gull-wing shaped.
The coma shapes are fairly symmetrical around the center so I do not believe that any element is knocked out of alignment.
It is totally useless for wide-area astrophotography (Milky way, Orion belt etc...), as its distortions and mainly the coma destroy the shape of the stars.
I had no problems with flaring with this lens, even if I cannot still find the hood here in Greece.
Finally the Image Stabilizer of this lens is clearly audible inside any video I recorded. Similar to the noise I get from the IS of the 24-105.
|
|
|
Apr 2, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
33
|
93032
|
Jun 28, 2022
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
97% of reviewers
|
$516.13
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.10
|
8.61
|
9.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
