 |
Page: 1 · 2 · 3
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
Aichbus
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 22, 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jan 21, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, lightweight, stabilized
|
|
Cons:
|
pricey, no hood included, not weathersealed
|
|
|
I ordered that lens after having tested the new Sigma 35 mm f/1,4 DG HSM. The Sigma can be a very good lens, if you get a good copy. Mine was very soft on one side of the frame and had a front focus issue, so I returned it. Also, it was quite heavy. The new Canon 35 2 IS is lighter. It feels solid, although not as solid as most L lenses. A quick test on a resolution chart proved that it is very sharp wide open, not worse than the Sigma @ f=1.4. Distortion is low, although more noticeable than on the Sigma. It lacks the 1 stop advantage of the Sigma but offers images stabilization instead. I doubt that it is as good as 4 stops, the IS on my 70-300L seems to be better, but maybe it is the weight of the latter that adds to the image stabilization. I find it disgraceful that Canon doesn't include a lens hood with this lens, especially at this price point. However, I don't know why, I like this lens more than the Sigma. I have the old EF 35 mm f2 and the 16-35L II, and the image quality of both (@35 mm) is the pits compared to this lens, so even at this price, I think I will keep the lens.
|
|
|
Jan 21, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
35
|
93332
|
Aug 3, 2022
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
97% of reviewers
|
$503.41
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.03
|
8.53
|
9.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
