LOG IN    OR   REGISTER TO FORUMS


Canon EF 35mm f/2

FORUMS Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive
Thread started 23 Feb 2006 (Thursday) 22:54   
LIST NEARBY THREADS
 
bolantej
Goldmember
Joined Mar 2005
3,774 posts
CAlifornia
[MORE/SHARE]

Okay, headed to the shop tomorrow, might ask to see the 35 f/2. opinions before I buy? shots even? thanks all.

Post #1, Feb 23, 2006 22:54:30




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
KevC
Goldmember
KevC's Avatar
Joined Jan 2005
3,154 posts
to
[MORE/SHARE]

Seems like a nice little lens. I haven't used it, but browsed through shots at pbase. Decently fast, tiny bit longer than normal on a crop body.

The 35L blows it away, but that's what so much money buys you :D

It's noisy, but it focusses fast.

Wide angles are harder to build, so don't expect something as sharp as the nifty... but stopped down to ~f/5.6 it should be tack sharp :)

Post #2, Feb 23, 2006 23:20:44


Too much gear...
take nothing but pictures .... kill nothing but time .... leave nothing but footprints

LOG IN TO REPLY
bolantej
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Joined Mar 2005
3,774 posts
CAlifornia
[MORE/SHARE]

thanks KevC. thinking of using it for wider portrait shots.

Post #3, Feb 23, 2006 23:37:41




LOG IN TO REPLY
embdude
Goldmember
embdude's Avatar
Joined May 2005
1,003 posts
California
[MORE/SHARE]

I have had this lens for 3 months now. It performs well and focuses very close in so you can use it for small objects or bugs and such if a macro lens is not handy. It is a very light and short lens (maybe canon's smallest) and will easily fit in a jacket pocket. The f/2 is nice for portraits and such and blurs the background nicely. I also like the focal legnth better than the 50mm on the smaller digital sensor.

I used it today to shoot these:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=139661

I will try to find something better to post later...

The only down sides to this lens is the lack of a quiet USM motor and you can't focus manualy when the lens is switched to autofocus. On the plus side the focus moves the front element in and out and does not spin the front element like some cheaper canon lenses like the 18-55 kit lens.

I dont think the L lens blows it away as far as image quality is concerned, it is twice as fast though at f/1.4 and is built hardier. The L is also annoyingly large. I can not forsee ever looking to get the L myself.

Post #4, Feb 24, 2006 00:18:36 as a reply to bolantej's post 40 minutes earlier.


-Chris
NEW: Photo Blogexternal link/ My Classic Camerasexternal link / Toys: Gear Sig...
Canon PDF's for EOS Digital Camerasexternal link
Free Photo Stuff Blogexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
LightRules
"flat out embarrassing"
LightRules's Avatar
Joined Jun 2005
9,908 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

The worst thing about the 35 f2 is the AF noise (aka, "wasp in a matchbox"). But AF speed is pretty fast and optics are very good above f2.8 (while f2 is quite useable). Size and weight is excellent (actually second to none really), and price is relatively low. Another great aspect of the 35 f2 is the close MFD. That said, I almost never use the lens because it can't compete with my Sigma 30 f1.4 EX.

Post #5, Feb 24, 2006 00:22:36




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
bolantej
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Joined Mar 2005
3,774 posts
CAlifornia
[MORE/SHARE]

Thanks embdude. I like the smaller lenses for toting the beast around, too. nice shots, I'd love to see somemore before tomorow ;) that is, if the shop has one in stock.

fStopJojo-
That Sigma is tempting, but I'm working on a budget right now, so the cheaper the better, as long as the optics are decent. doing a paid gig next month in a gym so I've gotta get something for some fast wider shots. I know, the 1.4 would definitely help, but the pocket is hurting a bit after my recent purchases. does that mean you're selling your 35/2? I forget where you're located. ;)

Thanks all for the comments.

Post #6, Feb 24, 2006 00:32:44




LOG IN TO REPLY
LightRules
"flat out embarrassing"
LightRules's Avatar
Joined Jun 2005
9,908 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

bolantej wrote:
does that mean you're selling your 35/2? I forget where you're located. ;)

i doubt i'll ever sell it really. it's such a good, small, lightweight lens that has its use for me here and there. but i do recommend it as it gives a nice walkaround 56mm FOV on your crop body for a very reasonable price. enjoy.

Post #7, Feb 24, 2006 00:38:37 as a reply to bolantej's post 5 minutes earlier.




LOG IN TO REPLY
aparmley
Senior Member
Joined Jul 2005
508 posts
Near St. Louis
[MORE/SHARE]

Its a fun little lens. I haven't used it too terribly much but Its a great focal lenght on a 1.6. Sharpness, AF speed, and more importantly AF accuracy blows my 50 1.8 out of the water - the "nifty" is a joke compared to it. But as jojo pointed out the focus motor is something you'd never heard before - he described it pretty close there.

Some samples for you:
F3.2

IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://parmley.smugmug​.com/photos/45573986-L.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://parmley.smugmug​.com/photos/45663071-L.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


F8 and some edits obviously
IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://parmley.smugmug​.com/photos/45662306-M.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


Wide open F2 [I think thats what they call "usable"]
IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://parmley.smugmug​.com/photos/45662302-L.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


F4
IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://parmley.smugmug​.com/photos/45575203-L.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


Heres a taste of the close focus distance I love this perk!
IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://parmley.smugmug​.com/photos/45577784-L.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


heres a little look at the bokeh and highlight performance - the bokeh isn't as dreamy as some but its not bad for the $$s.
IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://parmley.smugmug​.com/photos/46098958-L.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO


This is getting long - sorry about that - but I figure its all good. . .

comparison of focus tests between it and the 50 1.8 - please pardon the lack of custom WB here.
IMAGE NOT FOUND IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING!
http://parmley.smugmug​.com/photos/54085235-L.jpgexternal link
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO



IMAGE: http://parmley.smugmug​.com/photos/54085229-L.jpg

Please note this isn't the 50s best performance on the focus test - if I triple focus the results are better however, they are still soft and no where near the 35s sharpness - The point is to show what, under normal shooting conditions what I get when I simply focus and fire - its great when you have the time to lock focus a few times until you "Think" the lens finally has it right - but its a PITA!

but if you really want to see the best results I can get with the 50 focusing it a bunch of times, taking about 10 photos, and then going with the pick of the litter - well here ya are. . .


IMAGE: http://parmley.smugmug​.com/photos/57464126-L.jpg

by my eyes, the 35 is still better - first time around too - thats whats nice.

This is kinda long but I hope you like the sample images - I hope they help at least. . . My conclusion is that its a fun lens. . . if you got the money for it and you aren't deciding between this and a real nice lens I think it would be a nice addition. Opinions vary though - I can just give ya mine.

good luck to ya.
Andy

Post #8, Feb 24, 2006 00:39:17


Switched to Nikon . . . Thanks to all of you that made my sale a success! Enjoy your new gear!

LOG IN TO REPLY
aparmley
Senior Member
Joined Jul 2005
508 posts
Near St. Louis
[MORE/SHARE]

Looks like mine and Redbirds lenses are pretty "usable" wide open. Good example Red.

Post #9, Feb 24, 2006 00:47:24


Switched to Nikon . . . Thanks to all of you that made my sale a success! Enjoy your new gear!

LOG IN TO REPLY
aparmley
Senior Member
Joined Jul 2005
508 posts
Near St. Louis
[MORE/SHARE]

Redbird_xo wrote:
Hey Aparmley, I just realize that I have the exact same primes as your lineup. Regarding the "usability" of the 35mm F/2, I like mine very much for portrait and landscape shots. Thanks and happy shooting!

haha no kidding. . . Its been an interesting journey thus far. Thanks u 2 bud.

Post #10, Feb 24, 2006 00:59:19 as a reply to post 1220970


Switched to Nikon . . . Thanks to all of you that made my sale a success! Enjoy your new gear!

LOG IN TO REPLY
bolantej
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Joined Mar 2005
3,774 posts
CAlifornia
[MORE/SHARE]

Very nice shots from all of you!thanks so much. as logn as there is oen in the shop I may just have to pick it up (unless it's waaaaaaaay overpriced). I can deal with noise in exchange for prime goodness.

Post #11, Feb 24, 2006 01:32:19




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
embdude
Goldmember
embdude's Avatar
Joined May 2005
1,003 posts
California
[MORE/SHARE]

Here is a portrait of my daughter Sabrina with the 35 f/2

Also a link to a landscape taken with the 35mm, I posted last month...
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=128746

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos.

Post #12, Feb 24, 2006 02:27:38 as a reply to bolantej's post 55 minutes earlier.


-Chris
NEW: Photo Blogexternal link/ My Classic Camerasexternal link / Toys: Gear Sig...
Canon PDF's for EOS Digital Camerasexternal link
Free Photo Stuff Blogexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Wavy ­ C
Senior Member
Joined Jan 2005
848 posts
Belfast, Northern Ireland
[MORE/SHARE]

KevC wrote:
The 35L blows it away, but that's what so much money buys you :D

I don't think the 35L 'blows the f2 away' at all - the f2 lacks the silent usm focusing motor, but focus is still fast and extremely accurate. Optically I doubt if there is much between them. Certainly the f1.4 is nice, but the f2 is no slouch either.

It's light weight makes the 35mm f2 my favourite walkaround lens - you hardly know it is on the camera.

Post #13, Feb 24, 2006 05:22:54 as a reply to KevC's post 6 hours earlier.



----------
It wasn't me!

LOG IN TO REPLY
Sean-Mcr
Goldmember
Sean-Mcr's Avatar
Joined Apr 2005
1,813 posts
Manchester, England
[MORE/SHARE]

I'm not going to get in to a debate about the two versions, alls i can say is that no matter the version, a 35 is a great lens to own

I have to say, my 35 1.4 is sharper then my 50 1.4 and my 50 is sharp. But of course there's more to a lens then that

Post #14, Feb 24, 2006 08:03:32


I don't know what good composition is.... Sometimes for me composition has to do with a certain brightness or a certain coming to restness and other times it has to do with funny mistakes. There's a kind of rightness and wrongness and sometimes I like rightness and sometimes I like wrongness. Diane Arbus



http://www.pbase.com/s​ean_mcrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Wavy ­ C
Senior Member
Joined Jan 2005
848 posts
Belfast, Northern Ireland
[MORE/SHARE]

Sean-Mcr wrote:
I'm not going to get in to a debate about the two versions, alls i can say is that no matter the version, a 35 is a great lens to own

lol - wise decision on the debate, and I agree wholeheartedly that a 35mm is a great lens to own. If I could only have one lens I think it would be a 35mm!

Anyway, I've used both versions and, imho, the L version is probably optically slightly better in most if not all respects. Not a mile better, slightly better. In many cases it would be difficult to distinguish between them.

Mechanically, the L is definitely better - its usm motor offers silent (although not much faster) focusing, while the f2 makes a distinct rasp sound. Both seem very accurate. The f2 build quality, while not up to L quality, is still very good. It certainly does not feel a cheap lens, like, for example, the 50mm f1.8.

But, in my mind at least, the 35 f2 is the ultimate walkaround lens because of its small size and weight. If you carry your camera around your neck or over your shoulder it balances perfectly (at least on my 20D). The f2 is also nearly perfect for candid shots because out on the street it doesn't look a professional lens (the f1.4 looks more like a small zoom). The small size and weight also makes it easy to shoot one-handed if necessary, holding the camera by its handgrip. If you combine it with an 85mm f1.8, I'd say you are ready to tackle nearly any everyday situation (oh, and as an added bonus they both can use the same hood on a 1.6 crop body).

I much prefer this lens (or the f1.4 for that matter) to either of the 50mm lenses.

Highly recommended (and good value too)!

Post #15, Feb 24, 2006 09:59:16 as a reply to Sean-Mcr's post 1 hour earlier.



----------
It wasn't me!

LOG IN TO REPLY


LIST NEARBY THREADS
572,981 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon EF 35mm f/2
FORUMS Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive



NOT A MEMBER YET? CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TO FORUMS

CHANGE BODY TEXT SIZE FOR ALL THREAD PAGES
POWERED BY AMASS 1.0version 1.0
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net


SEND FEEDBACK TO STAFF  |  JUMP TO FORUM...  |  FORUM RULES


Spent 0.00083 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.03s
812 guests, 577 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 3341, that happened on Dec 11, 2014
Latest registered member is ozaero

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: By using this site you agree that some cookies will be stored on your browser. For unlogged users we store one session id cookie. For registered members we store (in addition to login session cookie) only cookies that are essential for required functionality, we do not store any personal tracking data in cookies or other browser's data storage methods.