First Impressions: Canon 35mm f/2

http://www.youtube.com …EqzCK3w&feature​=autoshare

Now in video form, in case you want my voice to horrible mess up your hearing

In text form:

-Build is much nicer than i expected, Kai said "oooh if i squeeze it I think its going to break" and I really disagree with that, Its built perfectly fine, Much nicer than say the Nifty or the kit 18-55

-Focus rings a hair scratchy and tiny..but eh...Not "abysmal" to me...

-AF is quieter than i expected, and pretty darn snappy, havnt had any issues with hunting or anything yet, and it seems to be spot on...

-"its so tiny" i think were the first three words i uttered upon unboxing it

-So far the IQ seems pretty good, Even wide open, good color and contrast out of it too...

-So far I do like it more than the 28mm f/1.8, but I havnt tested it out as thoroughly yet

KenjiS wrote in post #13991598
Kai said "oooh if i squeeze it I think its going to break" and I really disagree with that,

I've learned not to put much stock in Kai's opinions. Much too biased. Fun to watch sometimes though. Not all the time.

Hope you've finally found a standard lens you're happy with though

So far so good!

Heres the 35mm f/2 taken by the Sigmalux..

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …unetsukiphoto/6​941928933/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …unetsukiphoto/6​795815328/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …unetsukiphoto/6​941929081/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …unetsukiphoto/6​795815534/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …unetsukiphoto/6​941929237/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …unetsukiphoto/6​795815688/

Some more samples...

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …unetsukiphoto/6​795916032/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …unetsukiphoto/6​795916090/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …unetsukiphoto/6​942029725/

KenjiS wrote in post #13991598
-Focus rings a hair scratchy and tiny..but eh...Not "abysmal" to me...

-AF is quieter than i expected, and pretty darn snappy, havnt had any issues with hunting or anything yet, and it seems to be spot on...

-So far I do like it more than the 28mm f/1.8, but I havnt tested it out as thoroughly yet

Thanks for your review.

I just love how tiny the 35/2 looks on my 5D2. It's so small, I can't see using a UV filter to protect the front element, because that element is so very small.

I would say that the AF is louder than I expected. Loud zzzzt, zzzzt... But, I am fine with it.

I'd be curious to see how the 35/2 compares to the 28/1.8. I use 35/2, 50/1.4, and 100/2. I was thinking about 28/1.8, 50/1.4, and 100/2 --- although I'd probably won't sell the 35/2 --- I love the focal length.

My feeling on the 28mm f/1.8 (Though im coming from a crop camera....) is that it really, really needs f/2.8 or so to get nice and sharp and contrasty/punchy... and at f/2.8 the Bokeh can get a bit strange sometimes because of the non-rounded aperture, it also flares BADLY, IE, im not even pointing near the sun using a hood and this things flaring like a B! bad...

Its not exactly a "bad" lens mind you, and for full frame you might be able to live with the downsides easier than me (Because theres nothing else for you without spending over a grand)

For my usage, the 35mm f/2 is delivering sharp contrasty punchy results wide open at f/2, Something the 28mm f/1.8 wasnt as good at...

For APS-C I think the 35mm f/2 is the closest thing I've used to the excellent Nikon 35mm f/1.8, And thats all i really wanted...

The 35/2 is very close to the 35L for IQ. In fact, my 35/2 was better in the fringing / CA department. AF is snappy and accurate. And yes, it is small and light. Only real downsides to the 35/2 are it's built quality and crappy MF ring/operation.

Nice vid (minus iPhone quality ). I just viewed it after commenting on your "Prime nuts" thread. How do you find the bokeh compared to the 28 1.8? I know you said the 28 needs 2.8 to get good, but if you were to get a decent shot at 1.8..vs the 35 @ 2.. which do you think is creamier?

Focus noise, and to some extent..speed on it wouldn't be a big concern for me, i'm more interested in IQ.....and the price is definitely right.

Daan37 wrote in post #13992196
The 35/2 is very close to the 35L for IQ. In fact, my 35/2 was better in the fringing / CA department. AF is snappy and accurate. And yes, it is small and light. Only real downsides to the 35/2 are it's built quality and crappy MF ring/operation.

That's why I opted for the Voigtlander Ultron 40mm SL II f/2. Build quality is good and the MF ring is a pure joy to use. The only downside is that it's a MF lens,so if you want AF it's not the lens for you.

I had it for a long time - very sharp and very good to use indoor. I only sold it when I decided that I wanted a faster lens, and replaced it with the Sigma 30mm f/1.4.

I know a lot of people that wanted both a 24mm and a 35mm prime but only had the money for one L lens. The people who bought a 35mm F/1.4 L and a 28mm F/1.8 are much happier than the people that bought a 24m F/1.4 L and a 35mm F/2

I had the 35 f2 and returned it for the sigma 30.

The 35 was super sharp at f2. AF was louder but pretty quick. It would only be annoying if you really needed quiet. The lens is tiny but pretty solid feeling. Not super quality, but way better than the nifty. The f2 just felt limiting. I would still need a flash a good bit in the house.

But I just couldn't get the sigma out of my head. That extra stop and different bokeh just kept calling my name. All the threads about its greatness despite its calibration issues swayed me. The first copy was terrible. I sent the second copy in with my t3i and it came back looking great. Plenty sharp at 1.4, gives me more options, and seemingly right on par with the 35 at f2, although I need a bit more testing

I'm still on the fence about which will have been better in the long run (no current plans for a FF). I have only been able to get a few pics with the 30 since it came back. The 35 may win in edge to edge sharpness at wider apertures but who knows.....

tylerpaulphoto wrote in post #13992630
I know a lot of people that wanted both a 24mm and a 35mm prime but only had the money for one L lens. The people who bought a 35mm F/1.4 L and a 28mm F/1.8 are much happier than the people that bought a 24m F/1.4 L and a 35mm F/2

Interesting. I never used the Canon 28mm or 24L primes to have a personal opinion. At one point I was thinking 24L II, 50L, and 85L as a three prime set, but, I'm thinking that a wide angle zoom might be good enough until I can justify buying a dedicated wide angle landscape lens (e.g Zeiss 21).

My experience with the 35mm focal length on a full frame sensor was so good, I had to try my friend's 35L. When it came time to buy new glass, I knew that if I bought a 35L it would instantly become my second most used lens in my bag (after the 24-105).

I'm not selling my 35/2 though. It is really sharp and there will be times when I want to carry the small/light primes over L glass.

congrats nice pics and nice lens

happy 35/2 user here as well