Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 04 Mar 2012 (Sunday) 21:40
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Anyone who has had or has the 35mm f1.4L and Canon 50mm f1.4...

 
twoshadows
Liquid Nitrogen
Avatar
7,064 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3334
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Between the palms and the pines.
     
Mar 05, 2012 00:46 |  #16

Sounds like you have your mind pretty much made up, OP. But, having owned both, I'll give you my 2 cents fwiw.

They're different lenses. The 35 is built better with better AF and is slightly sharper, but if a 50 is what you need/want then you won't be entirely happy with the 35mm FL.

Probably the best thing is to try it. If you have the cash to do it without selling your 50 you can compare and see for yourself.


xgender.net (external link) Miss Julia Grey (she/her/Miss)
OST, API, PPP & MLI explained (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
reza187
Member
181 posts
Likes: 49
Joined May 2009
Location: Tokyo
     
Mar 05, 2012 01:45 |  #17

I had both. Personally, I don't like the color from 50 1.4 which I think muted. I prefer the 35L much more mainly for its color, contrast, and build quality.
I have sold them both and now use the Zeiss counterparts, which I think better for my needs (mainly static objects), and havent looked back since.

Btw, 35mm focal length works better for me. If I have to choose one, 35mm is way to go. YMMV.


Flickr (external link)
Cameras: Canon 5D Mark II, Sony RX1
Lenses: Canon 70-200mm F2.8 L IS II
Sigma Art 24mm F1.4, 35mm F1.4, 50mm F1.4, 85mm F1.4, 135mm F1.8
Carl Zeiss ZE 21mm F2.8, 28mm F2.0, 35mm F1.4, 35mm F2.0, 50mm F2.0 MP, 100mm F2.0 MP

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nonick
Goldmember
1,588 posts
Joined Jun 2009
Location: NYC
     
Mar 05, 2012 02:04 |  #18

50/1.4 is an okay lens but don't expect good color contrast there... sharpness is good when stopped down to f/2.8.


Gear|Searching for 7DII, Buying 5DIII 35L II, 24-70 2.8L IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kin2son
Goldmember
4,546 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Mar 05, 2012 02:24 |  #19
bannedPermanent ban

KenBPhotos wrote in post #14025277 (external link)
Also, even though the 35mm f1.4L lens is 4x more, I just don't see it performing 4x as good as the 50mm f1.4, so that's why it actually would be a huge surprise.

Since when the L is ever 4x more of a lens compared to the younger siblings? Is 50L 4x of a lens compared to 50 1.4? Or 85L 5x the lens of 85 1.8? What about 35L vs 35/2? Is the L 4x the lens?

You get the idea.....

Don't judge a lens based on price.....you always pay the premium for that slight increase when you want the best.


5D3 Gripped / 17-40L / Σ35 / 40 Pancake / Zeiss 50 MP / Σ85 / 100L Macro / 70-200 f2.8L II IS / 430 EX II / 580 EX II / Canon 2xIII TC / Kenko Ext. Tubes
EOS M / EF-M 18-55 / EF-M 22f2 / Ricoh GR aka Ultimate street camera :p
Flickr (external link) | My Images on Getty®‎ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bobbyz
Cream of the Crop
20,505 posts
Likes: 3443
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Mar 05, 2012 08:58 |  #20

Don't have canon 50mm f1.4 but sigma 50mm f1.4 and 35L. Both are quite nice, colors look good from both to me. Prefer 35L focal length wise.


Fuji XT-1, 18-55mm
Sony A7rIV, , Tamron 28-200mm, Sigma 40mm f1.4 Art FE, Sony 85mm f1.8 FE, Sigma 105mm f1.4 Art FE
Fuji GFX50s, 23mm f4, 32-64mm, 45mm f2.8, 110mm f2, 120mm f4 macro
Canon 24mm TSE-II, 85mm f1.2 L II, 90mm TSE-II Macro, 300mm f2.8 IS I

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Alex_Venom
Goldmember
Avatar
1,624 posts
Joined Nov 2008
     
Mar 05, 2012 09:31 |  #21

stillinamerica wrote in post #14025406 (external link)
So. I have the 50mm 1.2. I use it on the 5D mk2.
I bought a 35 1.4L a few weeks ago as I found a great deal and couldnt miss out (35L and 17-55 2.8 for $1150 combined). I was worried that the focal ranges would cross over.

They don't, the 35L will now be used indoors over the 501.2.

In terms of image quality, I have found the 35L to be as good as the 50L right now....So I would assume it is better than the 50 1.4.

Did they clean the blood spills from them for you? :p;):D


Photography is about GEAR and not talent or practice. Practice won't make you a better photographer. Expensive equipment will. =D
"Nobody can buy a scalpel and become a doctor, but anyone can buy a camera and become a photographer."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Alex_Venom
Goldmember
Avatar
1,624 posts
Joined Nov 2008
     
Mar 05, 2012 09:34 |  #22

Oh, and jokes apart, about the topic: I have had the 50 1.4 and now have the 35L. All I can say is: GET IT! You'll love it!

Much sharper wide open (and I mean it!)
Faster AF
Way better build
Better colors and contrast
Way better bokeh

You get what you pay for and this is clearly the case. Only downside IMHO of the 35L is more CA wide open and that's not really easy to fix in post...


Photography is about GEAR and not talent or practice. Practice won't make you a better photographer. Expensive equipment will. =D
"Nobody can buy a scalpel and become a doctor, but anyone can buy a camera and become a photographer."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bob_r
Goldmember
2,473 posts
Gallery: 23 photos
Likes: 725
Joined Aug 2006
Location: West Tennessee, USA
     
Mar 05, 2012 11:59 |  #23

Your Flickr site contain a lot of landscape shots and I didn't notice many shots where you were shooting wide open. If you plan on buying a 17-40 and you'll continue shooting mainly landscapes, I'd suggest buying the 17-40 first to see if you still need a 35L. I have both the 35L and the 50 f/1.4 and use the 50 more for studio work on both the 5D and 7D and the 35 more for landscapes and environmental portraits.

The 35 is a little sharper than the 50, but IMHO it's main advantages are the color and contrast.


Canon 7D, 5D, 35L, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8, 135L, 200L, 10-22, 17-55, 70-300, 100-400L, 500D, 580EX(2).
Sigma 150 macro, 1.4X, 2X, Quantaray 2X, Kenko closeup tubes, Yongnuo YN685(3), Yongnuo YN-622C-TX. Lots of studio stuff.
** Image Editing OK **

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sebr
Goldmember
Avatar
4,628 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Sweden/France
     
Mar 05, 2012 14:28 |  #24

I have both, but have not used the 50 since getting the 35. The main reason is that I really like the FL and rending the 35L provides. The 35L is definitely very sharp wide open. I must say my 50 is also very sharp, but the 35L is just so special.

I have the 35L and 70-200L in my bag most of the time. I think the 2 lenses make a grab combo for FF.


Sebastien
5D mkIII ; 17-40L ; 24-105L ; 70-200L II ; 70-300L ; 35L ; Σ85/1.4 ; 135L ; 100macro ; Kenko 1.4x ; 2x mkIII ; 580EXII
M5 ; M1 ; 11-22 ; 18-150 ; 22/2.0 ; EF adapter; Manfrotto LED
Benron Tripod; ThinkTank, Lowepro and Crumpler bags; Fjällräven backpack

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
marcosv
Senior Member
775 posts
Joined Oct 2009
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Mar 05, 2012 14:42 |  #25

sebr wrote in post #14029106 (external link)
I have the 35L and 70-200L in my bag most of the time. I think the 2 lenses make a grab combo for FF.

I'm just beginning to discover how much I like the 35L and 70-200L combination. These two are my best lens. My 85L is excellent, but, unless I'm doing f/1.2 portraits, the 70-200L does the job.


EOS-M | 40D | 5DII | 5DIII | EF-M 22 | EF-M 18-55 | 10-22 | 17-55 | 17-40L | 24-70L mk II | 24-105L | 70-200/2.8L IS mk II| 35L | 85L II |35/2 | 40/2.8 pancake | 50/1.8 | 50/1.4 | 100/2 | Rokinon 14/2.8 | 90 EX | 270 EX II | 580 EXII | 600 EX-RT

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Cesium
Goldmember
1,967 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2009
     
Mar 05, 2012 14:51 |  #26

The 35L is better. But when you need 50mm, use a 50mm lens. They may sound "close enough" on paper, but the two lenses render very different images.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
stax
Senior Member
Avatar
731 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Oakland
     
Mar 05, 2012 16:37 |  #27

bpark42 wrote in post #14025240 (external link)
If you are defining IQ as sharpness, then you probably won't see a huge difference. The 35L is certainly sharper in the central portion of the frame wide open, but has to be stopped down some for the outer zones to sharpen up.

That said, IQ encompasses more than just sharpness, and the 35L is clearly the superior lens overall. The 50/1.4 has muddy colors with relatively poor tonal transitions and an abrupt transition from in-focus to out of focus that can be somewhat unappealing. Of course, if you aren't seeing these issues with the 50 and are just looking for pixel-peeping sharpness, then maybe the upgrade to the 35 isn't worth it for you.

This x1,000,000. I have both lenses and this comment describes my experience. The 35L is acceptably sharp wide open, but it gets much better stopped down a bit.


http://www.flickr.com/​photos/staxnet/ (external link)

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=865770

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenBPhotos
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
572 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Jersey City
     
Mar 05, 2012 16:52 |  #28

bob_r wrote in post #14028171 (external link)
Your Flickr site contain a lot of landscape shots and I didn't notice many shots where you were shooting wide open. If you plan on buying a 17-40 and you'll continue shooting mainly landscapes, I'd suggest buying the 17-40 first to see if you still need a 35L. I have both the 35L and the 50 f/1.4 and use the 50 more for studio work on both the 5D and 7D and the 35 more for landscapes and environmental portraits.

The 35 is a little sharper than the 50, but IMHO it's main advantages are the color and contrast.

I ordered the 17-40mm f4L yesterday. I KNEW I was getting that lens, but wasn't sure about the 35mm.

I am going to get the 35mm L. My mind is made up, especially after looking at more sample images and from some of the comments on this thread. If you were in my situation, I think you would too...

I bought the 5D mkII w 24-105 from B&H about a week ago, but I ended up paying tax on it (I'm in Jersey and could have gotten it shipped from the store with no tax). Then, I noticed the price of the 5D mkII's on B&H were just lowered $200 because of mkIII. So now I can just exchange the 5D mkII w 24-105mm for the 5D mkII body and 35mm f1.4L for the same exact price. Actually I think I get $25 back :) I also just purchased the 17-40 after selling my 100mm macro, so I think I'll be set with the 35mm L, 50mm 1.4 and 17-40mm f4L for now. I'm saving for the 70-200mm f2.8 IS II now. So hopefully that can join my Domke bag in about a month. Thanks for all the help!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

3,290 views & 0 likes for this thread
Anyone who has had or has the 35mm f1.4L and Canon 50mm f1.4...
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Aphotographer21!
1016 guests, 218 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.