Canon EF 35 IS vs. Canon EF 40: Can't decide!

Final Point was:

I shoot by 90% indoor and low light. With the 35 IS I get ISO 1600 and at the same shoot with the 40er I get ISO 3200.

Canon 35 IS is in my way the best compromise.

I have a copy of the 40 STM and it is a great little lens for the $. However, it almost seems too small and only f2.8 (no advantage over my zoom), so I bought a the 35 f/2 IS for the extra stop, IS and it is still fairly small and light weight. I also like the ability to mount a proper hood, although it is over priced. Used the 35 at a wedding on New Years eve and was very impressed with its performance on my 6D.

The 40 will probably be up for sale soon.

jrscls wrote in post #16571350
I also like the ability to mount a proper hood, although it is over priced.

I got this aftermarket hood for the 35/2 IS. Looks good and works perfect. It has the little tab that newer Canon hoods have to make putting the hood on and taking it off much easier. And it is a lot cheaper than the OEM hood.

http://www.amazon.com …B00G9N5XJU/ref=​pd_sim_p_1

I have the 40mm pancake, but mostly for its size and price. It works well as a light weight walk around prime on my 5D3, and fits in my pocket when I want to take it along as an extra lens. The 35 f/2 IS is a better lens, but is in another pricing tier, and it is also larger.

I think, due to price, that a better comparison is the 40mm pancake vs. the 50mm f/1.8. The pancake wins that face-off in every category except maximum aperture.

Scrumhalf wrote in post #16571380
I got this aftermarket hood for the 35/2 IS. Looks good and works perfect. It has the little tab that newer Canon hoods have to make putting the hood on and taking it off much easier. And it is a lot cheaper than the OEM hood.

http://www.amazon.com …B00G9N5XJU/ref=​pd_sim_p_1

I was aware of that hood and was tempted. I justified paying the price for the Canon hood since there was an instant rebate that just about covered the price of the hood. I think at this price range, Canon should include the hood.

Heya,

35mm F2 IS if money is not an absolute issue.

40mm F2.8 if money is a serious issue.

The 35mm F2 IS is simply better, in every way, than the 40mm F2.8, except when it comes to fitting in your pocket.

What really matters though, is what you prefer in terms of focal length, feel, etc. Whatever simply works better for your style and needs is what you should focus on.

Very best,

I have both and will probably not use my 40mm much in the future.
The 35mmf/2 IS instantly became my favourite lens, especially at this time of the year when Shutter speeds can be a bit slower.
For me this lens covered everything i need other than a long reach like my 70-200. Its even replaced my 24-70 f/2.8 MKII as my daily lens.

A bit OT but i feel its a shame people are still buying gear that they intend to send back. No one wins in this situation. So now the shop has a used lens they need to get rid of.
Yes, i know its the law and there is nothing legally wrong with doing this but why dont people just buy one lens and if they dont like it then send it back.

Anyway, good call on keeping the 35mm, i know you will really enjoy it.

dave_bass5 wrote in post #16573949
A bit OT but i feel its a shame people are still buying gear that they intend to send back. No one wins in this situation. So now the shop has a used lens they need to get rid of.

Both lenses are used, when I bought it. So it's no problem.

Send the 40 back.

Have the 40 for 6 weeks. Nothing at all to complain.

Just got the 35is used from a friend today. Hope its one more stop and IS advantages will benefit me in daily use. Otherwise it'll go on second-hand market.

The 40 stays with me even if I decide to keep the 35is.

for the cost of the 40, keep both. I use the 40 as a body cap and backup lens. AF not blazing, but accurate and reliable.