Canon 35mm f/2 (non-IS) on 60D: worth it?

I use it on my 60D, and it is my favorite lens. It is sharp and useful. I recommend keeping the lens hood on it at all times for protection and flare reduction.
While I like both zooms and primes, I find that I use the 35 more than any of my other primes. It works fine at F2, and the difference between F2 and F2.8 is an important full stop. I also have the Tokina macro 35f2.5 and the Sigma 50 macro, but I like Canon color much more than the color rendition Imget from Sigma. qWhile I have the Canon 50 F1.4, I wouldn't use F1.4 too often...I prefer F2 for portraits.

EverydayGetaway wrote in post #16079816
I wouldn't really worry about the hexagon bokeh, you only really see it when stopped down beyond F/4.

Here's an example at f/2.5 from my old T2i (I don't have anything that shows the bokeh better at a lower f/stop on a crop sensor, but I do from the 6D if you're interested

That doesn't look bad. Subject's sharp, and background blur is acceptable considering foliage is a always challenging.

silma wrote in post #16080056
I have it on a 60D (weel, had it...taken to canon for repair now) and I can say I love that little cheap lens. It's small, light, AF is fast (noisy). I can bring my 60D always with me without having something bulky in my bag.

A small and light kit to bring around is what I'm looking for. How's the AF? Is it accurate? I don't mind it being noisy, I'm used to that with my Tamron already. As long as it doesn't hunt and locks in reasonably fast, that'll be fine. I'm happy with my Tamron AF performance. But the 50mm f1.8 Mk II AF just isn't good enough.

artyH wrote in post #16080379
I use it on my 60D, and it is my favorite lens. It is sharp and useful. I recommend keeping the lens hood on it at all times for protection and flare reduction.
While I like both zooms and primes, I find that I use the 35 more than any of my other primes. It works fine at F2, and the difference between F2 and F2.8 is an important full stop.

I quite often shoot indoor or in dimly lit areas, so the extra stop will be welcome to keep the shutter speed high enough. The 60D high iso is quite usable, but I prefer to keep it low whenever I can. I wonder how the AF keeps up when it gets dark...

cedm wrote in post #16082586
That doesn't look bad. Subject's sharp, and background blur is acceptable considering foliage is a always challenging.

A small and light kit to bring around is what I'm looking for. How's the AF? Is it accurate? I don't mind it being noisy, I'm used to that with my Tamron already. As long as it doesn't hunt and locks in reasonably fast, that'll be fine. I'm happy with my Tamron AF performance. But the 50mm f1.8 Mk II AF just isn't good enough.

I quite often shoot indoor or in dimly lit areas, so the extra stop will be welcome to keep the shutter speed high enough. The 60D high iso is quite usable, but I prefer to keep it low whenever I can. I wonder how the AF keeps up when it gets dark...

It does OK in the dark, definitely not the best lens for it though. On my 6D it has zero issues locking focus in the dark, but on my old T2i and EOS M it hunts a little bit, but it pretty much always locks accurately.

I bought a 35 2 about 4 months ago for my 60D. I liked it. Just picked up a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 non-VC. About a week later I sold the 35 2. Easy decision, too.

Tommy1957 wrote in post #16084349
I bought a 35 2 about 4 months ago for my 60D. I liked it. Just picked up a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 non-VC. About a week later I sold the 35 2. Easy decision, too.

I did a similar thing.
Used a 28mm f/2.8 prime on my 60D for a while as it quick to focus & good in low light.
Got a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 non-VC and sold the prime.

Tommy1957 wrote in post #16084349
I bought a 35 2 about 4 months ago for my 60D. I liked it. Just picked up a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 non-VC. About a week later I sold the 35 2. Easy decision, too.

Well, I'm heading in the opposite direction Well, I intend to keep my Tamron, it's my favorite lens by far, but I do want to get the prime as a smaller/lighter alternative.

Since you had both, how would you compare the build and the AF quality? Is it on compare or is one noticeably better than the other?

I've watched a few videos on youtube showing the 35mm AF and it looked pretty good. Definitely quick and no mention of it hunting or having troubles to lock focus. That's encouraging.

I read good things about the IQ as well, though the chart samples from the-digital-picture.com shows it to be blur with chromatic aberration wide open. Other reviews (e.g. photozone.de) say it's sharp with little CA. Maybe someone got a bad copy? For the matter, I mostly/only care about center sharpness.

^I've never observed any serious CA from mine, I shoot wide open fairly often, I actually think it's one of my better lenses with CA control. The AF is laughably loud, but it's fast and accurate. If you're looking for something small and light as a standard walk around lens, do yourself a favor and buy it, because that's exactly what I loved about it on my T2i

That lens is also the reason I'm hoping Canon comes out with a nice 30-35mm lens for the EOS M, for now I use the 35/2 with the EF adapter on the M pretty often, but I'd love for it to be smaller (no need for adapter).

If you shoot into the sun, you can get CA and flare, but that is also the case with most fast lenses. The lens hood helps.
AF is accurate and pretty fast in low light. It is not quite as fast as the 85f1.8, but does well on my 60D. I generally have the 35 mounted on my 60D and a zoom on my T2i. AF is just faster on the 60D than the T2i.

I used the 35 f2 over the 35L for a long time. The 35 f2 is actually SHARPER in the center than the 35L, and mine focused more accurately too.

Definitely loved the 35 f2, and for the price it's one of the best deals you can get for price:performance ratio.