Will Canon's 35 f1.4L Mark II win?

Personally I don't see the need to upgrade my 35L - its my most versatile lens and performs flawlessly in every condition. Focus is so fast and accurate, colors rendition, etc. And for $1100 2 years ago it's been one of my best investments in my business. I wouldn't sell it to buy the Sigma for a few hundred less.

And if somehow they improve with the 35LII there is now way in hell I would buy it for $2200 (which is the least its going to cost out of the gate)

Look at canon lenses recently.

24-70 ii and 70-200 2.8 ii

incredible optical performance, incredible price increase.

why would the remake of the 35 be any different?

it had better for the price they are going to charge for it...

there's no way canon would release a 35L II that performs worse than the sigma...it'd make zero sense...so they're not going to release anything until they have something better...

I would not mind an 35L, I think it's a great lens and I know the consistency I've always received from canons L line. The sigma renders differently than my canon L, ziess does likewise, even though the CZ and Sig may be optically superior, I'd still prefer to buy once and know it will work well with my other lenses.

I would be suprised though if canon doesn't release a new 35L in the next year, it seems to be the lens most cried out for after the release of the sigma.

Hopefully a 35 1.2L with a price point between $1600-1900 that has better AF than the 85L ii or 50L

Invertalon wrote in post #16463313
35L already has a floating element. I also never had any issues with field curvature. The only benefit would be sealing in your list lol

Earlier I said that the remake of the 35L could be with f/1.2 maximum aperture, rather than the f/1.4 on the present lens. Making a 35L f/1.2 would not be a tweak of the existing design, but rather a new design altogether. Judging from the experience of the 50 f/1.2L it is not a foregone conclusion that the new 35L f/1.2 lens would have a floating element and avoid field curvature. That is precisely why I said that the lens would have to avoid these lovely "features" present on the 50L.

canon ver II will be $1000 more than ver 1

My guess is the listing price will be around $1,899 for 35mm L II.

Sirrith wrote in post #16462188
Those people will be caught, then drawn and quartered, and there will be a temporary truce between the Canons and the Sigmas.

Meanwhile, those of us who prefer a 50mm prime will publicly laugh at the arguing, while secretly being jealous that the 35mm-ites have some real nice lens choices.

35 f/1.2L

I would s*** d*** for it.

Given the performance of the 24-70mm II in comparison to the Sigma 35mm and the 24mm and 50mm Canon L... I'm not sure why people still buy these primes, unless you absolutely require f/1.4.

Mornnb wrote in post #16465945
Given the performance of the 24-70mm II in comparison to the Sigma 35mm and the 24mm and 50mm Canon L... I'm not sure why people still buy these primes, unless you absolutely require f/1.4.

No one "absolutely requires" anything. f/1.4 gives a magical look to portraits. If you're going to use a boring and slow midrange zoom, why not just use a G15 and call it a day? With the high IQ of compacts these days I'm not sure why people still buy midrange zooms.

haha. this is funny.

oh well some people never learn

LostArk wrote in post #16465973
No one "absolutely requires" anything. f/1.4 gives a magical look to portraits. If you're going to use a boring and slow midrange zoom, why not just use a G15 and call it a day? With the high IQ of compacts these days I'm not sure why people still buy midrange zooms.

Because some people need versatility to be able to change focal length on the spot. Not everybody has the ability to walk back and forth framing images with primes. I use my 17-40 and 24-70 II very often, and the 24-70 II is like having a 24mm, 35mm, 50mm and 70mm prime all in one (and all inbetween). The IQ is superior to almost every prime I have used at comparable apertures (f/2.8 and smaller).

I love primes, don't get me wrong. I simply love f/1.2, f/1.4 and f/2 apertures but for much of the work I do, the set focal length becomes a hassle. With the high ISO ability of the 5D3, I can use f/2.8 zooms and be perfectly fine.

Different strokes for different folks...