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 Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive 
Thread started 23 Feb 2006 (Thursday) 22:54
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon EF 35mm f/2

 
jjonsalt
Goldmember
1,502 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Central Florida
     
Feb 24, 2006 10:22 |  #16
bannedPermanent ban

bolantej wrote:
might ask to see the 35 f/2. opinions before I buy?

I would think, considering what you now have, it would be a welcomed addition to your gear. That being said, since you have a 50mm and 'normal' with a 1.6 crop factor being 29mm, perhaps you should also look at the 28mm f/1.8 which, by the way, has USM. 28ish seems to me about right for full length portraits. I'm not much interested in third party lenses myself, but for those that are Sigma has a 30mm f/1.4. I have no idea how good/bad it is.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
jjonsalt
Goldmember
1,502 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Central Florida
     
Feb 24, 2006 10:24 as a reply to  @ post 1221962 |  #17
bannedPermanent ban

Wavy C wrote:
If I could only have one lens I think it would be a 35mm!

If we are talking only primes then I agree (for my 20D, that is).




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
In2Photos
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
19,813 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Near Charlotte, NC.
     
Feb 24, 2006 10:33 as a reply to  @ jjonsalt's post |  #18

jjonsalt wrote:
I would think, considering what you now have, it would be a welcomed addition to your gear. That being said, since you have a 50mm and 'normal' with a 1.6 crop factor being 29mm, perhaps you should also look at the 28mm f/1.8 which, by the way, has USM. 28ish seems to me about right for full length portraits. I'm not much interested in third party lenses myself, but for those that are Sigma has a 30mm f/1.4. I have no idea how good/bad it is.

Good suggestion but the EF 28 1.8 is the same price as the Sigma 30 and bolantej said that price was a concern. The 35 f/2 is almost half the price of both these lenses.


Mike, The Keeper of the Archive

Current Gear and Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jjonsalt
Goldmember
1,502 posts
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Central Florida
     
Feb 24, 2006 11:11 as a reply to  @ In2Photos's post |  #19
bannedPermanent ban

In2Photos wrote:
Good suggestion but the EF 28 1.8 is the same price as the Sigma 30 and bolantej said that price was a concern. The 35 f/2 is almost half the price of both these lenses.

point noted




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jojohohanon
Member
195 posts
Joined Aug 2005
     
Feb 24, 2006 12:20 |  #20

I had one and returned it. I overpaid for it ($270), and felt that it should have handled alot better for that price. Like fStop said, very buzzy, plasticy.

Had it been priced like the 50mm/1.8, it would have been a clear keeper, but the sigma 30mm is only a little bit more and gives you a full stop advantage.

Of course, now I have neither, so there you go.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
In2Photos
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
19,813 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Near Charlotte, NC.
     
Feb 24, 2006 12:23 as a reply to  @ jojohohanon's post |  #21

jojohohanon wrote:
I had one and returned it. I overpaid for it ($270), and felt that it should have handled alot better for that price. Like fStop said, very buzzy, plasticy.

Had it been priced like the 50mm/1.8, it would have been a clear keeper, but the sigma 30mm is only a little bit more and gives you a full stop advantage.

A little bit more? How about $229.95 vs. $399.95 at B&H. That is almost double!


Mike, The Keeper of the Archive

Current Gear and Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Gary ­ W. ­ Graley
Goldmember
Avatar
1,326 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Northeastern USA
     
Feb 24, 2006 13:41 |  #22

This was shot with a 35 f2, should have hung onto that lens, a bit noisy but sharp!

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://img.photobucket​.com …ley/EOS%2020D/c​astle3.jpg (external link)


G2

5D Mark ii, 17-40L, 70-300L, 100L, Tamron 28-75 f2.8, S100

Umm..He's Sick, My best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who's going with a girl who saw Ferris pass-out at 31 Flavors last night. I guess it's pretty serious……

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
embdude
Goldmember
Avatar
1,018 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 7
Joined May 2005
Location: California
     
Feb 24, 2006 13:43 as a reply to  @ In2Photos's post |  #23

The Minolta near the bottom of the page was taken with the 35mm f/2
https://photography-on-the.net …thread.php?t=89​381&page=3

I have to say the more I use this little lens the more I like it!

As for the focusing noise, I don't understand the fuss. It makes the standard AF noise, period! All autofocus lenses used to make this noise, many cameras/lenses still do. The invention of USM motors (basically rubberbands instead of metal gears) has made focusing quiet. Apparently people have forgotten the good old days!

The EF 35mm f/2 was one of Canon's original EF lenses. Designed before USM or even "L"* Lenses. One reason it has not been updated is to keep the price down.

(* FD mount "L" lenses existed at the launch of the EOS system back in 1987 but took till late 1988 to appear in EF mount)


-Chris
NEW: Photo Blog (external link)/ My Classic Cameras (external link) / Toys: Gear Sig...
Canon PDF's for EOS Digital Cameras (external link)
Free Photo Stuff Blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Gary ­ W. ­ Graley
Goldmember
Avatar
1,326 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Northeastern USA
     
Feb 24, 2006 14:20 |  #24

Chris, I agree, that noise really wasn't that bad at all, to me, only reason I
moved it was I was in the midst of getting a 16-35L, sold that as well as my
35-135 zoom, both were good lenses, the 16-35 that came didn't focus properly
nor did the second :( so I ended up getting a 17-40L and the 200L now those
worked GREAT! :)
Wished I'd have kept that 35, but I'm getting the Sigma 30mm f1.4, a little wider
and a bit faster, more money too but it's 1.4...so
G2


5D Mark ii, 17-40L, 70-300L, 100L, Tamron 28-75 f2.8, S100

Umm..He's Sick, My best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who's going with a girl who saw Ferris pass-out at 31 Flavors last night. I guess it's pretty serious……

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jerrypeisen
Member
60 posts
Joined Oct 2004
Location: Cleveland Ohio
     
Feb 24, 2006 14:57 as a reply to  @ Gary W. Graley's post |  #25

Here is some samples shot this morning at a local car delaer while my car was in for service. Lighting was terrible in the showroom, nothing I could do about it. Was processed in BB and only PP was in a trial copy of iCorrect Editlab Pro 5.0

http://www.pbase.com/i​mage/56472867 (external link)
http://www.pbase.com/i​mage/56472866 (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sean-Mcr
Goldmember
Avatar
1,813 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Manchester, England
     
Feb 24, 2006 15:32 as a reply to  @ post 1221962 |  #26

Wavy C wrote:
lol - wise decision on the debate, and I agree wholeheartedly that a 35mm is a great lens to own. If I could only have one lens I think it would be a 35mm!

Anyway, I've used both versions and, imho, the L version is probably optically slightly better in most if not all respects. Not a mile better, slightly better. In many cases it would be difficult to distinguish between them.

Mechanically, the L is definitely better - its usm motor offers silent (although not much faster) focusing, while the f2 makes a distinct rasp sound. Both seem very accurate. The f2 build quality, while not up to L quality, is still very good. It certainly does not feel a cheap lens, like, for example, the 50mm f1.8.

But, in my mind at least, the 35 f2 is the ultimate walkaround lens because of its small size and weight. If you carry your camera around your neck or over your shoulder it balances perfectly (at least on my 20D). The f2 is also nearly perfect for candid shots because out on the street it doesn't look a professional lens (the f1.4 looks more like a small zoom). The small size and weight also makes it easy to shoot one-handed if necessary, holding the camera by its handgrip. If you combine it with an 85mm f1.8, I'd say you are ready to tackle nearly any everyday situation (oh, and as an added bonus they both can use the same hood on a 1.6 crop body).

I much prefer this lens (or the f1.4 for that matter) to either of the 50mm lenses.

Highly recommended (and good value too)!

I shoot candids/street shots with my 35 more then any other lens now. I happily carry around two bodies and 4 primes all day in and around town, even when i'm in bars way past midnight. So the weight between the two lenses is a none issue for me when i'm willing to carry that around. I don't hide when it take candids, im normally part of the scene i'm shooting. As you know if you use your 35 for candids ect, it's a waiting/timing game, not a hiding game. I also have the 85, and i've got some good candids with it, but i do prefer shorter focal lengths now.


I don't know what good composition is.... Sometimes for me composition has to do with a certain brightness or a certain coming to restness and other times it has to do with funny mistakes. There's a kind of rightness and wrongness and sometimes I like rightness and sometimes I like wrongness. Diane Arbus



http://www.pbase.com/s​ean_mcr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
embdude
Goldmember
Avatar
1,018 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 7
Joined May 2005
Location: California
     
Feb 24, 2006 16:42 as a reply to  @ Gary W. Graley's post |  #27

Gary W. Graley wrote:
This was shot with a 35 f2, should have hung onto that lens, a bit noisy but sharp!
G2

Fantastic shot Gary:D


-Chris
NEW: Photo Blog (external link)/ My Classic Cameras (external link) / Toys: Gear Sig...
Canon PDF's for EOS Digital Cameras (external link)
Free Photo Stuff Blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Gary ­ W. ­ Graley
Goldmember
Avatar
1,326 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Northeastern USA
     
Feb 24, 2006 16:52 |  #28

Thanks Chris! very sharp image there, printed it out on some 11x17 paper and amazing detail.
G2


5D Mark ii, 17-40L, 70-300L, 100L, Tamron 28-75 f2.8, S100

Umm..He's Sick, My best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who's going with a girl who saw Ferris pass-out at 31 Flavors last night. I guess it's pretty serious……

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bolantej
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
3,780 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Mar 2005
Location: CAlifornia
     
Feb 24, 2006 19:37 |  #29

Well, folks, I got it. It sure is a buzzing son-of-a-gun. Kinda scared me when I hit the * button for the first time. Almost dropped the camera ;) It seems to be pretty fast, though. As long as it's not hunting around, it really isn't noticable. I'll try to post some shots up tonight.
Just wondering though, does the focus switch when set to auto disconnect the ring from the focusing mechanism or something? that thing spins so freely when in AF, and I have to spin it a few mm once I switch it to manual in order to get it going again. I noticed the same thing for the display model at the store. I mean, both move if I breath on them too hard in AF mode. I was worried about wreckign the AF mechanism, but it does not seem as though it will do this. Opinions from owners on this?

Thanks to all who posted.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
embdude
Goldmember
Avatar
1,018 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 7
Joined May 2005
Location: California
     
Feb 24, 2006 22:44 as a reply to  @ post 1224075 |  #30

The focus ring moves freely in AF, the switch is a clutch.

Congratulations!


-Chris
NEW: Photo Blog (external link)/ My Classic Cameras (external link) / Toys: Gear Sig...
Canon PDF's for EOS Digital Cameras (external link)
Free Photo Stuff Blog (external link)

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

811,245 views & 30 likes for this thread
Canon EF 35mm f/2
FORUMS Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive 
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 360nomad
1174 guests, 239 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.