Canon 35L II worth it?

Hrm,

Worth it would be relative to the situation.

If 35mm is your bread & butter, and you want the best 35mm you can get, it may be worth it if you absolutely must have Canon. But really, it's competing with a few lenses, namely the Sigma 35 ART which significantly less. If you already have a 35mm F1.4, then to me, it probably isn't worth it. Granted, the 35 F1.4L is an aged lens, the 35 F2 IS optically is better, etc. But it's F2 not F1.4. So the Sigma 35 ART made a ton of sense for people wanting a fast 35 F1.4 with AF. Then Canon finally drops the 35 L II, with an enormous price tag. Not worth it based on cost alone to me. Sigma ART being the better deal, for quite literally the same IQ. Again, if it's your bread & butter and you need Canon, then the 35L II makes sense. But if it's just for shooting kids around the house or something, I'd say no.

Since you're even considering the Zeiss, then I would say that answers a ton of questions right away about the need for AF, Canon, etc.

Very best,

M 35IS focuses in far dimmer light than my 35Art, which does nothing but hunt. I would hate to rely on it for AF in poor light, and if you can't, a 35 Zeiss 1.4 would be the best option imo.

I think the bene of the 35II is that is has Canon AF and Sigma sharpness.

I have a lot of Zeiss MF lenses, but I appreciate having AF in a nearby focal length. You have to decide if it's important in this focal length.

Vertigo1 wrote in post #17869613
Have used a 35L and own a 35 Art but have not tried the 35L II yet - might get a quick chance at an upcoming show.

From what I've read, it is slightly better than the Sigma but not by much and has weather sealing which the Sigma lacks. The focusing is also probably a bit more reliable but I can't say I've had any issues with my Sigma.

Basically I get the impression it's maybe 10-20% better than the Sigma but three times the price. Yes I'd love one and I lust after it but it makes no logical sense. As I already have the 35 Art, it'd cost me circa £1k to upgrade to the 35L II which is bonkers.

I can't speak for the prices wherever you are located, but in the US, the Canon 35mm f/1.4 L II is exactly twice the price of the Sigma 35mm, not 3 times. It's still very expense by comparison, but not as bad as you suggest. I've seen and personally had enough focus inconsistency issues with the new Sigma lenses that I would pay a premium for a lens that hit AF every time. A 15 or 20% miss rate because of inconsistent AF is not acceptable to me. While many Sigma owners have had minimum AF issues, too many others like me have been frustrated by it.

mcluckie wrote in post #17880205
Wait, a 35mm replaced an 85 for portraits? Isn't focal length your first choice?

Typically yes, but new 35L is so much better wide open than 85L, I just shoot closer. For a group portrait its a no brainer... 35L II

I would love to see some direct comparison between 35L vs 35L II.
There are not many photos can seen since the 35L II released last year and just like some people said above in the thread, the images from 35L II didn't inspire or surprise me.

Agreed. A lot of acclaim surrounded the original L lenses, and from MTF charts and the like, they were highly recommended. I moved from Leica to Canon for digital and lenses were a big factor (and fellow pro friends that were already singing the praises of the 1Ds systems). I hated my first 2 L zooms and was usually disappointed with most of the primes. Hence my Zeiss collection.

People tend to positively review lenses they're supposed to like. There is so much more to good glass than specs.

"Typically yes, but new 35L is so much better wide open than 85L, I just shoot closer."

Hasn't anyone commented on the shape of their head? (That can be rhetorical as it seems the nuances of focal lengths elude many people.)

Oh I just realized maybe you're on a crop body...

mcluckie wrote in post #17881455
Hasn't anyone commented on the shape of their head? (That can be rhetorical as it seems the nuances of focal lengths elude many people.)

Not that close! LOL!