# 35mm f/1.4L II rumors?



## DPMphotog (Apr 3, 2012)

I have been thinking about getting the current 35L recently, but have seen inklings of a replacement coming soon... 

Any timeframe/rumored specs out there? Or should I just not worry about it and purchase an already great lens?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 3, 2012)

There have been rumors for some time. Personally, I think it's due for a replacement and has been for a while. Between 2006 and 2011, every Canon L-series prime lens of 100mm or shorter, except the 35L, was either updated or newly-released. 

Having said that, even if they announce one tomorrow, it could be many months and multiple delays before it's actually available - so, I'll give my usual advice: if you want/need it now, buy it now. If history is a guide, recent updates (70-200 II, 24-70 II) the price of the updated lens will be significantly higher than the original, which means that after the MkII release retailers raise their prices on the MkI while they still have stock, and used prices go up accordingly. That happened with the 70-200 II, and I'm already seeing used prices of the 24-70 trending up. So if you get the 35L now, and do decide to upgrade, you'll likely at least break even.

Personally, I thought the 35L was due for replacement over a year ago...that didn't stop me from buying the current version 15 months ago, and I would have missed out on a lot of great shots if I had waited for a still-just-a-rumor replacement.


----------



## prestonpalmer (Apr 3, 2012)

I am waiting for the replacement as well. Till then, I am using the 24 II.


----------



## Daniel Flather (Apr 3, 2012)

neuro, what could be improved on the current 35L? I love mine and I use it wide open 99.9% of the time.


----------



## Random Orbits (Apr 3, 2012)

Daniel Flather said:


> neuro, what could be improved on the current 35L? I love mine and I use it wide open 99.9% of the time.



The 35L is pretty good -- I got mine at the beginning of the year, but it is outclassed by the new Zeiss -- slightly in the center and more at the edges. See review at TDP for the Zeiss for comparisons with the 35L. It also doesn't have weather sealing.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 3, 2012)

Bingo - a little more corner sharpness (quite feasible with current coatings, I think), and weather sealing.


----------



## prestonpalmer (Apr 4, 2012)

Corner sharpness is the only reason I'm waiting. I saw a significant difference between my 24 v1 and my new 24 1.4 II. I assume we will see the same improvement in the 35. Let's just hope it won't take much longer! That is a oooooooold lens! I could really use it for wedding photography.


----------



## Random Orbits (Apr 4, 2012)

prestonpalmer said:


> Corner sharpness is the only reason I'm waiting. I saw a significant difference between my 24 v1 and my new 24 1.4 II. I assume we will see the same improvement in the 35. Let's just hope it won't take much longer! That is a oooooooold lens! I could really use it for wedding photography.



An old lens design, but a good lens. The light fall off is less than the 24L II, and I find the 35L to be a little sharper than the 24L II wide open. It's also the least expensive fast L prime. 

The 35L should be an improvement though, although I do wonder whether or not they'll increase the lens diameter to accept 77mm filters. It seems like all the newer lenses have increased diameters to improve FF edge performance (16-35, 24-70, 100-400).


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 4, 2012)

Nothing beyond the previous Rumor on March 7.

http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/03/whats-next-a-general-breakdown/

Lenses are tougher to get inside information for. Many expect a new version this fall. Its going to cost a lit more for a very small improvement.


----------



## Daniel Flather (Apr 4, 2012)

Well, as far as corner sharpness, I always fly wide open, so no biggie for me. Wearher sealing is always a bonus, even just for dust.


----------



## sethlowephoto (Apr 4, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> There have been rumors for some time. Personally, I think it's due for a replacement and has been for a while. Between 2006 and 2011, every Canon L-series prime lens of 100mm or shorter, except the 35L, was either updated or newly-released.
> 
> Having said that, even if they announce one tomorrow, it could be many months and multiple delays before it's actually available - so, I'll give my usual advice: if you want/need it now, buy it now. If history is a guide, recent updates (70-200 II, 24-70 II) the price of the updated lens will be significantly higher than the original, which means that after the MkII release retailers raise their prices on the MkI while they still have stock, and used prices go up accordingly. That happened with the 70-200 II, and I'm already seeing used prices of the 24-70 trending up. So if you get the 35L now, and do decide to upgrade, you'll likely at least break even.
> 
> Personally, I thought the 35L was due for replacement over a year ago...that didn't stop me from buying the current version 15 months ago, and I would have missed out on a lot of great shots if I had waited for a still-just-a-rumor replacement.




Totally agree... I have had this experience myself with lenses and the 'break even' experience when existing models go up in price. I just purchased the current 35L a few months ago and couldn't be happier. Ive had to turn the sharpness down to 1 on my 5D mkII! If youve got the the money, and need the lens you wont be disappointed at all.


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 4, 2012)

I don't see why the 35mm L gets so much praise on sharpness. I received a CPS evaluation loan and it was never sharp wide open and I was completely underwhelmed by it considering the applause it receives. Heck the cheapo 50mm 1.4 was twice as sharp wide open and half as much.  

Now the 24mm 1.4L II really impressed me! Great color and very sharp wide open! I prefer it much over the soft 35mm I received to evaluate and is great on crop cameras & full frame. 

That lens was disappointing and hope canon revamps it soon. I might reconsider it then but not likely.


----------



## prestonpalmer (Apr 4, 2012)

If they wait too much longer I might have to pickup the Zeiss for my weddings!


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 4, 2012)

Here is a severe crop when I ended up using my 35mm L to photograph a friend and his monster truck in low light. I was amazed at the resolution with my 1D MK III. The car was over half the length of the arena from me.

35mm L / F/2.8 ISO 3200 1/1000 sec


----------



## Daniel Flather (Apr 4, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> I don't see why the 35mm L gets so much praise on sharpness. I received a CPS evaluation loan and it was never sharp wide open and I was completely underwhelmed by it considering the applause it receives. Heck the cheapo 50mm 1.4 was twice as sharp wide open and half as much.
> 
> Now the 24mm 1.4L II really impressed me! Great color and very sharp wide open! I prefer it much over the soft 35mm I received to evaluate and is great on crop cameras & full frame.
> 
> That lens was disappointing and hope canon revamps it soon. I might reconsider it then but not likely.



Maybe it was dropped on its head one time too many?


----------



## DPMphotog (Apr 4, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> There have been rumors for some time. Personally, I think it's due for a replacement and has been for a while. Between 2006 and 2011, every Canon L-series prime lens of 100mm or shorter, except the 35L, was either updated or newly-released.
> 
> Having said that, even if they announce one tomorrow, it could be many months and multiple delays before it's actually available - so, I'll give my usual advice: if you want/need it now, buy it now. If history is a guide, recent updates (70-200 II, 24-70 II) the price of the updated lens will be significantly higher than the original, which means that after the MkII release retailers raise their prices on the MkI while they still have stock, and used prices go up accordingly. That happened with the 70-200 II, and I'm already seeing used prices of the 24-70 trending up. So if you get the 35L now, and do decide to upgrade, you'll likely at least break even.
> 
> Personally, I thought the 35L was due for replacement over a year ago...that didn't stop me from buying the current version 15 months ago, and I would have missed out on a lot of great shots if I had waited for a still-just-a-rumor replacement.



This is exactly what I was thinking, thank you for putting it into a easy to read argument in my head. I have events booked for the coming months, that based on knowledge of the locations/past experience could bode well for the lens' abilities as they stand (sharp wide open, etc).

I've used this site for awhile now, but obviously this is the first post to the forum and I just wanted to thank everyone for their responses/input so far.

I was wondering if anyone could post some more sample images or direct me to a good place to find a collection?

I don't know how to make a sig otherwise I'd have my gear down there, but FYI, I'd be using it on a *5D Classic/7D along with the 70-200 2.8 IS, 50 1.4, 85 1.4, and 24-70L*.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 4, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> the soft 35mm I received to evaluate



I suspect that's the point - you received a bad copy, or it just needed a big AFMA which it didn't get. Mine is very sharp in the center, although less so in the corners on FF.


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 4, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > the soft 35mm I received to evaluate
> ...



Possible but It did sharpen up perfectly by 2.8 and tested it using liveview to see if it was the AF. The lens Date code was 2010 so it wasn't that old and didn't looked too banged up when I got it. It's performance was still disappointing considering the advantage of primes is wide open performance and the 35mm wasnt cutting the mustard for me. I'd like to see a revamp but I've already got the 24mm, which is a much better lens IMO.


----------



## JR (Apr 4, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Personally, I thought the 35L was due for replacement over a year ago...that didn't stop me from buying the current version 15 months ago, and I would have missed out on a lot of great shots if I had waited for a still-just-a-rumor replacement.



I did the opposite and regret not getting it before xmas when it was on sale. Now i feel it is too late or close to the new version being announced for me to pull the trigger but i hope i will not regret it some more in case it still delayed!!!


----------



## birdman (Apr 5, 2012)

My 35L delivers beautiful pictures on my 5dII. I don't think much could be improved, except: 

1) exotic fluorite coatings 
2) little sharper across frame wide open
3) less color fringing--an issue with all fast primes

My copy was purchased 100% new and I will not upgrade for a LONG TIME. 

I only want an excellent Canon Wide Angle. My 17-40L is mediocre


----------



## Marsu42 (Apr 8, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> I'd like to see a revamp but I've already got the 24mm, which is a much better lens IMO.



Is your preference based on your personal experience (with your possibly bad 35L copy) or on reviews? I'm asking because I'd like to get a 35L as my next lens but I'm unsure if the 24L isn't more versatile for event photography. But the reviews I read say the 24L is very similar to the 35L or the latter even has an edge.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 8, 2012)

From what I've seen, the 35L has a very slight IQ edge, and definitely less vignetting, too. Practically speaking, I think it's foolish to pick one of the two over the other based on IQ, they're too equivalent. The real difference is focal length - I set my 24-105mm to each FL for a while, and preferred the 35mm framing (found myself cropping the 24mm shots). Also, the 35L can be used for environmental portraits, whereas with the 24L you'd probably need to be close enough to result in distortion of the subject's features. Another factor is weather sealing if you need to shoot in the rain - the 24L has it, the 35L doesn't.


----------



## prestonpalmer (Apr 8, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> Another factor is weather sealing if you need to shoot in the rain - the 24L has it, the 35L doesn't.



Another reason im waiting for the 35L II! I get caught in the rain all the time with wedding photography. Ruined only 1 5d2 last year from rain. Stoked about the new 5D3 sealing. And a sealed 35 with a little better IQ than the current one would be a wonderful addition!


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 8, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > I'd like to see a revamp but I've already got the 24mm, which is a much better lens IMO.
> ...



The proof is in the pudding for me. Here is the 35mm 1.4L compared to my 50mm 1.4 at the time. 

For 1300$ My expectations were the 35mm at least meet the same sharpness level as the baseline 50mm. It didnt and these self-portraits i did that night showed the 35mm's weakness, sharpness wide open, which the 50mm didnt have much of a problem doing. Whatever, people have there preferences and the 24mm 1.4L II is a much much better lens if you don't mind that focal length. Then again, it could have been a bad copy but i doubt it.


----------



## Random Orbits (Apr 9, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> The proof is in the pudding for me. Here is the 35mm 1.4L compared to my 50mm 1.4 at the time.
> 
> For 1300$ My expectations were the 35mm at least meet the same sharpness level as the baseline 50mm. It didnt and these self-portraits i did that night showed the 35mm's weakness, sharpness wide open, which the 50mm didnt have much of a problem doing. Whatever, people have there preferences and the 24mm 1.4L II is a much much better lens if you don't mind that focal length. Then again, it could have been a bad copy but i doubt it.



You probably have a bad copy or one that needs to be retuned by Canon. My 35L focuses more accurately and consistently than my 50L.


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 9, 2012)

Random Orbits said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > The proof is in the pudding for me. Here is the 35mm 1.4L compared to my 50mm 1.4 at the time.
> ...



Please post some examples of the 35 1.4L @ 1.4. I'd love to see them and it may sway me to get another CPS loan for re-evaluation. Its a lens I'd like to like and see what it can do.


----------



## lessmore (Apr 9, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> Random Orbits said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



There is a full group (with updates daily) for the 35mm f/1.4L on Flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/[email protected]/pool/

You can get a good idea of how versatile (and sharp) the lens is by checking its actual use by a bunch of different photographers.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 9, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> The proof is in the pudding for me. Here is the 35mm 1.4L compared to my 50mm 1.4 at the time.
> My expectations were the 35mm at least meet the same sharpness level as the baseline 50mm.... self-portraits i did that night showed the 35mm's weakness, sharpness wide open...Then again, it could have been a bad copy but i doubt it.



I can't say for sure that you got a 'bad copy' but assuming the setup for the two shots was the same and your intended focus point was on the near eye, judging by the reflection of the light source, it seems that the 35L is not focused where you intended. Most likely, this just means the lens needed AFMA on your body. The shot with the 35L is suffering from misfocus, meaning you can't fairly judge sharpness (of course, you can certainly _unfairly_ judge the lens to be soft based on a misfocused shot!).


----------



## RLPhoto (Apr 9, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > The proof is in the pudding for me. Here is the 35mm 1.4L compared to my 50mm 1.4 at the time.
> ...



Ok here are three photos linked from pixel-peeper.com (not my photos) <-------Great website if your looking into lenses.

This is the similar performance of my loaned 35mm 1.4L.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/inaffablegong/4020051441/#sizes/o/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/pixelmixture/3959096398/#sizes/o/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/pixelmixture/3957146026/#sizes/o/

These are the best performers I could ever find.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/inaffablegong/3682397859/#sizes/o/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/pixelmixture/3859486209/#sizes/o/



Once again, Here I go again on my own. 

My point is that i still don't understand why the 35mm 1.4L is praised so much. If you compare the very best photos from the 35mm to the 24mmII, Its a no brainer. 

The 24mmII is a much better piece of glass than the 35mm.(Id expect it to, afterall the 24mmII is NEWER!) 
The 24mmII has the color of the 85L, its tack sharp wide open, its weather sealed and its newer.

Here are some 24mm 1.4L II Examples to compare to the 35mm 1.4L

http://www.flickr.com/photos/alex12ga/6249236255/#sizes/o/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/instantvantage/4596003923/#sizes/o/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/instantvantage/4924693402/#sizes/o/

I've also did a quick photo outside also to add these 24mm 1.4L II shots. For 1300$ the 35mm 1.4L couldn't even match what I was getting out of my 350$ 50mm 1.4. The 24mm II did that and even more!

Plus if your on APS-c and full frame is a great combo with the 50L and 135L because...

24mmL - Full Frame

35mm FOV w/24mmL - APSC

50mmL - Full Frame

85mm FOV w/50mmL - APSC

135mmL - Full Frame

200mm FOV W/ 135mmL - APSC

Its a perfect three lens setup w/ 2 Bodies.


----------



## keithfullermusic (Apr 11, 2012)

i don't think waiting would be wise for this. look at the reasons:

1) canon has been dirt slow at releasing things after announcing them (1DX, 24-70II, etc.)
2) canon hasn't even announced one, let alone CR announcing any serious rumors.
3) canon has increased their prices like woah - and you bet a new 35L, a lens that everyone wants, is going to be priced like woah.
4) buy it used now, and you can sell it if the new one ever comes out. it is a beloved lens, and you would have absolutely no problem selling it because the new one will be waaaaaaaay more expensive. you might lose a 100 bucks, but that would be like paying 100 bucks to rent it for a year or so.
5) the current one is old, but amazing. how much can a new version really be improved (which is probably the reason they haven't made a new one in so long)?


----------



## Act444 (Apr 11, 2012)

I have one. I think it's an excellent lens- two main improvements would make it top-notch:

1) weather sealing (a piece of hair/long dust somehow got behind the rear element of mine while outside on a windy day- kind of aggravating but I can't seem to see it in pictures at least, so that's a relief)

2) slight IQ improvement/less purple fringing at 1.4 (at 1.8 and above it's great- peaking around 2.8 in my opinion)


----------



## JR (Apr 11, 2012)

Act444 said:


> I have one. I think it's an excellent lens- two main improvements would make it top-notch:
> 
> 1) weather sealing (a piece of hair/long dust somehow got behind the rear element of mine while outside on a windy day- kind of aggravating but I can't seem to see it in pictures at least, so that's a relief)
> 
> 2) slight IQ improvement/less purple fringing at 1.4 (at 1.8 and above it's great- peaking around 2.8 in my opinion)



Weather sealing was one of the main reason I did not get the existing model. I am anxious to see the new version annouced though! UNless the new 24-70 II is so good that it will make us forget about prime! 

???


----------



## Marsu42 (Apr 12, 2012)

JR said:


> version annouced though! UNless the new 24-70 II is so good that it will make us forget about prime!



I don't think a f2.8 lens will make you forget about a f1.4 one due to the noticeable difference in dof...


----------



## JR (Apr 13, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> JR said:
> 
> 
> > version annouced though! UNless the new 24-70 II is so good that it will make us forget about prime!
> ...



Maybe, but it would make for a nice consolation prize in the mean time


----------



## keithinmelbourne (Apr 13, 2012)

The current 35L is so good, I'm not sure there is much need of improvement. There are other lenses that need more of an update such as the 50 F1.4 or the 17-40L.


----------



## matfotografia (Oct 19, 2012)

Hello, I am willing to get the 35L 1.4, but i have read that there is one Version 2 is coming soon; how much money do you think it will be on the market? beacause seeing the price of the new 24-70 is almost 1000USD of difference.

Regards, 

Miguel


----------

