# Would you buy the 35L now, or wait?



## DRR (Aug 25, 2014)

If you were to buy a 35L in the next few months, would you buy it now? 

Wait until Photokina (no 35L update is likely, as far as I know)

Wait until later in the year, when prices are generally at their lowest?


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 25, 2014)

If I wanted one I'd get it now.

If a MkII comes out then it will be much more than you can get the MkI for so you have a different set of factors contributing to your purchasing decision.

Would you buy a MkII now for $2,200? Because even if they were available they wouldn't be selling for less than list, and wouldn't be for some time after release. Look after your MkI, keep the box and bag, receipt, warranty and paperwork and even if you want to upgrade in the future you won't lose that much.

Besides, lenses are for taking photos and imagine the images you will miss in the mean time.

If I wasn't in a rush I'd see what the rebates brought, but if you are not in a rush do you need it...............


----------



## beckstoy (Aug 25, 2014)

I doubt there's an update to the 35L coming anytime soon.

I was waiting too, and finally just got the Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art. 

Couldn't be happier! That lens is legit. I'd rather be earning $ with this amazing Sigma lens rather than thinking about saving a few dollars in the long term or waiting for the 35L II.

I've shot with both the Canon and Sigma versions, and the Sigma's sharper. Love it.


----------



## Dick (Aug 25, 2014)

If you want a 35 mm lens and wonder if there will soon be a better one available, get a used 35L and you can more or less get your money back any day if you want something else instead. The Sigma is also worth considering if slight AF issues don't bother you that much. Personally I would now get a used 35L if didn't already have the Sigma.


----------



## Random Orbits (Aug 25, 2014)

Dick said:


> If you want a 35 mm lens and wonder if there will soon be a better one available, get a used 35L and you can more or less get your money back any day if you want something else instead. The Sigma is also worth considering if slight AF issues don't bother you that much. Personally I would now get a used 35L if didn't already have the Sigma.



+1 on a getting a used/refurbished 35L.


----------



## moreorless (Aug 25, 2014)

privatebydesign said:


> If I wanted one I'd get it now.
> 
> If a MkII comes out then it will be much more than you can get the MkI for so you have a different set of factors contributing to your purchasing decision.
> 
> ...



Normally I'd agree but I wouldn't be shocked if the new 35mm 1.4 isn't sold at that big a premium due to the Sigma.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 25, 2014)

moreorless said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > If I wanted one I'd get it now.
> ...



I think Canon have demonstrated on pretty much every occasion that they don't care about Sigma. Sigma are not pushing them to do anything, if they were we would have seen a 50 f1.4 replacement a long time ago. 

I believe the bigger picture is Canon think the relevance of fast primes has waned and they don't carry the "system" clout they used to. Killer specialty lenses like the 24 TS-E and 17TS-E, and zooms with the IQ of the 70-200 IS f2.8 MkII and 24-70 f2.8 MkII are not only expensive but they are good sellers with much broader appeal. I well understand the fast prime "look" that can't be replicated with f2.8 zooms, but it seems to me Canon don't really care too much and have moved on faster than some of us, lets be honest the most compelling reason for fast wide primes was not dof control (though I am not denying it's importance sometimes) but it was to compensate for awful film iso speeds and that has very much been put to rest with even current camera iso capabilities, I suspect Canon consider medium speed primes with IS that are small have much more appeal and earning potential, the new lenses are often video orientated and that is what Canon thinks is more important to them.


----------



## DRR (Aug 25, 2014)

Would anyone speculate that the 35L would be substantially ($200) lower than it is right now in the next 4 months or so? Prices seem to go down before the holidays.


----------



## Vossie (Aug 25, 2014)

I would not buy it. I am in the market for a 35mm as well and will probably go for the f/2 IS. Main reasons to choose this over the 1.4L or the Sigma is size, second is price. My main use will be for street photography.

Main down for me of the f/2 IS is the lack of weather sealing. The slower f-stop does not bother me too much. I like the bokeh of the f/2 IS more than that of the 1.4's even though there is less oof blur. For street work, the IS comes in handy when shooting in the evening as you can do more handheld.

What will be the main use for the 35 you are after?


----------



## jdramirez (Aug 25, 2014)

I'd buy used... that's my goto move. So if you buy it today for 900... you can sell it for around that in 1 or 2 years... because if Canon isn't going to rush to bring a new 35L to the market after the 35 art came out, then chances are they aren't in any rush.


----------



## ScottyP (Aug 25, 2014)

privatebydesign said:


> moreorless said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



I don't really feel like I need IS on a 35mm lens for what I shoot. I'd rather have the wider aperture for the 35mm focal length. Handholding at 1/30th works ok with a wide-ish lens like a 35mm, and that is plenty slow for me. I don't have much need for 4 stops of IS to allow me to shoot sluggish 1/2 second exposures handheld because most of my subjects are alive and moving way too much for that, even if trying to hold still. When I do occasionally shoot still life I am fine using a tripod or resting the camera on something. 

What I do like about a brighter 35mm is that instead of having to jack up the ISO to the point where I notice noise or lack of detail in crops, I have room to open it up and gain a stop of shutter speed at equivalent ISO compared to what an f/2 lens could do. And even wide open, the DOF on a 35 usually stays wide enough to work with, and does not get so shallow that you are stuck with that look where practically nothing in the image other than a couple of eyelashes, seven pores and one pupil is in focus.


----------



## jheez (Aug 26, 2014)

Get a good used 35L or 35 f2 IS. They're both great lenses, each with strengths and weaknesses. 

I don't think Canon is in a huge rush to get a 35LII out there. The 35L is already a great lens. The only things they'll probably improve are rounded aperture blades, weather sealing, some extra sharpness in corners, less CA, improved coatings. I won't be upgrading, as I think anything they improve will make minimal difference in 99% of photos.

There are so many 35L's out there, that I think the used value is fairly cheap. If a new 35L comes out, you'll probably pay $1000 more than a good use 35L. The 35 f2 IS is also a wonderful value if you only need f2. Lighter weight, flares less, rounded aperture blades.

Waiting until later in the year might not work to your advantage depending on how the yen fluctuates with the dollar.


----------



## Omni Images (Aug 26, 2014)

I bought the 35 1.4L second hand a few years ago now. Was in immaculate condition from a rich guy who had the gear but never used it, I also got his 85 1.2L
The 35 would be my most used lens.
I shoot a lot of stitched landscapes, using it vertical with my 1Dmk4 and the manfrotto 303 pano head. I am very happy with the results of this lens.
The advantage of the faster lens is focusing in low light ... dust and dawn and night shots in the city also with low light .. I have the 17-40 F4 and it struggles to find focus in low light always... the 1.4 ... bang on .. the brighter viewfinder is great, you can see what you are taking photos of so much better ... you don't have to shoot at 1.4, but to see at 1.4 in low light is such an advantage.
Image below shot using the 35 1.4L and pano head.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Aug 26, 2014)

DRR said:


> If you were to buy a 35L in the next few months, would you buy it now?
> 
> Wait until Photokina (no 35L update is likely, as far as I know)
> 
> Wait until later in the year, when prices are generally at their lowest?



Hi DDR,
As many others have suggested. The better options are: 1) Get an used 35L lens so you can recover most of the cost when reselling later; 2) Get the Sigma 35mm Art that is sharper and; 3) If you don't really need f1.4 aperture, get the 35mm f2 IS that is darn sharp from f2, it's a lot lighter and you'll save lot of money. 
I personally got the 35mm f2 IS and can't be happier with my decision. This is good for street photography and landscape because of the minimal distorsion and CA. It also offers an acceptable bokeh quality and colors are superb.


----------



## Kmccarthy (Aug 27, 2014)

Another option is to get a 40mm pancake. Great IQ, light, compact and cheap.


----------



## DRR (Aug 27, 2014)

Kmccarthy said:


> Another option is to get a 40mm pancake. Great IQ, light, compact and cheap.



I have it. I love it, but it's a completely different category of lens for me.


----------



## dlee13 (Aug 28, 2014)

You should look at the features of an L lens and see if you really need them then decide. So if they were to release a 35L II which compared to the 35 IS had f1.4, a better build, more aperture blades, red ring and weather sealing then is it for the extra $ and waiting time?

I own the 35 IS and reccomend it more. It's tack sharp wide open and I'd honestly be surprised if a it would be sharper than the IS. Just go buy the 35 Art if you want f1.4 or the 35 IS if you want something lighter with IS. You can always sell them if they do eventually announce a 35L II.


----------

