# Review - Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II by LensRentals.com



## Canon Rumors Guy (Nov 13, 2015)

```
<p>LensRentals.com has completed their review of Canon’s latest L prime, the EF 35mm f/1.4L II.</p>
<blockquote><p>… resident tech guru Roger Cicala was able to run multiple copies of this lens through our Olaf Optics tests to get both an MTF chart on the lens (averaged over 10+ copies) as well as a copy to copy variation score. When placed up against the original Canon 35mm f/1.4L, the new Mark II version easily win the battle in terms of overall sharpness. the new Mark II version also beats the Sigma 35mm Art series in sharpness, by only my a small fraction that you likely wouldn’t be able to tell the difference in. These scores, make the Canon 35mm f/1.4L II the new king of the 35mms in terms of both sharpness and consistency, but is also priced considerably more than some of the competition. <a href="http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/11/lensrentals-reviews-the-canon-35mm-f1-4l-ii-lens" target="_blank">Read the full review</a></p></blockquote>
<ul>
<li>Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L $1099: <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/162614-USA/Canon_2512A002_Wide_Angle_EF_35mm.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank">B&H Photo</a> | <a href="http://www.adorama.com/CA3514AFU.html?kbid=64393" target="_blank">Adorama</a> | <a href="http://amzn.to/1GN0ug2" target="_blank">Amazon</a></li>
<li>Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L II $1799: <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1180801-REG/canon_9523b002_35mm_f_1_4l_ii_usm.html/BI/2466/KBID/3296" target="_blank">B&H Photo</a> | <a href="http://www.adorama.com/CA35142.html?utm_term=UbK24x0al34oSlvW4eT8QxjoUkX3mDVXeWC-Ug0&utm_medium=Affiliate&utm_campaign=Other&utm_source=rflaid64393&cvosrc=affiliate.64393" target="_blank">Adorama</a> | <a href="http://amzn.to/1Uehm5w" target="_blank">Amazon</a></li>
</ul>
<p> </p>
```


----------



## infared (Nov 13, 2015)

I always LOVE what Roger has to say and rely on his take on things more than most. So, its no surprise that he gives the new Canon high marks....and I am sweetly surprised that my Sigma 35mm f/1.4 is right in the mix with the Canon. I have no desire to upgrade..and price is the issue for me. My Sigma focuses spot on...its not a problem...the build is VERY nice..and on top of that, as Dustin Abbott crooned, the lens is a nicely designed piece of glass to look at. So, even thought the cost is very high, I am glad that Canon has upped their game ...that's great!! ...maybe they can do same in their 50mm dept. next!


----------



## YuengLinger (Nov 13, 2015)

The review is concise and informative, but sample photos are very important. The third, the portrait of the young woman leaning against the fence, has a bit too much processing (glamour glow?), which is not useful for showing what a lens can do. The out of focus leaves in the background left are just plain weird. Furthermore, there looks to be some distracting cloning errors to her nose and chin--the nose ring might have been partially cloned out leaving only the shadow??? And the chin has a strange bump...

The other two images are lovely.


----------



## TeT (Nov 13, 2015)

YuengLinger said:


> The review is concise and informative, but sample photos are very important. The third, the portrait of the young woman leaning against the fence, has a bit too much processing (glamour glow?), which is not useful for showing what a lens can do. The out of focus leaves in the background left are just plain weird. Furthermore, there looks to be some distracting cloning errors to her nose and chin--the nose ring might have been partially cloned out leaving only the shadow??? And the chin has a strange bump...
> 
> The other two images are lovely.



You crack me up.... thanks.


----------



## YuengLinger (Nov 13, 2015)

TeT said:


> YuengLinger said:
> 
> 
> > The review is concise and informative, but sample photos are very important. The third, the portrait of the young woman leaning against the fence, has a bit too much processing (glamour glow?), which is not useful for showing what a lens can do. The out of focus leaves in the background left are just plain weird. Furthermore, there looks to be some distracting cloning errors to her nose and chin--the nose ring might have been partially cloned out leaving only the shadow??? And the chin has a strange bump...
> ...



My pleasure! Point is, sample images in a review should have minimal processing.

Btw, do you have a response to the REVIEW?


----------



## TeT (Nov 14, 2015)

YuengLinger said:


> Btw, do you have a response to the REVIEW?



Yes, I enjoyed the review and thought it to be informative with obvious praise for the lens. I was happy to see the reviewer use the lens in many situations and conditions and that it did extremely well in all...

Regarding the pics... I noted that #3 was the odd duck among the lot, but did not really think on it much more until I read your post and then looked at the pic a little closer...


----------



## DigiAngel (Nov 14, 2015)

Phew..Awesome Lens, but at that price point i really cant see anything that justifies it over the sigma 35. in germany, the sigma is 729€ (amazon), the canon is 2049€ (some euros cheaper in some shops, but not ready to ship) - that almost three times the price! and the sigma is stunning even wide open, autofocus works very nice for me, too, you get 3 years warranty and they even change the mount if you would want to go for another system.

it really has to come down in price, at least from 3 sigmas to 2 sigmas


----------



## photogaz (Nov 15, 2015)

As a Canon 35L Mark I owner I'm really not going to upgrade at that price. What are Canon smoking?

I'll happily buy one if it was $250 less.


----------



## Viggo (Nov 15, 2015)

I'm sorry, but I so wish every happy Sigma owner could have experienced the 5 Art lenses I have... They don't work, especially with the 1dx. Two of mine worked great for 6-7 months even, but then the go to their dark place eventually anyway.

I'm glad you're happy with them, but to bring it out and shouting it on every. single thread with a Canon 35 or 50 in it is starting to get to me.

I will NEVER consider a Sigma for anything again, and the 35 L II is still better in every way, and of course that increases the price. 

I have recently used my newly bought old drain pipe 200 f2.8 II, and it must be Canon's most underrated lens ever made. And even that slow (2.8) ancient tech long unstabilized tele is so accurate and fantastic for tracking! It hits everything and simply reminds me of how bad the Sigma is in comparison.


----------



## TeT (Nov 15, 2015)

Viggo said:


> I'm sorry, but I so wish every happy Sigma owner could have experienced the 5 Art lenses I have...



Wouldn't wish a bad lens on anyone, even if to prove a point. It is well documented (AF) and those who buy the Sigma do it for the price point and the IQ at that price point. IF they get a good one, they are right to defend their purchase... with decent to good AF the Sigma ART is a fantastic lens. Apparently most of the Arts are acceptable to most of the buyers... (let us please NOT define or dissect what is and is not acceptable on an individual level)

As you stated, I will not be going sigma either... I loved my Sigma lenses back in the 90's on my nikon film cameras...


----------



## TeT (Nov 15, 2015)

photogaz said:


> As a Canon 35L Mark I owner I'm really not going to upgrade at that price. What are Canon smoking?
> 
> I'll happily buy one if it was $250 less.



You should eventually get your shot at the $250 less (within a year(?), might be grey(?)).

I believe that canon is smoking it up and partying because they hit a home run with this lens and could probably have gotten away with another $100 or so per lens at launch... it's that good!


----------



## YuengLinger (Nov 16, 2015)

Viggo said:


> I'm sorry, but I so wish every happy Sigma owner could have experienced the 5 Art lenses I have... They don't work, especially with the 1dx. Two of mine worked great for 6-7 months even, but then the go to their dark place eventually anyway.
> 
> I'm glad you're happy with them, but to bring it out and shouting it on every. single thread with a Canon 35 or 50 in it is starting to get to me.
> 
> ...



Viggo, we should be wishing that Sigma *succeeds wildly*, as it puts pressure on Canon to make better lenses and sell them at a reasonable price (which is tough with so much corporate overhead, I know).

Fortunately, my nearly two year old 35mm Art is still working great. Sadly, I gave up on the 50mm Art after two bad AF copies.

My body, by the way, is a 5DIII.


----------



## Viggo (Nov 16, 2015)

TeT said:


> Viggo said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sorry, but I so wish every happy Sigma owner could have experienced the 5 Art lenses I have...
> ...



I didn't actually want people to have bad lenses, just that not just here, I constantly being looked at like, "it's must be your fault, mine is working". I want people who shout the most to understand what it's like to go through the hassle of five lenses that goes back and forth to repair and exchange and NEVER works and never completely fail, so you always think you've figured out the 4 afma settings and you don't really believe the +58(!) value FoCal gives you. It makes me sick to shoot hundreds and hundreds of shots trying to get it to hit. And I mean a high contrast still subject in both Servo and Obe shot 20 times in a row, all having different degrees of sharpness and focusing misses.

I for one consider the 35 L II to be the only choice if you want something better than the mk1.


----------



## caMARYnon (Feb 18, 2016)

Finally lenstip's review here


----------

