# EF 35 f/1.4L and EF 35 f/1.4L II MTF Comparison



## Canon Rumors Guy (Aug 27, 2015)

```
The optical performance difference between the two lenses looks to be quite significant if you go by the MTF chart comparison.</p>
<p>I had two complaints about the original 35L, the first being it wasn’t weather sealed and the second was the CA, it looks like both of those issues have been corrected. I’m looking forward to seeing if the additional weight is going to be difficult to get used to with the new lens, I did like the compact size of the first version.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, there aren’t many sample images  from the new lens yet, but they should start making their way to the web soon.</p>
<p><strong>Preorder EF 35 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></strong></p>
```


----------



## pj1974 (Aug 27, 2015)

I couldn't see the MTFs in the top post... so here/below are the MTF's (as per Canon's website)

EF 35mm f/1.4 L first
EF 35mm f/1.4 L II second

Note - I posted those MTFs earlier in this other CR Forum thread, but in reverse order, i.e. 1st vII and the v1 2nd
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=27485.msg543345#msg543345 

Regards & happy to help! 

Paul 8)


----------



## rfdesigner (Aug 27, 2015)

That looks more like the curves of a 135 prime... not a 35mm.. cracking job!

I do hope this bodes well for any new 50mm lenses that come out.. although it may make me change to a 17-35-85-135 setup from a 24-50-100 arrangement.. it's clear where the better glass now is.


----------



## Don Haines (Aug 27, 2015)

When I switched to Canon, it was mostly for the glass.... Glass like this hammers in the point.

Those are insanely good curves for a wide angle lens! Somewhere in the Canon design team there is a very proud optical designer of this lens......


----------



## dolina (Aug 27, 2015)

EF 35mm f/1.4L II USM







Art






EF 35mm f/1.4L USM






Can't wait for May/June/July to arrive so prices drop to around $1,440.

Thank you Sigma, Nikon, Yongnuo, Zeiss, Rokinon, Bower and Samyang for putting out 35/1.4 to keep competition alive.

The Series one currently sells on BH for $1,479


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 27, 2015)

Don Haines said:


> When I switched to Canon, it was mostly for the glass.... Glass like this hammers in the point.
> 
> Those are insanely good curves for a wide angle lens! Somewhere in the Canon design team there is a very proud optical designer of this lens......



Canon's wide angle offerings are no longer the Achilles heel of the system. The TS-E 24 MkII and 16-35 f4 IS are superlative lenses, the 11-24 f4 and the TS-E 17 are true world beaters, and the 24, 28 and 35 IS lenses are really nice with decent prices.

If this 35 f1.4 L pans out as the MTF's suggest, and I am not comparing them to others just the MkI, then we can expect a 16-35 f2.8 MkIII and a 24 f1.4 MkIII with the same tech to really get the best out of the 5DS/R, and our wallets.


----------



## DArora (Aug 27, 2015)

Canon took time but they did it right. Looks like it is going to outperform every 35mm out there.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 27, 2015)

Poll time, people:

Poll #1: MTF Chart response

Poll #2: Price

Poll #3: What's next

Please vote, thanks. I'm curious to where everyone's heads are on this announcement today.

- A


----------



## Han (Aug 27, 2015)

So that's 2099 euro's !

https://www.calumetphoto.nl/product/Canon-EF-35-mm-f1-4-L-II-USM/CAN3514LII?tracking=|searchterm:Ef|35


----------



## Khalai (Aug 27, 2015)

Han said:


> So that's 2099 euro's !
> 
> https://www.calumetphoto.nl/product/Canon-EF-35-mm-f1-4-L-II-USM/CAN3514LII?tracking=|searchterm:Ef|35



That's sick - but let's wait for early adopters. wanting more money than for 24-70 II is quite insane and the price will hopefully settle down under 1600-1700 EUR.


----------



## Eldar (Aug 27, 2015)

Khalai said:


> Han said:
> 
> 
> > So that's 2099 euro's !
> ...


If it´s any comfort, it is significantly worse in Scandinavia ... $2800 in Norway and apparently even worse in Finland.


----------



## Random Orbits (Aug 27, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> Poll time, people:
> 
> Poll #1: MTF Chart response
> 
> ...



1800 is a bit high. I'm waiting for it to show up at 1500-1600 at CPW.


----------



## takesome1 (Aug 27, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> If this 35 f1.4 L pans out as the MTF's suggest, and I am not comparing them to others just the MkI, then we can expect a 16-35 f2.8 MkIII and a 24 f1.4 MkIII with the same tech to really get *the best out of * the 5DS/R, and *our wallets*.



In bold will be the biggest development for Canon.


----------



## LovePhotography (Aug 28, 2015)

Based merely on the MTF comparison, I wonder how many people would notice a real world difference with the Sig 35 Art at half the price? Just wondering... (IQ only... not focus, weight, status symbol, or anything else...)


----------



## Eldar (Aug 28, 2015)

LovePhotography said:


> Based merely on the MTF comparison, I wonder how many people would notice a real world difference with the Sig 35 Art at half the price? Just wondering... (IQ only... not focus, weight, status symbol, or anything else...)


Based on the MTF charts and the limited number of sample images we have seen, it will most likely have better IQ than the Sigma 35 Art. Remember also that many different qualities constitutes IQ. Too many people seem to regard IQ and sharpness as synonyms (too many people read and believe DxO). They are not. Sharpness, color, contrast, CA, fringing, flare resistance ... It's a long list. However, to me, getting L-series build quality, with proper weather sealing and fast and consistent AF, will be worth it.


----------



## infared (Aug 28, 2015)

It will be interesting to see the lens review comparisons with the Sigma Art. Can't wait!


----------



## aj1575 (Aug 28, 2015)

Just looking at the MTF, this lens simply looks amazing. There seems to be nothing coming close to it, even the 55mm Otus looks less good.

But the question remains, since even the Sigma 35 Art is alreday very good, who is going to pay twice the price for such a lens? Is will definitly be an option for medium Format shooters to move to a 5Ds with such a lens. The IQ should be on a comparable level.


----------



## infared (Aug 28, 2015)

aj1575 said:


> Just looking at the MTF, this lens simply looks amazing. There seems to be nothing coming close to it, even the 55mm Otus looks less good.
> 
> But the question remains, since even the Sigma 35 Art is alreday very good, who is going to pay twice the price for such a lens? Is will definitly be an option for medium Format shooters to move to a 5Ds with such a lens. The IQ should be on a comparable level.



I think your comment is spot on. Although this lens looks absolutely amazing...I have a Sigma Art that I am very happy with and I do not plan on purchasing this lens. For me, from a cost standpoint it is prohibitive....but it does have its place in the growing Canon lineup especially for the larger megapixel bodies. There will be a ton of opinions and reviews on this baby!


----------



## Random Orbits (Aug 28, 2015)

infared said:


> aj1575 said:
> 
> 
> > Just looking at the MTF, this lens simply looks amazing. There seems to be nothing coming close to it, even the 55mm Otus looks less good.
> ...



The Canon is marketed and will not be bought by those that are the most price sensitive. The 35L sells at a price above the Sigma already and it doesn't make sense for Canon to invest a lot of R&D to sell the 35L II for less. Give it some time, and the 35L II price will drop. It'll still be more than the Sigma but it will be more weather resistant, have higher IQ and work with Canon AF _*CONSISTENTLY*_.

A lot of people said similar things of the 24-70 II compared to the Tamron 24-70, 24-70 f/4 IS compared to the 24-100 f/4, the 5DS compared to the 5DIII. The prices in all those cases were much higher for the newer Canon option and the boards lit up with similar "Who would buy it?" But once the reviews are in, and the prices settle, people do see the value of the newer offering and buy it. Not everyone, but enough.


----------



## Diltiazem (Aug 28, 2015)

infared said:


> It will be interesting to see the lens review comparisons with the Sigma Art. Can't wait!



Yes. But I am already liking what I am seeing.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/petapixel/


----------



## mackguyver (Aug 28, 2015)

Full res sample images: http://www.cameraegg.org/ef-35mm-f1-4l-ii-usm-lens-sample-images/


----------



## Eldar (Aug 28, 2015)

mackguyver said:


> Full res sample images: http://www.cameraegg.org/ef-35mm-f1-4l-ii-usm-lens-sample-images/


Hey Mac! Good to see you´re still with us.


----------



## FramerMCB (Aug 28, 2015)

Han said:


> So that's 2099 euro's !
> 
> https://www.calumetphoto.nl/product/Canon-EF-35-mm-f1-4-L-II-USM/CAN3514LII?tracking=|searchterm:Ef|35



The price, while it "feels very high" is not out of reality for a premium, top-of-the-line Canon branded L series. Let me explain. Everyone likes to compare Canon with the Sigma Art Series, and while it is a valid comparison, at least from an optical viewpoint, a better comparison is to compare it with something more similar. For example, one can make a comparison between a Corvette and a Lamborghini (spelling?) for horsepower, straightline acceleration, etc. But the reality is, for a true "autophile", there is no real comparison between the two. Likewise, with a Canon L series, not only are you buying a lens that is guaranteed to work with all current Canon bodies, but also with future bodies seamlessly. Moreover, resale value, for some, will also be a consideration. Another guarantee: Canon will hold resale way above and for a much longer time than the Sigma (or any other third-party lens). The only exception to this rule, and in my opinion, a better comparison, is to the Zeiss 35mm 1.4 Distagon T lens for Canon. This lens is currently selling from B&H photo for $1,543USD. And note this price is with an instant savings of $300USD. 

The other point I would make, is that Canon doesn't necessarily drive business decisions based on what the competition is doing. (Certainly this has some weight on what they do and bring to market, but is not the sole driver.) This new lens is looking like another "world beater" like another poster referred to a few other of Canon's more recent offerings. And with the new BR lens group/element sounds like this might be a stellar performer for astrophotographers and those that like to do nighttime landscapes - virtually no Coma. But we shall see.
A caveat: I will in all likelihood never own this lens, as I am not a professional photographer, nor equipped with a bottomless wallet. But I am very excited by what Canon continues to do. Especially when one considers all of the different businesses/products they make. (Similar to Nikon)

Obviously not as versatile as a zoom, but this could be a fantastic lens for weddings/environmental portraits. Especially if wanting or limited to using available light. Just think of the images one could capture in low light with this mounted on a 6D...
Cheers.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 28, 2015)

mackguyver said:


> Full res sample images: http://www.cameraegg.org/ef-35mm-f1-4l-ii-usm-lens-sample-images/



This lens is a remarkable upgrade after looking at those samples!

In particular the one I know the MkI 35 would ruin is the shot of the binoculars http://www.canon.co.uk/Images/L262_5DS_CINC_Sample_Image_10_tcm14-1290743.JPG the right side, highlight edge of that would be a horrible mess of CA.


----------



## bluenoser1993 (Aug 28, 2015)

[/quote]

resale value, for some, will also be a consideration. Another guarantee: Canon will hold resale way above and for a much longer time than the Sigma (or any other third-party lens). 

[/quote]


This is quite valid for the most popular lenses. I bought the 35L new, used it for two years, sold it for a $50 profit. The 70-200 2.8 IS II I did even better, buying used and selling for almost $200 profit two years later. Both sold for the price of new at the time, the buyer only saved sales tax and risked buying unseen for that small savings. Canon is really incredible in this respect.


----------



## rrcphoto (Aug 28, 2015)

aj1575 said:


> Just looking at the MTF, this lens simply looks amazing. There seems to be nothing coming close to it, even the 55mm Otus looks less good.
> 
> But the question remains, since even the Sigma 35 Art is alreday very good, who is going to pay twice the price for such a lens? Is will definitly be an option for medium Format shooters to move to a 5Ds with such a lens. The IQ should be on a comparable level.



since when is gains in optical performance equal to the price ratio?


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 28, 2015)

Random Orbits said:


> The 35L sells at a price above the Sigma already and it doesn't make sense for Canon to invest a lot of R&D to sell the 35L II for less. Give it some time, and the 35L II price will drop. It'll still be more than the Sigma but it will be more weather resistant, have higher IQ and work with Canon AF _*CONSISTENTLY*_.



+1

Consistent AF performance at f/1.4 would easily be worth +$500 to me over the Sigma. I am not joking.

You buy an autofocusing f/1.4 lens _to autofocus at f/1.4_. I don't mind the need to tune it with AFMA or a USB dock, but once it's dialed in, it should be consistent. In my hands, the Sigma was not, but I know a lot of people love that lens.

- A


----------



## mackguyver (Aug 28, 2015)

Eldar said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > Full res sample images: http://www.cameraegg.org/ef-35mm-f1-4l-ii-usm-lens-sample-images/
> ...


Hi there, Eldar, thanks for the note. I'm still alive . My health has greatly improved and I even made it out to shoot recently. Unfortunately my job has gotten extremely busy, limiting my time on CR as well. 

This lens certainly intrigues me, but I'm actually more excited about the thoughts of a new 24L, 50L, and 85L in the years to come with less CA wide open. If they are as good as this lens looks to be, then Canon's got a whole new standard they will be rolling out. I guess the rumors of fast lenses being dead are false.

Long live the fast prime!


----------



## rfdesigner (Aug 28, 2015)

mackguyver said:


> Eldar said:
> 
> 
> > mackguyver said:
> ...



I think you're right.. and I think it's strategic on Canons part.

The lensrentals MTF data shows canons latest lenses are being made far more consistantly, which means better build precision. Once you've got that production precision and a high MP sensor, then you can go about releasing higher resolution optics as you can now make them in volume and see the difference in the final image, yes they'll cost more, but photographers can see the difference.

That these three things have come together is, IMHO, no accident.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Aug 28, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > Full res sample images: http://www.cameraegg.org/ef-35mm-f1-4l-ii-usm-lens-sample-images/
> ...



Yes, this is the beauty of an APO design.


----------



## gregory4000 (Aug 29, 2015)

There are plenary of photographers who want the best. I feel the price will be justified considering Leica,
Their 35mm is costlier and doesn't even autofocus.
As regards DXO. This will rate high.
The Zeiss Otus may have quality to contend with. Keep in mind, If Zeiss made an Otus 35mm it would cost $5k.


----------



## Larsskv (Aug 30, 2015)

gregory4000 said:


> There are plenary of photographers who want the best. I feel the price will be justified considering Leica,
> Their 35mm is costlier and doesn't even autofocus.
> As regards DXO. This will rate high.
> The Zeiss Otus may have quality to contend with. Keep in mind, If Zeiss made an Otus 35mm it would cost $5k.



If! DXO rates it, it will rate high. DXO seems to do all they can to avoid Canon from looking good. The lack of lenses tested on 5DS+R is hard to understand, as caused by anything other than DXO's intentions .


----------



## JPCanonUser (Aug 30, 2015)

Eldar said:


> Khalai said:
> 
> 
> > Han said:
> ...



285,000 here in Japan (about $2,400 at a straight conversion).


----------



## Khalai (Aug 30, 2015)

Eldar said:


> Khalai said:
> 
> 
> > Han said:
> ...



Well, 2069 EUR in Czech republic, which is about 2333 USD. Sucks  500 USD difference? I may as well buy ticket to NYC, go to B&H, make myself a nice trip and still spend less than buying it in EU, dammit!


----------



## infared (Aug 30, 2015)

Random Orbits said:


> infared said:
> 
> 
> > aj1575 said:
> ...



The Sigma AF definitely an issue. I own both the 35mm & 50mm Art lenses and the Sigma Dock. I went thru the ringer with it. I bought an 35mm first...and thought that the AF was "fine"...then I bought a 50mm and it was a nightmare...I could not get it to focus correctly even with the dock. It was "spotty. I sent it back to B&H and requested another copy...and, after "carefully" dialing in the focus on the Dock it has been fabulous. I usually only use single-point AF so....I do not know about other AF settings. The AF works with central or edge AF points....I then double checked my 35mm "very carefully" after my experience with the 50mm and found it to be "off" more than my new 50mm. So...I used the Dock to adjust the 35mm in all 4 focus zones as I had the 50mm and since that time...I have found that both lenses are just incredible. Yes..at f/1.4. I double checked before typing this...I tested at infinity, medium distance and close..very close at f1.4. They are spot on. Its funny while I was doing that I put my Canon 100mm Macro f/2.8L IS on the my 5DIII and it MISSED focus on a candle wick...focusing on the rim of the candle behind it when the focus point was dead on the wick. Second shot it nailed it, though. 
So ...I guess no lens/camera AF situation is perfect....and I have to say...I do not blame anyone who does not want to go thru the process I had to go thru to get great results from the Sigma's....I mean..hey I spend almost a couple of thousand dollars on two lenses and I have to dedicate a lot of time, buy a dock and jump through hoops to get them to perform precisely. Yeah..its annoying...but for me ...for what is out there (and even this stellar looking new 35mm f/1.4II from Canon at $1800), I think I have two very stellar lenses for what I have paid for them. I know that some agree with that outlook and some don't....but I just love some of the images that I have been able to create with these lenses. Really love them when I want low DOF.


----------



## rfdesigner (Aug 30, 2015)

Khalai said:


> Eldar said:
> 
> 
> > Khalai said:
> ...



You'll have to wait for the grey imports

As a guide you can get grey imports of the 11-24 for £2099 inc VAT vs £2799 inc VAT and the 5Ds for £2375 inc VAT vs £2999 inc VAT. The 5Ds was released less than 3 months ago.. On that basis you ought to be able to get your mits on a grey 35LII by end of November at the very latest.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Aug 30, 2015)

Virtually all wide aperture lenses have issues with longitudinal CA's (Purple Fringing). 

The BR lens is a huge advance in technology.

LOCA's cannot be removed by software. Lightroom will find the purple fringing and turn it to gray, but the fringing is still there. 

Just the elimination of LOCA's alone will make wide aperture images appear to be sharper.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 30, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Virtually all wide aperture lenses have issues with longitudinal CA's (Purple Fringing).
> 
> The BR lens is a huge advance in technology.
> 
> ...



Surely, and I am not trying to pick a semantics fight, if it doesn't have LoCA's then it is sharper, not just appears sharper. If an edge blur is lower it is, by definition, sharper.


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 30, 2015)

infared said:


> The Sigma AF definitely an issue. I own both the 35mm & 50mm Art lenses and the Sigma Dock. I went thru the ringer with it. I bought an 35mm first...and thought that the AF was "fine"...then I bought a 50mm and it was a nightmare...I could not get it to focus correctly even with the dock. It was "spotty. I sent it back to B&H and requested another copy...and, after "carefully" dialing in the focus on the Dock it has been fabulous. I usually only use single-point AF so....I do not know about other AF settings. The AF works with central or edge AF points....I then double checked my 35mm "very carefully" after my experience with the 50mm and found it to be "off" more than my new 50mm. So...I used the Dock to adjust the 35mm in all 4 focus zones as I had the 50mm and since that time...I have found that both lenses are just incredible. Yes..at f/1.4. I double checked before typing this...I tested at infinity, medium distance and close..very close at f1.4. They are spot on. Its funny while I was doing that I put my Canon 100mm Macro f/2.8L IS on the my 5DIII and it MISSED focus on a candle wick...focusing on the rim of the candle behind it when the focus point was dead on the wick. Second shot it nailed it, though.
> So ...I guess no lens/camera AF situation is perfect....and I have to say...I do not blame anyone who does not want to go thru the process I had to go thru to get great results from the Sigma's....I mean..hey I spend almost a couple of thousand dollars on two lenses and I have to dedicate a lot of time, buy a dock and jump through hoops to get them to perform precisely. Yeah..its annoying...but for me ...for what is out there (and even this stellar looking new 35mm f/1.4II from Canon at $1800), I think I have two very stellar lenses for what I have paid for them. I know that some agree with that outlook and some don't....but I just love some of the images that I have been able to create with these lenses. Really love them when I want low DOF.



Thanks for sharing your story, but the USB dock will not solve inconsistent AF -- it will only solve front/back focusing, right?

See here: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-50mm-f-1.4-DG-HSM-Art-Lens.aspx
(Now this is Bryan Carnathan with the Sigma _50_ Art, but I had a similar experience with the 35)

For the short version of what I'm concerned with, just pan down to the butterfly. Read the paragraph before the butterfly. Mouseover 1-10 and see what happens. Then read the last bit:

"A second copy of this lens shows similar inconsistent performance. Both this camera and the lens (via the dock) can be focus calibrated, but you cannot calibrate for inconsistency."

I thought the Sigma 35 Art on my 5D3 was razor, razor sharp. But it missed shots from f/1.4 to f/2 with glaring regularity, even with a very careful composition, no focus and recompose, single AF point instead of the '+' shaped cluster, etc.

In that light, paying 2x for the 35L II -- which is shaping up to be a sharper lens _that also has fire-and-forget confidence with the AF_ -- seems a fair deal to me. Many may disagree with that, though.

- A


----------



## RobertG. (Aug 31, 2015)

mackguyver said:


> Full res sample images: http://www.cameraegg.org/ef-35mm-f1-4l-ii-usm-lens-sample-images/



I like the sample shots in full size. The portraits look great. Unfortunately the landscape shots don't look that good. The picture of the bright blue lagoon is not sharp. According to the Exif date it was shot at f8 1/320 ISO 100 but at 100% nothing is sharp. It might be noise reduction, JPEG compression or whatever but the picture lacks detail and sharpness. The daylight shot of Santorini was shot at f8 1/640 ISO 100 but it is not sharp at all, too. Hopefully it is just the JPEG compression... Such samples are not worth to be shown this way. The single house looks much better. There is detail and microcontrast where there should be one. Same for the large aperture samples, which look amazing.

I hope that this lens will just be the start of a series of updated lenses. A new 50mm and 85mm would be great. But I would love even more a new 40/45/50mm TS-E lens. I guess this new 35mm produces an image circle which is much larger than it needs to be. I guess this was the best way to achive this high corner performance. So how hard can it be to produce a new 40mm TS-E lens?


----------



## infared (Aug 31, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> infared said:
> 
> 
> > The Sigma AF definitely an issue. I own both the 35mm & 50mm Art lenses and the Sigma Dock. I went thru the ringer with it. I bought an 35mm first...and thought that the AF was "fine"...then I bought a 50mm and it was a nightmare...I could not get it to focus correctly even with the dock. It was "spotty. I sent it back to B&H and requested another copy...and, after "carefully" dialing in the focus on the Dock it has been fabulous. I usually only use single-point AF so....I do not know about other AF settings. The AF works with central or edge AF points....I then double checked my 35mm "very carefully" after my experience with the 50mm and found it to be "off" more than my new 50mm. So...I used the Dock to adjust the 35mm in all 4 focus zones as I had the 50mm and since that time...I have found that both lenses are just incredible. Yes..at f/1.4. I double checked before typing this...I tested at infinity, medium distance and close..very close at f1.4. They are spot on. Its funny while I was doing that I put my Canon 100mm Macro f/2.8L IS on the my 5DIII and it MISSED focus on a candle wick...focusing on the rim of the candle behind it when the focus point was dead on the wick. Second shot it nailed it, though.
> ...



Like I said...my lenses seem to be very consistent. The 50mm that I sent back was not.
I agree with your outlook especially if you have the cash to layout $1800 for a 35mm prime. I would love to own the LII...but that is not going to happen for me at that price...nor will I own an Otis! LOL! it was a stretch for me to buy the two Sigmas...
I am very happy with the lenses that I own...if they did not perform well I would not tolerate that at all. I am very serious about creating images and need consistent results to achieve that.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 31, 2015)

RobertG. said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > Full res sample images: http://www.cameraegg.org/ef-35mm-f1-4l-ii-usm-lens-sample-images/
> ...



I think the real issue is that the enlargement ratios are so big now any kind of dof is getting increasingly difficult.

My average print size is 16" x 24" and I can tell which lens I shot with, the only remarkably sharp lens for landscapes (that I own) is the TS-E 17mm where I laid the plane of focus on the ground, anything less and the dof is not as good. If I was a landscape shooter I'd sell my 11-24 and get the TS-E 24 MkII and be done. 

At the magnifications we now look at hyperfocal is dead, only tilt will do.


----------



## RobertG. (Aug 31, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> RobertG. said:
> 
> 
> > mackguyver said:
> ...



Yes, this could be one explanation, which also came to my mind. It is the reason why I mainly use the TS-E 17mm and TS-E 24mm for landscapes. But sometimes a longer lens would be useful and so I use the TS-E 45mm and TS-E 90mm as well. TS-E 45mm is really not up to date and a much better replacement would be appreciated.


----------



## Sporgon (Aug 31, 2015)

I guess if I'd spent a week in Santorini with that girl my pictures would be a bit shaky. Seriously though, I think the portrait shots have a superb latest-in-film * like look to them, and I presume they were shot on a 5Ds. Says a lot for that camera's sensor and the lens. Canon seem to have moved a little back towards the 5DII hue with the 5Ds 
whereas the 5DIII is greener - like the Exmor.

(* scans from film such as Kodak Portra 160)


----------



## ahsanford (Aug 31, 2015)

Larsskv said:


> gregory4000 said:
> 
> 
> > There are plenary of photographers who want the best. I feel the price will be justified considering Leica,
> ...



This. We knew the sensor scores would be higher for anything SoNikon-related at DXO, but they've had well over a month since their 5DS / 5DS R reviews to retest Canon lenses and they've re-tested exactly ZERO to date. 

Anyone who follows the clown car that DXO is knows that their lens scores are heavily, heavily weighted by _how many pixels are on the sensor sitting behind them_. So an epic improvement in the ranking of Canon lenses was expected with the release of the 5DS rigs.

But DXO has seen to it that it will not happen until either (a) the a7R II has its lenses retested first (heavily muting the upside of Canon's new MP advantage or (b) until Nikon's D820 / D900 (whatever it's called) surfaces with the a7R II sensor.

#fairandbalanced #dxo

- A


----------



## StudentOfLight (Sep 1, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> I guess if I'd spent a week in Santorini with that girl my pictures would be a bit shaky. Seriously though, I think the portrait shots have a superb latest-in-film * like look to them, and I presume they were shot on a 5Ds. Says a lot for that camera's sensor and the lens. Canon seem to have moved a little back towards the 5DII hue with the 5Ds
> whereas the 5DIII is greener - like the Exmor.
> 
> (* scans from film such as Kodak Portra 160)


The portrait shots I downloaded were shot with the 5D-III. I was excited by how well very CA was handled in all dimensions. Also, the bokeh looked almost 135L quality.


----------



## martti (Sep 12, 2015)

My hero Ken Rockwell has tested this lens on his 5D S R and he says that the difference in sharpness is hardly noticeable in real world. In addition he says that the old version is so good that nobody actually needs a better lens than it is. Those who do not have the old version of the lens as yet should now get ready to get one as there are people who want to upgrade and there will be lots of it out in the used market.

I do not understand why you people spend so much time staring at your MTF charts when you can get a neutral and professional assesment from Ken's site. Just click
http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/35mm-f14-ii.htm


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 12, 2015)

martti said:


> My hero Ken Rockwell has tested this lens on his 5D S R and he says that the difference in sharpness is hardly noticeable in real world. In addition he says that the old version is so good that nobody actually needs a better lens than it is. Those who do not have the old version of the lens as yet should now get ready to get one as there are people who want to upgrade and there will be lots of it out in the used market.
> 
> I do not understand why you people spend so much time staring at your MTF charts when you can get a neutral and professional assesment from Ken's site. Just click
> http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/35mm-f14-ii.htm



Because in his own words he is not neutral and professional. He has said he will quite happily make stuff up to get page hits.

P.S. As I expected. _"My hero Ken Rockwell has tested this lens on his 5D S R"_ no he has not, he hasn't touched one. His 'review' is based on looking at MTF charts..............


----------



## meywd (Sep 12, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> martti said:
> 
> 
> > My hero Ken Rockwell has tested this lens on his 5D S R and he says that the difference in sharpness is hardly noticeable in real world. In addition he says that the old version is so good that nobody actually needs a better lens than it is. Those who do not have the old version of the lens as yet should now get ready to get one as there are people who want to upgrade and there will be lots of it out in the used market.
> ...



yup, BS as usual



> I'm sure when my own -II version arrives I'll be taken by its added sharpness, as I was with the 24-70/2.8 L II, but for now, I'm not getting that excited.



and what does this mean?



> A 24mm f/1.4 *works even better in the dark*, but it's too wide for general purpose use.


----------



## gjones5252 (Sep 12, 2015)

martti said:


> My hero Ken Rockwell has tested this lens on his 5D S R and he says that the difference in sharpness is hardly noticeable in real world. In addition he says that the old version is so good that nobody actually needs a better lens than it is. Those who do not have the old version of the lens as yet should now get ready to get one as there are people who want to upgrade and there will be lots of it out in the used market.
> 
> I do not understand why you people spend so much time staring at your MTF charts when you can get a neutral and professional assesment from Ken's site. Just click
> http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/35mm-f14-ii.htm


I have no idea if you are joking or not. Ken Rockwell is the worst reviewer of any lens. I would get better reviews by giving my blind grandfather a beer and a picture of the lens. Ken Rockwell does his best to just be negative to get likes and to follow the any press is good press model. 
When I first started reading his site about 5 years ago it was all hate towards canon. Just randomly in reviews about Nikon he would throw out that he hated canon. 
The only thing that has never changed about his horrible opinion is about the custom modes c1, c2 c3 on the cameras being an amazing tool. He did introduce me to that.
Other then that Google the digital picture.


----------



## bluenoser1993 (Sep 12, 2015)

RobertG. said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > Full res sample images: http://www.cameraegg.org/ef-35mm-f1-4l-ii-usm-lens-sample-images/
> ...



I found the same problem with my version 1, loved the up close results, did not like the results from infinity based focus in landscape. I ended up selling it.


----------



## risc32 (Sep 12, 2015)

gjones5252 said:


> martti said:
> 
> 
> > My hero Ken Rockwell has tested this lens on his 5D S R and he says that the difference in sharpness is hardly noticeable in real world. In addition he says that the old version is so good that nobody actually needs a better lens than it is. Those who do not have the old version of the lens as yet should now get ready to get one as there are people who want to upgrade and there will be lots of it out in the used market.
> ...



I actually like Rockwell. I've read nearly every word on his site, and i think some of you here might want to consider seeing a doctor, as the things you are attributing to him didn't happen. If anything i would have thought you canon fanboys would be humping his leg. The guy switched to the canon camp when he got his hands on a 5d, and is quick to point out Canons superiority in camera bodies/lenses and customer service. He didn't review the 35mm mk2 yet, and if you had actually read his opinions on the matter you would see that he states that the newer lens would likely be better but at a huge cost in weight/size and dollars. But he also points out that it might just be a big enough improvement to justify it, like the 24-70mmf2.8 v2. But since you guys are rockwell know it alls i guess i'm just telling you what you already know. i also have a sneaking suspicion that ken knows more than you and your blind grandfather technically, so why don't you start a site and tell us how it really is?


----------



## caMARYnon (Sep 23, 2015)

Sigma and mkI comparison
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/MTF.aspx?Lens=994&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=829&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0&CT=AVG
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/MTF.aspx?Lens=994&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=121&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0&CT=AVG


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 23, 2015)

risc32 said:


> I actually like Rockwell. I've read nearly every word on his site, and i think some of you here might want to consider seeing a doctor, as the things you are attributing to him didn't happen. If anything i would have thought you canon fanboys would be humping his leg. The guy switched to the canon camp when he got his hands on a 5d, and is quick to point out Canons superiority in camera bodies/lenses and customer service. He didn't review the 35mm mk2 yet, and if you had actually read his opinions on the matter you would see that he states that the newer lens would likely be better but at a huge cost in weight/size and dollars. But he also points out that it might just be a big enough improvement to justify it, like the 24-70mmf2.8 v2. But since you guys are rockwell know it alls i guess i'm just telling you what you already know. i also have a sneaking suspicion that ken knows more than you and your blind grandfather technically, so why don't you start a site and tell us how it really is?



Direct from his 'About me' page.



> _ I have a big sense of humor, and *do this site to entertain you (and myself)*, as well as to inform and to educate. *I occasionally weave fiction* and satire into my stories to keep them interesting. *I love a good hoax*. Read The Museum of Hoaxes, or see their site. A hoax, like some of the things I do on this website, is done as a goof simply for the heck of it by overactive minds as a practical joke. Even Ansel Adams kidded around when he was just a pup in the 1920s by selling his photos as "Parmelian Prints." I have the energy and sense of humor of a three-year old, so remember, *this is a personal website, and never presented as fact*. I* enjoy making things up for fun*, as does The Onion, and I publish them here......_



http://www.kenrockwell.com/about.htm


----------



## Mark Webb Photography (Sep 24, 2015)

35mm f/1.4L II wide open samples from me, enjoy


----------



## Click (Sep 24, 2015)

Very nice pictures, Mark.

...And welcome to CR


----------



## meywd (Sep 24, 2015)

Mark Webb Photography said:


> 35mm f/1.4L II wide open samples from me, enjoy



Wonderful photos, welcome to CR


----------



## ben805 (Sep 28, 2015)

35L II is a significant upgrade from my old 35L, center to border sharpness is superior to my 100L IS Macro, 85L II, and 70-200 2.8 IS II. Stopping down the aperture get very little to no improvement in sharpness and contrast. Color and bokeh similar to 85L II, and AF is the most consistent and accurate out of all my L lens, I think the 35L II broke several ranks and it has now become my reference for the rest of my arsenal to measure up to.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/


----------

