# Shootout: Canon 35mm f/1.4L II, Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art & Canon 35mm f/1.4L



## Canon Rumors Guy (Sep 23, 2015)

```
LensRentals.com has completed their first MTF comparison between the Canon 35mm f/1.4L II, Sigma 35mm Art & Canon 35mm f/1.4L. The MTF does show a slight advatange for the new Canon over the Sigma Art series lens, but based on the MTF alone, that may not make it worth the price. However, there are a lot more things to consider than just MTF charts. There’s build quality & AF performance, both of which are going to be better from the new Canon. Other things like color rendition, CA control, and overall “look” of the images the lens is capable of producing will also matter to a lot of buyers.</p>
<p>We’re still waiting for our copy of the new Canon, and we’re really looking forward to it.</p>
<div id="attachment_22616" style="width: 610px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><a href="http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/09/35mm-f1-4-shootout-canon-35mm-f1-4l-ii-vs-sigma-35mm-art-vs-canon-35mm-f1-4l-i"><img class="wp-image-22616 size-full" src="http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/allmtf.jpg" alt="allmtf" width="600" height="810" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Roger Cicala and Aaron Closz, Olaf Optical Testing, 2015</p></div>
<p>From LensRentals.com</p>
<blockquote><p>Everyone always asks me if I would buy this lens. Honestly, I’m not sure that I would just on the basis of the MTF charts. It’s the best 35mm by just a whisker over the Sigma 35mm f/1.4, but at nearly twice the price. As more reviewers weigh in there may well show other things that make it worth the price difference. A lot of people only consider Canon lenses, though, and I expect many of them will be upgrading from the Canon 35mm f/1.4 for the increased resolution the new lens gives them. <a href="http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/09/35mm-f1-4-shootout-canon-35mm-f1-4l-ii-vs-sigma-35mm-art-vs-canon-35mm-f1-4l-i" target="_blank">Read the full article</a></p></blockquote>
<p><strong>Preorder EF 35 f/1.4L II $1799:</strong> <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> <strong>|</strong> <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> <strong>|</strong> <a href="http://amzn.to/1Uehm5w" target="_blank">Amazon</a><strong> | <a href="http://bit.ly/1KPvgKw" target="_blank">Canon Store</a></strong> (in stock)</p>
```


----------



## rrcphoto (Sep 23, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> LensRentals.com has completed their first MTF comparison between the Canon 35mm f/1.4L II, Sigma 35mm Art & Canon 35mm f/1.4L. The MTF does show a slight advatange for the new Canon over the Sigma Art series lens, but based on the MTF alone, that may not make it worth the price.



well part of the "worth the price" isn't tested here which is the LoCA which canon is stating should be much better.

and then we get into the other aspects of the lens - build quality, better (meaning less) sample variation, weather sealing,etc.

double the price? hard to say - there's still a premium of sticking with the native brand.


----------



## Maximilian (Sep 23, 2015)

Honestly I am quite surprised to see such an - to me - obvious advantage in the MF charts. 
And then we can add up all the mentioned advantages like BR element, in house AF, weather sealing, QC, ...

Of course real world experiences will show that these two lenses are quite close together, but after all the praises and ovations for the Sigma I thought it would be really hard for Canon to beat it. 

Obviously they did their homework quite well. 

And the price performance must be considered by each individually depending on their needs and wants.


----------



## Mac Duderson (Sep 23, 2015)

Don't buy the lens, just rent the crap out of it from us 

Anyone who uses this lens as their main lens wouldn't think twice and put the money down and would have it paid off after 2 shoots. Well actually maybe just 1 shoot becasue we would also sell the MKi and only have to put down $600 to upgrade. Not even a question.
If someone never had the previous MKi version I still think many will want this lens simply for the blue element and AF which Zeiss still lacks. The fact that you can shoot wide open with no CA makes this lens the best 35mm ever.

Canon PLEASE do the 85mm now!!  The 85L is my main lens and would give anything for that blue element and less touchy AF.
Maybe I could order the 35mm and deconstruct it and tape that blue element on the back of my 85mm he he! ;D


----------



## East Wind Photography (Sep 23, 2015)

Based on the mtf alone, I would not buy it. However there are so many other things to consider such as AF speed, weather sealing (real world sealing...not just the cosmetic stuff), color balance, smoothness of the MF control....should I go on?

Mtf is an important factor but not the sole reason in most cases for paying twice as much.


----------



## Diltiazem (Sep 23, 2015)

The TDP site needs some fixing.

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

You can change the aperture on Sigma, but not on Canon.
Does anyone know which camera was used for this test?


----------



## can0nfan2379 (Sep 23, 2015)

Mac Duderson said:


> Don't buy the lens, just rent the crap out of it from us
> 
> Anyone who uses this lens as their main lens wouldn't think twice and put the money down and would have it paid off after 2 shoots. Well actually maybe just 1 shoot becasue we would also sell the MKi and only have to put down $600 to upgrade. Not even a question.
> If someone never had the previous MKi version I still think many will want this lens simply for the blue element and AF which Zeiss still lacks. The fact that you can shoot wide open with no CA makes this lens the best 35mm ever.
> ...



I owned the 24-70 2.8II and while extremely versatile and incredibly sharp for a zoom, I felt the bokeh & OOF areas were a bit busy. The 85II is one of my favourite lenses of all time and as I've said in a number of other threads, if they can get rid of the focus by wire, make it all internal focus and incorporate the BR optics, I'll get my credit card out right now.

I should have the 35II tomorrow so I'm pretty excited to see how it performs wide open. I think Canon have a winner here. The Sigma from all accounts is a damn good lens for the dollars but I'm happy spending some additional $ for consistent and reliable AF, less CA and build quality / long term reliability.


----------



## RogerCicala (Sep 23, 2015)

Diltiazem said:


> The TDP site needs some fixing.
> 
> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/MTF.aspx?Lens=994&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=829&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0&CT=AVG
> 
> ...



No camera - these are just the lenses tested on an optical bench. It eliminates the variability of a camera body.


----------



## bholliman (Sep 23, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> Everyone always asks me if I would buy this lens. Honestly, I’m not sure that I would just on the basis of the MTF charts. It’s the best 35mm by just a whisker over the Sigma 35mm f/1.4, but at nearly twice the price. As more reviewers weigh in there may well show other things that make it worth the price difference. A lot of people only consider Canon lenses, though, and I expect many of them will be upgrading from the Canon 35mm f/1.4 for the increased resolution the new lens gives them.



To me the biggest advantage of the Canon L II over the Sigma Art will be auto focus speed and accuracy. Yes, the Sigma is extremely sharp, but there is a lot of copy variation and many report auto focus problems. We know the Canon L II will excel in this area based on how other Canon lenses perform. I'm happy with my 35mm f/2 IS and don't plan to upgrade, but if this were a focal length I used more or used it for my income I would certainly spend the extra for the L II over the Sigma Art.


----------



## raptor3x (Sep 23, 2015)

Diltiazem said:


> The TDP site needs some fixing.
> 
> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/MTF.aspx?Lens=994&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=829&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0&CT=AVG
> 
> ...



It's probably not that the site has any issues but they only have data wide open. Also, these measurements are taken on a true optical bench, there is no camera involved.


----------



## Matthew Saville (Sep 23, 2015)

There is also coma, CA/PF, field curvature, and vignetting to consider, especially if you do astro-landscape photography.

The Sigma doesn't really impress in these respects, putting in a pretty good performance but not exactly flawless.

By comparison, Tamron's press release "horn tooting" about the 35 and 45 f/1.8's do seem to emphasize that they put a lot of energy into specialty things like coma, field curvature, and vignetting. In fact from the sound of their press release you'd think these lenses have ZERO light falloff, period!

I'm sure more real-world tests will surface soon for both of these newest 35's, and maybe we'll discover that Tamron was only trying to say "hey, we're putting just as much effort into this as the other guys are"...

Still, I'm highly tempted to jump to the conclusion that at $1800 this new 35 L is just not going to be a lens for the masses. Not when you can get ~90% of the sharpness from the Sigma for $900, and possibly 75-90% of the overall IQ from the Tamron for $600. Really, the only thing the Canon L will truly stand out for is probably going to be it's rock-solid build quality and dependability, and some of that old-fashioned je ne sais quoi that Canon L's are known for. (Bokeh, colors, etc.)


----------



## Arty (Sep 24, 2015)

From the reviews I have seen, the Tamron is not in the same league as any of these lenses. The resolution looks better on the Canon 35F2 IS than the Tamron 35, according to some review numbers.


----------



## infared (Sep 24, 2015)

My Sigma 35mm Art (once calibrated on the dock for my 5DIII), is just a fantastic lens. I will be keeping mine. The new Canon looks fantastic, too! I think for me...if I have a solid image, no one will notice the microscopic nuance of "better" provided by the Canon at twice the price. I feel the same about my 50mm Art lens. Once taking the time to carefully calibrate my lenses I am not experiencing the AF problems that are constantly being cited. The lenses focus fast and are spot on when my technique is. Maybe I have just been extremely fortunate. I would love to own the new Canon...but I just cannot justify that expenditure...I know that many can, though. It's all good!


----------



## Diltiazem (Sep 24, 2015)

RogerCicala said:


> Diltiazem said:
> 
> 
> > The TDP site needs some fixing.
> ...



Thanks Roger. Would kindly inform TDP that aperture on Canon can't be changed while Sigma goes from 1.4 to 16?


----------



## Diltiazem (Sep 24, 2015)

raptor3x said:


> Diltiazem said:
> 
> 
> > The TDP site needs some fixing.
> ...


But you can change Sigma from 1.4 to 16 and see MTF at different apertures.


----------



## Local Hero (Sep 24, 2015)

The MTF on the Canon looks amazing.
Especially since this is measured, not theoretical.

Not sure why you would say the MTF is not good enough to encourage you to buy this lens?

The Sigma is great value, but there is massive diminishing returns seeking out better image quality, especially for better contrast.


----------



## RogerCicala (Sep 24, 2015)

Diltiazem said:


> raptor3x said:
> 
> 
> > Diltiazem said:
> ...



That's because we've given them the stop-down charts on that lens. Stop-downs take about 20 hours to do on a lens, and we're behind right now.


----------



## Viggo (Sep 24, 2015)

MTF's are one thing, this is more fun.

Art vs L II

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=994&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=829&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

L I vs L II

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=994&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=121&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

35 L II vs 200 f2 both wide open. ;D

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=994&Camera=979&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=458&Sample=0&SampleComp=0&CameraComp=979&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0


----------



## docsmith (Sep 24, 2015)

Or...vs the 24-70 II @ f/2.8

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=994&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=3&LensComp=787&CameraComp=979&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=0

The 24-70 II continues to impress me.


----------



## infared (Sep 25, 2015)

docsmith said:


> Or...vs the 24-70 II @ f/2.8
> 
> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=994&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=3&LensComp=787&CameraComp=979&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=0
> 
> The 24-70 II continues to impress me.



That is impressive!


----------



## jd7 (Sep 25, 2015)

infared said:


> docsmith said:
> 
> 
> > Or...vs the 24-70 II @ f/2.8
> ...



Not trying to take anything away from the 24-70L II but it looks like the 35L II is almost as good at 1.4 as it is at 2.8. There is more vignetting wide open but otherwise it looks pretty similar, doesn't it? THAT seems pretty impressive to me.


----------



## caMARYnon (Sep 25, 2015)

jd7 said:


> Not trying to take anything away from the 24-70L II but it looks like the 35L II is almost as good at 1.4 as it is at 2.8. There is more vignetting wide open but otherwise it looks pretty similar, doesn't it? THAT seems pretty impressive to me.


Agreed


----------



## Sabaki (Sep 25, 2015)

docsmith said:


> Or...vs the 24-70 II @ f/2.8
> 
> http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=994&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=3&LensComp=787&CameraComp=979&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=0
> 
> The 24-70 II continues to impress me.



We went through a few years where most of Canon's new L series zooms were being touted as 'prime like' in their IQ

I do believe that the 35mm mkii is the first L series prime in many a year, I'm sure it should best every zoom out there for sharpness, colour, contrast and aberration control

A new era in primes has dawned


----------



## YuengLinger (Sep 25, 2015)

Sabaki said:


> docsmith said:
> 
> 
> > Or...vs the 24-70 II @ f/2.8
> ...



To prove this isn't a fluke, bring on the new 50mm 1.2!!!

Ok, back to drooling over the 35mm 1.4 II...


----------



## Sabaki (Sep 25, 2015)

YuengLinger said:


> Sabaki said:
> 
> 
> > docsmith said:
> ...



I'm holding out for a 85mm f/1.2  I seen a review for the Otus 85 and that lens is simply incredible! Hoping Canon can match that lenses optical powers


----------



## Synics (Sep 25, 2015)

I used to have the 35L. Sold it, picked up the Sigma 35 and never looked back. This lens is pretty much perfect in every way. It nails perfect focus every time on both my 5d2 and 5d3 with no adjustments needs. Every picture is extremely sharp, crisp, and magical. It is my most favorite lens. It has made me a lot of money. IMO I would never fork out twice he money for something that is slightly better on some chart. There is so much other stuff I could put my money into. But that's just me.


----------



## sanj (Sep 27, 2015)

Can someone kindly educate me on the statement "Canon 35mm f/1.4 for the increased resolution the new lens gives them." 
I am not knowledgeable enough to know how a lens would increase resolution. [I don't actually understand what resolution actually means. I have been struggling with this for long.]


----------



## Chapman Baxter (Sep 27, 2015)

Viggo said:


> MTF's are one thing, this is more fun.
> 
> Art vs L II
> 
> ...



I suspect the L II vs Art comparison says more about the different cameras used (5DS R vs IDS III) than the comparative resolving powers of the two lenses.


----------



## TeT (Sep 27, 2015)

Synics said:


> I used to have the 35L. Sold it, picked up the Sigma 35 and never looked back. This lens is pretty much perfect in every way. It nails perfect focus every time on both my 5d2 and 5d3 with no adjustments needs. Every picture is extremely sharp, crisp, and magical. It is my most favorite lens. It has made me a lot of money. IMO I would never fork out twice he money for something that is slightly better on some chart. There is so much other stuff I could put my money into. But that's just me.



We are hoping for more than slightly better, and more than on just the chart... Still not a lot of solid comparisons out there as of yet... and many are hoping for all this because the 50 is due soon and this should be a preview of that.

Time will tell...


----------



## Viggo (Sep 28, 2015)

TeT said:


> Synics said:
> 
> 
> > I used to have the 35L. Sold it, picked up the Sigma 35 and never looked back. This lens is pretty much perfect in every way. It nails perfect focus every time on both my 5d2 and 5d3 with no adjustments needs. Every picture is extremely sharp, crisp, and magical. It is my most favorite lens. It has made me a lot of money. IMO I would never fork out twice he money for something that is slightly better on some chart. There is so much other stuff I could put my money into. But that's just me.
> ...



I don't know how other people feel, but a comparison to the Sigma isn't important as I already own it twice and know that I can't use it. I really like the mk1, so when I see the big step up from that, it's really all I need. A guy in the other thread going on now posted cats and dogs on Flickr and they look killer!


----------

