# Hold out for EF 35/2 IS or jump in with classic 35 1.4L



## Ew (Nov 5, 2012)

I've been lusting for the 35/1.4 since I gave away (to old friend w new baby - shooting w T2i) my 2nd 28/1.8 in July. Just as I was bout to pull the trigger - whammo - options options. 

Many rumors of updates for the ol' 35 but that was not an issue for me as it is a great lens - Now!

In comparison, I shoot the 50/1,4 at 2.0+ most of the time. Opening up in really bad light. 

In a bizzare state of excitement and confusion over this one. I'll hold off for a couple of days to cool down a bit and review in a sane state of mind. 

It doesn't seem that the new 35/2 IS would be a replacement for the 1.4.... Am I wrong??

Thank you in advance for your thoughts.


----------



## PackLight (Nov 5, 2012)

No, it is not a replacement for the 35mm f1.4L. You didn't see a red ring on the f/2 did you?


----------



## Daniel Flather (Nov 5, 2012)

My 35L is awesome on the 5D3, get the 1.4L if price is not an issue. The new 35/2IS looks nice. Or, hold out for a few more years for the 35LII. Buy what you want now, or you'll wait forever.


----------



## marcosv (Nov 5, 2012)

I love my 35L. But, it isn't a small lens, being fairly long.

That 35/2 IS looks a bit closer to the compactness of the 35/2 non-IS. Could be a consideration of you got a bag full of glass.

I think the answer will be how close does the 35/2 IS gets to the 35L optically.


----------



## AudioGlenn (Nov 5, 2012)

+1 vote for the 35L. Awesome lens. Why wait? If you have the money and you know what you want, get what you want. I don't see a great need for the IS, even for video. I'm sure there's a market for it but the 35L is awesome AND it's already available.


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 6, 2012)

35L is nice, but it's not quite razor sharp until F/1.8


----------



## Jakontil (Nov 6, 2012)

I didnt wait and get myself 35L n couldnt be happier since...

Now... Should i get the 24-70II in place for my 24-105?

Optically speaking, 24-105 aint great but the extra length that puts me still


----------



## Axilrod (Nov 6, 2012)

Do you shoot alot of video? I would think the 35 f/2 IS would be an APS-C video shooter's dream. I'd honestly wait and see how the 35 f/2 performs, if it's anything like the 24 IS and 28 IS it may be worth checking out.


----------



## SJTstudios (Nov 6, 2012)

The 35mm f2 will be better stopped down sharpness wise, but for 1.4-2, the 35mm 1.4 will be better, so for that light, it will be good, weight wise, we really won't see a difference, it's just a matter of what your use will be.


----------



## tron (Nov 6, 2012)

35 f/2 at 900 is a complete waste of money. Get the 35 1.4L before they replace it with a $2K lens...


----------



## Bosman (Nov 6, 2012)

The price is not super far off from the L however given the other new lenses they have released it probably is sharp at F2. For those merging or adding video to their work its going to be real good for that and the is may be handy for low light since its the hybrid is. The new 35 F1.4 LII that comes out, god knows when, will probably be $1800. The optics are probably designed for the future hi resolution cameras that come out in the next 5 years at least that would make sense. I personally will probably get this lens for shooting finish line shots for sports given that i sold my 24-70 and liked the 35mm focal length for that. However, I want to see reviews and learn more before dropping the cash. The compromise would also be that i would need to use a rain sleeve for my equipment shooting events in bad weather which I havent had to do with my 1dm3 and 24-70 or 70-200, still it is just smart to protect it.
new the 35L is $1,329.00
new the 35F2 is $849.00
If $500 is a lot to you then the F2 is it. Personally I'd get the F2 and if you needed more power or weather proofing built in due to using it in bad weather conditions then the L is it but then I doubt it offers much more than the F2 until or unless they get a F1.2 35mm on the books in which case bam! that would be a must buy but also be $2500 if it did see the light of day.


----------



## sagittariansrock (Nov 6, 2012)

Jakontil said:


> I didnt wait and get myself 35L n couldnt be happier since...
> 
> Now... Should i get the 24-70II in place for my 24-105?
> 
> Optically speaking, 24-105 aint great but the extra length that puts me still



Canon is getting rid of that extra length so people can decide more easily :



tron said:


> Get the 35 1.4L before they replace it with a $2K lens...



Good advice.


----------



## gjones5252 (Nov 6, 2012)

I have been in this same situation as this is one of the lens choices i am thinking about.
One thing i have seen is the MTF of the new 35 is quite a bit better than the L version. I dont know enough te know exactly what this means but wouldnt that be at least worth waiting? Its quite a big increase looks like....


----------



## weilin (Nov 6, 2012)

Bosman said:


> I am an L addict but given the 35 F2 is available and it has a gasket seal which shocks me since that is typically reserved for L lenses.



Where did you see that the new 35mm F/2 has a gasket? I seemed to have missed that announcement


----------



## keithfullermusic (Nov 6, 2012)

2.0 vs. 1.4 is vastly different.

a) 1.4-1.8 looks incredible - especially 1.4 if you get the focus right.

b) 1.4 is amazing in low light. 2.0 is really good, but that's an entire stop different. sure, 4-stop IS is great for static objects, but if you're shooting events i think shutter speed is more important. What would you rather have, 1.4 @ 1/50 or 2.0 @ 1/100 with people moving around? I'd vote for the former.

c) IS is really really really nice for video, but at 35mm you aren't going to need it as much as you would at say 100mm

d) size and weight are different

e) price


----------



## Bosman (Nov 6, 2012)

Uh oh, I read up first thing this morning and got cross modginated. I apologize for my lack of truth on the gasket that was the 24-70 F4L. So sorry. I'm an idiot.


----------



## Plato the Wise (Nov 6, 2012)

I have the 35L and all I can say is that it is awesome. It is a great focal length on full frame and at 1.4 the background just melts away from the subject. It is a sharp lens and the color is great as well.

The only drawback is that I don't think it is sealed like the other Ls.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 6, 2012)

I had to make a similar choice a few months back -- the 35L or the new 28 IS. Rented them both first. I ended up choosing the 28 IS and have been quite pleased.

Money didn't factor into this call. My considerations were as follows (apply these to your situation as needed):

The 28 IS (2.8 + 4 stops IS) is more handholdable in low light than the 35L. That applies to what I shoot, but perhaps not for you. (I'm often shooting nighttime street or stationary people indoors at social events.) With my 5D3, I can bring home useable shots from ISO 6400 - 10000 shots at 1/20 of a second. The 35/1.4L cannot bring those shots in without shooting wide open (i.e. soft anywhere but in the center with an unusably small DOF for my needs) and at an even _higher_ ISO to net a useable non-IS shutter speed.

New non-L EF (not EF-S) designs rival old L designs from an IQ perspective. The new 28 is as sharp as the 35L in head to head on the 28's wide open end (comparing both at F/2.8 ). The 35L is a _shade_ better in the corners when you stop it down for landscape work. So I shot both and couldn't really see a difference in the IQ.

IMHO, the 28 IS has better build quality than the 35L. The 28 IS build/materials/etc. is nearly identical to the modern 'plastic' L lenses like the 100L macro (though the 28 lacks a gasket), whereas the 35L is dated, has cheaper looking/feeling plastic, etc. As an owner of the tank-like 24-70 F/2.8L Mk I and 70-200 F/2.8L IS II lenses, I was shocked to see the famous 35L I've heard so much about resemble my non-L 50mm F/1.4 in build quality.

The 28 is small, light, and unassuming. I love this as I often shoot candids, street, etc. In return for this little lens, I lost the prestige of a red ring. Great trade for me, but perhaps not for you.


So, given all of the above, I went with the 28. It was the right call _for me_. Had the same IQ statements been true and the new 35 F/2 IS was available then, I very well may have gone with that lens instead of the 28. But, if you like what F/1.4 - F/2 looks like, are shooting moving targets (where IS's longer useable shutter speeds won't help you), or need a red ring -- the 35L is the option.


----------



## wayno (Nov 6, 2012)

I cant agree that the 35L and the 50 1.4 are of similar build quality. The 35L is a league ahead in that regard, despite it's age, IMO.


----------



## Gothmoth (Nov 6, 2012)

i would wait and check the new sigma 35mm f1.4.

http://sigma-global.com/en/lenses/cas/product/art/a_35_14.html

i hope it will be a winner.

i was not much of a sigma fan in the past.
but i give them some credit and i hope they do what they promised and make their quality management better.




> New user-control tools and software, and new quality control measures
> 
> The new Sigma Optimization Pro software and USB Dock are designed exclusively for these new product lines and will enable Sigma users to connect their lenses to their computers to update lens firmware and fine-tune focus parameters via easy-to-use, on-screen controls.
> 
> ...



http://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/cas/requirement/index.html#requirement04


----------



## weilin (Nov 6, 2012)

Bosman said:


> Uh oh, I read up first thing this morning and got cross modginated. I apologize for my lack of truth on the gasket that was the 24-70 F4L. So sorry. I'm an idiot.



No harm done. You made the 35mm F/2 much more desirable to me for a second >.<.

Wei


----------



## Botts (Nov 7, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> 35L is nice, but it's not quite razor sharp until F/1.8



A good point, as much as I love the 35L, I've just accepted the fact it's not razor sharp at f/1.4. The 35L is a fabulous lens, and if you're a shooter needing the DOF advantages of 1.4 then there's nothing better in this focal length.

But if you don't need the DOF, and sharpness is important enough for you to not shoot the 35L at 1.4 then the 35/2 is likely worth considering. The other IS primes are quite sharp wide open.

Also if you're shooting static-ish nightscapes without a tripod, the 35/2 IS will be more handhold-able than the 35L. I have the 35L, and a 17-55 2.8 IS, if I'm going to shoot a building at night time without a tripod, I'm grabbing the 17-55 2.8 every time. The L has a 2-stop advantage over the 17-55, but only a 1 stop over the 35/2 IS. And apparently the 35/2 has a better IS system than the 17-55 so it will be a more stark comparison of IS vs Aperture for night shots.

Based on your positive comments about the 28/1.8 I'd guess you won't miss the IS too much. The 35L has a special look to it's photos, so you may want to go this way.

Just my 2 cents.


----------



## wickidwombat (Nov 7, 2012)

ahsanford said:


> I had to make a similar choice a few months back -- the 35L or the new 28 IS. Rented them both first. I ended up choosing the 28 IS and have been quite pleased.
> 
> Money didn't factor into this call. My considerations were as follows (apply these to your situation as needed):
> 
> ...



thanks for the info I'm holding out for the 35 f2 IS f2 rather than f2.8 makes a big difference for me and the 1 stop difference from f2 to f1.4 is not as much of a benefit as the 4 stop IS IMO


----------



## Gothmoth (Nov 7, 2012)

> Ronkonkoma, NY, November 7, 2012 – Sigma Corporation of America, a leading researcher, developer, manufacturer and service provider of some of the world's most impressive lines of lenses, cameras and flashes, is pleased to announce that the first lens of its new Global Vision lineup, the 35mm F1.4 DG HSM, is now available for the street price of $899.
> 
> The 35mm F1.4 DG HSM, is designed for photographers who want to achieve creative, dramatic effects in their photographs. As the first lens released under Sigma’s new Art line, it will feature a new matte finish and overall new design concept, which includes a clearly defined category label on every new lens. This 35mm wide-angle lens with a maximum aperture of 1.4 ensures outstanding performance in low light, and a stunning bokeh background effect to emphasize the subject.
> 
> ...




http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/11/07/Sigma-35mm-f1-4-DG-HSM-899-dollars-street-price

im no video guy and i never missed IS in my 35mm lenses.

so this will probably end up in my personal kit when the image quality is right.


----------



## Bosman (Nov 7, 2012)

Gothmoth said:


> i would wait and check the new sigma 35mm f1.4.
> 
> http://sigma-global.com/en/lenses/cas/product/art/a_35_14.html
> 
> ...


Sigma actually just released the price of the 35 F1.4 DG HSM for $899. The timing is interesting, its as if they were waiting for Canon to release the 35 F2 IS before announcing the price. This will make it harder to decide between the Sigma at F1.4 over the Canon at F2 but with 4 stop IS. Its very interesting. I wonder since it is an art series if they have even bothered to weather seal it, there is no mention of it that i have found...
FYI, I have an app on my iphone called Zite and it gives me news based on subject and the photography subject gets lots of new excellent articles, even Canon Rumors shows up on there.


----------



## MK5GTI (Nov 7, 2012)

1 2nd the Sigma 35mm option as well, i have been very happy with my 50mm and 85mm.


----------



## drjlo (Nov 7, 2012)

Bosman said:


> Sigma actually just released the price of the 35 F1.4 DG HSM for $899.



$50 higher than Canon f/2 IS with one stop more aperture but no IS. 
Since there's always that dreaded worry with Sigma lenses having AF "issues" with Canon, it's somewhat comforting to see that new Sigmas come with USB docks:

"Sigma developed proprietary software (SIGMA Optimization Pro) and a USB docking system that allows you to update the lens' firmware and adjust its parameters such as focus without having to ship it back to Sigma for adjustments."


----------



## tron (Nov 7, 2012)

drjlo said:


> Bosman said:
> 
> 
> > Sigma actually just released the price of the 35 F1.4 DG HSM for $899.
> ...


I aleady have Canon 35mm 1.4L but I think this is an excellent move from Sigma.


----------



## Daniel Flather (Nov 9, 2012)

wayno said:


> I cant agree that the 35L and the 50 1.4 are of similar build quality. The 35L is a league ahead in that regard, despite it's age, IMO.



Agreed, having owned the 50/1.4 I can say the 35L's build quality is superior to the 50/1.4.


----------



## dave (Nov 9, 2012)

Daniel Flather said:


> wayno said:
> 
> 
> > I cant agree that the 35L and the 50 1.4 are of similar build quality. The 35L is a league ahead in that regard, despite it's age, IMO.
> ...



have owned both and +1


----------



## kiss-o-matic (Nov 10, 2012)

Bosman said:


> The price is not super far off from the L however given the other new lenses they have released it probably is sharp at F2. For those merging or adding video to their work its going to be real good for that and the is may be handy for low light since its the hybrid is. The new 35 F1.4 LII that comes out, god knows when, will probably be $1800. The optics are probably designed for the future hi resolution cameras that come out in the next 5 years at least that would make sense. I personally will probably get this lens for shooting finish line shots for sports given that i sold my 24-70 and liked the 35mm focal length for that. However, I want to see reviews and learn more before dropping the cash. The compromise would also be that i would need to use a rain sleeve for my equipment shooting events in bad weather which I havent had to do with my 1dm3 and 24-70 or 70-200, still it is just smart to protect it.
> new the 35L is $1,329.00
> new the 35F2 is $849.00
> If $500 is a lot to you then the F2 is it. Personally I'd get the F2 and if you needed more power or weather proofing built in due to using it in bad weather conditions then the L is it but then I doubt it offers much more than the F2 until or unless they get a F1.2 35mm on the books in which case bam! that would be a must buy but also be $2500 if it did see the light of day.



This is semi-OT, but something to consider if the 35mm F2 is on the plate for anyone:

How well do you rate the weather-sealing of the sealed Canon lenses? I took my 24-70L and my 5d2 to Burning Man this past summer. I gaffer taped the hell out of it, as well as wrapped it in plastic bags from the convenient store. I was smart enough to put it in my bag when I wasn't using it (or when huge dust storms flew by) but it was still in inhospitable weather for a week, and the parts that were not taped/covered had dust all over them. At our first stop for food on the way out, I wiped it down a/ baby-wipe and took off the tape: it was in beautiful shape. I was really pumped.

My only regret was, as it was taped and bagged up, using a zoom. I also took some night shots and the extra F-stop (or two) from a fast prime would have been money VERY well spent. So, I'm in the market for a fast 35mm or 50mm for next year. Caveat: I'm experiencing physical arousal for Zeiss right now as I just got my first one. Thinking of getting a 35 or 50 of that flavor, but as I will be wrapping it up again, that focus ring makes it impossible to use at the event.

Sry to ramble. Could anyone expect such harsh conditions to wreak havoc on a 35mm F2? Not sure if the OP is going to be in the rain, but at this point, it could be the major difference (other than the F-stop) between the two lenses.


----------



## FrutigerSans (Nov 10, 2012)

+1 Wait for Sigma 35mm 1.4

http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english/lens/wide/35_14/#/gallery

I am amazed at the quality of the wide open samples!


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 12, 2012)

After seeing those photos, This Sigma will be my 35mm of choice.


----------



## Bosman (Nov 13, 2012)

I guess i was sticking within the parameters of the Canon lineup but then Sigma has a nice one there. Size may matter for some. There appears to not be inner focusing going on else it would have the letters IF in the name...I wish all lenses were inner focusing, but then they would be bigger.


----------



## dolina (Nov 13, 2012)

I'd wait for 35/1.4 II but I have the 40/2.8 pancake already.


----------



## Bosman (Nov 13, 2012)

How are you liking the 40 Dolina? I haven't had any recent work or time with the lens but from my simple tests, it looks amazing and the focus on the 5dm3 is without flaw. That said its not as fast as an L but then i expected that. I didn't buy it for fast focus.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 13, 2012)

Bosman said:


> How are you liking the 40 Dolina? I haven't had any recent work or time with the lens but from my simple tests, it looks amazing and the focus on the 5dm3 is without flaw. That said its not as fast as an L but then i expected that. I didn't buy it for fast focus.



The pancake is _super_ sharp for the dollar. Wide open it's very good, but F/4 - F/5.6 it's stellar. There have been some reviews shooting down it's performance when stopped far down (F/11 or smaller), so I wouldn't advise it for landscape work. And, famously, it's a slow focuser if you are accustomed to USM glass. Useable for sure -- but it's not quick.

I will say that it stays in my bag far too much; my 28 2.8 IS and 50 1.4 can simply do more for me (better in low light, I have filters of that size, can do landscapes, etc.), so those lenses see much more use.

Would love to see them make a 22 pancake (like they did for EOS-M) so that I could have a small/wide/fast walkaround for my crop. That's a single lens mirrorless alternative that I could get behind. :


----------



## mrsfotografie (Nov 13, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> After seeing those photos, This Sigma will be my 35mm of choice.



+1, and it would sit nicely between my Sigma 20 and 50 mm primes ;D


----------



## drjlo (Nov 20, 2012)

Shoot, Rokinon 35mm f/1.4 at Groupon for $399. 35mm isn't so bad to manual focus..

http://www.groupon.com/deals/gg-rokinon-wide-angle-lenses?utm_campaign=UserReferral_rp&utm_medium=raf-121015-10r1act-lk&utm_source=uu5948210


----------



## dolina (Nov 20, 2012)

Bosman said:


> How are you liking the 40 Dolina? I haven't had any recent work or time with the lens but from my simple tests, it looks amazing and the focus on the 5dm3 is without flaw. That said its not as fast as an L but then i expected that. I didn't buy it for fast focus.


It is good enough for me to forget the 35. ;D

Physically the smallest at less than an inch, tied at the lightest with the 50/1.8 II, 2nd cheapest Canon lens after the 50/1.8 II while using today's technology.

For me it is the perfect party and street lens. I can even use it as a lens cap.

I am looking forward to stuffing the 40 and a pro body into one of these bags.


----------



## TeenTog (Nov 21, 2012)

> It doesn't seem that the new 35/2 IS would be a replacement for the 1.4.... Am I wrong??



A bit.  The 35 f/1.4 is an "L" series lens- even though the the the new 35 f/2 is "new", I'm guessing the f/1.4L will outperform it even still. It's just a better lens, as all "L" series lenses are. Plus, the f/1.4L has better weather sealing and durability. All the pros that use it just love it. Plus, on a full frame pro body, its not a bad "general" lens.


----------



## tron (Nov 21, 2012)

TeenTog said:


> > It doesn't seem that the new 35/2 IS would be a replacement for the 1.4.... Am I wrong??
> 
> 
> Plus, the f/1.4L has better weather sealing and durability.


The 35mm f/1.4L does not have weather sealing.


----------



## TeenTog (Nov 21, 2012)

> The 35mm f/1.4L does not have weather sealing.



Hmmmm... well, it would probably hold up better if dropped, right?


----------



## tron (Nov 21, 2012)

TeenTog said:


> > The 35mm f/1.4L does not have weather sealing.
> 
> 
> 
> Hmmmm... well, it would probably hold up better if dropped, right?


 ;D I haven't made any comparison


----------



## Gothmoth (Nov 21, 2012)

tron said:


> TeenTog said:
> 
> 
> > > It doesn't seem that the new 35/2 IS would be a replacement for the 1.4.... Am I wrong??
> ...



yep it seems to be a common myth that all L lenses are weather sealed.


----------



## switters (Nov 24, 2012)

I'm certainly intrigued by the optical quality of the Sigma 35. However, I have the 35L now and my copy, at least, is razor sharp at f/1.4 and gets ridiculously sharp from there. The colors, AF and rendering are also amazing. No complaints there.

The main reason I'm interested in the 35/2 is the smaller size and weight. The 35L isn't huge, but it's not compact either. If I can get the same or even better optical quality in a more compact package, I'd probably be willing to sacrifice the extra stop. However, I shoot almost exclusively portraits (of my 16-month old daughter, who never stops moving), so IS doesn't help me at all; f/1.4 is a lot more useful in those circumstances.

The Sigma is bigger and heavier than the 35L (660g vs. 580g, and 3.03 x 3.7 vs. 3.1 x 3.4), so even if it's a little sharper than the 35L, I'm not interested. My 35L is plenty sharp, and the size and weight are more important to me.

I have the 40/2.8 too, which is incredible especially considering its size. In fact, I also prefer the 40mm focal length to 35mm. I wish Canon made a 40/1.8. I'd be all over that. I used to shoot Pentax and their 43/1.9 was my favorite lens ever.


----------



## tron (Nov 24, 2012)

switters said:


> I wish Canon made a 40/1.8. I'd be all over that. I used to shoot Pentax and their 43/1.9 was my favorite lens ever.


 NOW! You reminded me of my first SLR: A Konica Autoreflex TC with 40mm f/1.8


----------



## Zv (Nov 25, 2012)

I like my primes to be small, light and fast. Just the opposite of my zooms. I would like to own a 35L but I think what I would benifit more from is the 35 f/2 IS. Perfect for a small event or party where IS is helpful for low light as well as a relatively wide aperture for moving subjects. I really like my 50 f/1.8 but on a 7D (I prefer my 7D for it's AF and speed) it's just a bit too long and focuses quite slow. The 35 f/2 IS sounds perfect. Can't wait!


----------

