# Need some advice on getting the Canon 35mm 1.4 II.



## Cheekysascha (Feb 29, 2016)

As the title says, I'm thinking about picking up the new Canon 35mm 1.4 II, I used to think about picking up the old 35mm or even the Sigma version but didn't get them as I wanted the weather sealing.

So for those of you who have the the 35mm 1.4 II how is it? do you like the larger design? what are your favourite things and least favourite things about the lens?


----------



## elyroberts (Mar 9, 2016)

I have the canon 35mm 1.4 orginial and i honestly don't know how it can get any better. When compared to my 50mm 1.2, 85mm 1.2, 24mm 1.4, it is i the only lens that will nail focus and be sharp at it's lowest f-stop. Seriously love it. I use it on every shoot and use my 24mm 1.4 less and less due to missed focus. I have played with the Sigma Art 50mm and it was sharp, but I prefer to stay with canon for CPS reasons. I have sent almost every piece of equipment, other than my 35mm back to canon for some small repair. If the 35mm II is any better than the original it would have to be canon's best lens. Hope that helps. 

Ely Roberts Photography - http://www.elyrobers.com - Specializing in wedding photography in Bend Oregon


----------



## Viggo (Mar 9, 2016)

I'll give the 35 L II the biggest compliment I can give ; it makes me feel the same way as with every shot I did with the 200 f2. I cannot fully praise that lens. It's one out of two lenses I own now, so I use it heavily. When I finally got my 1dx properly calibrated it has not missed ONE shot. Contrast color is so much better than the old one it's not even funny.

Considering every aspect of it, I can't see a reason one wouldn't buy it if the focal length is right. 

In short, epic!


----------



## tron (Mar 9, 2016)

Viggo said:


> I'll give the 35 L II the biggest compliment I can give ; it makes me feel the same way as with every shot I did with the 200 f2. I cannot fully praise that lens. It's one out of two lenses I own now, so I use it heavily. When I finally got my 1dx properly calibrated it has not missed ONE shot. Contrast color is so much better than the old one it's not even funny.
> 
> Considering every aspect of it, I can't see a reason one wouldn't buy it if the focal length is right.
> 
> In short, epic!


Viggo one question: By calibration you mean just AFMA or you had to send it to Canon?


----------



## Viggo (Mar 9, 2016)

To Canon. Not the lens, but the 1dx. It was all over the place with any lens.


----------



## Pookie (Mar 9, 2016)

Viggo said:


> I'll give the 35 L II the biggest compliment I can give ; it makes me feel the same way as with every shot I did with the 200 f2. I cannot fully praise that lens. It's one out of two lenses I own now, so I use it heavily. When I finally got my 1dx properly calibrated it has not missed ONE shot. Contrast color is so much better than the old one it's not even funny.
> 
> Considering every aspect of it, I can't see a reason one wouldn't buy it if the focal length is right.
> 
> In short, epic!



No 200 f/2 anymore? My wife bought me that lens and I love it. Unfort I rarely use it as it's pretty impractical most of the time, at least for me. Big and prime but oh so lovely!!! It's the sports car I pull out of the garage every so often, not the everyday driver. The 70-200 isn't even get used that much anymore as it is just lumbering. 

I'm of the same opinion as *elyroberts* except I think the 50L focus just as fast and as accurately. I own the original 35L and love it, always sharp and quick. I find it hard to swap for the mark II as weather sealing is not so much an issue for me. Did you swap it out for the mark II or just get the mark II first?


----------



## Viggo (Mar 10, 2016)

I had to sell 200 for financial reasons. I dragged that baby with me even if it was just walking around a shopping center, it's what makes photography great, lol.

I have had 8-10 copies of the 35 L over the last decade. Also had two 35 Art lenses.

The new one is just sooo much better. Even the complete lack of distortion is something that is a BIG difference. I never correct distortion in post, because it removes the "3D pop". It's the reason I have much love for the 35 L II, Sigma 50 Art and the 200 f2.


----------



## d (Mar 10, 2016)

I share Viggo's sentiments about the 35L II - the image rendering is just incredible. I've never shot with the first version, so can't compare the two, but this second version really impresses me. I had a few issues with using it on my 1DX to begin with, but it (or the camera) seem to have settled down now and it's nailing focus for nearly every shot.

You should rent or borrow one for a day or two and see how you like it.


Cheers,

d.


----------



## PavelR (Mar 10, 2016)

I've owned the first version, but not used it much because it is NOT sharp - comparing with any other longer primes [135/2, 200/2]. Now I own versoin II and I do not fear to use it wide open on any subject...
I confirm that comparison on The Digital Picture is correct:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=121&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=994&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0


----------



## wallstreetoneil (Mar 10, 2016)

there is literally no comparison

if the 35L ii didn't exist the 35L would still be a great lense

when you see with your eyes how sharp at F1.4 the new lens is your jaw drops (on the 5DSR it is crazy) - and it has, in my opinion, the magical rendering of the 50L


----------



## Viggo (Mar 10, 2016)

wallstreetoneil said:


> there is literally no comparison
> 
> if the 35L ii didn't exist the 35L would still be a great lense
> 
> when you see with your eyes how sharp at F1.4 the new lens is your jaw drops (on the 5DSR it is crazy) - and it has, in my opinion, the magical rendering of the 50L



+1, the bokeh is VERY good, and considering the sharpness I'm most impressed.

Would love to have a go with it on the 5ds sometime.


----------



## muchakucha (Mar 11, 2016)

I upgraded from my Sigma 35 1.4. Color and rendering is excellent. Worth the money if you can afford it. Having consistent AF is also really nice, my Sigma used to miss at 10ft+ every once in a while. They might be about the same in sharpness but to me the Canon just has a better look to it.


----------

