# Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out



## Canon Rumors Guy (Apr 3, 2017)

```
<p>Images and specifications for the Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM that we first told you about back in January have finally leaked out over at DCI.</p>
<ul>
<li>Lens construction: 6 10 sheets group (one glass molded aspherical lens)</li>
<li>Aperture number of blades: seven (circular aperture)</li>
<li>Minimum Focusing Distance: 0.13 m (working distance 3 cm)</li>
<li>Maximum shooting magnification: 1 time</li>
<li>Image stabilization effect: Approximately 4 stops</li>
<li>Filter diameter: 49 mm (with lens hood ES – 27)</li>
<li>installed ) – Size: 55.8 x 69.2 mm</li>
<li>Weight: Approx. 190 g</li>
<li>Macro light mounted</li>
<li>Hybrid IS</li>
<li>Lead screw type STM</li>
</ul>
<p>This lens will be announced on Thursday, April 6, 2017 in most parts of the world.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## Sharlin (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

I think this is the first prime lens with the lead-screw (silent) type STM?


----------



## sanj (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

3 cm? IS? Well done!


----------



## dpc (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

Intriguing! I'm interested, depending on the quality of the optics. I had a 35mm Tokina macro several years ago and loved it. Gave it to my son.


----------



## bereninga (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

This seems like a pretty good lens for those foodies out there interested in better photography.


----------



## fon-foto (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

Cool, looks like a versatile travel lens option


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



Canon Rumors said:


> Maximum shooting magnification: 1 time



Whoa. Time out.

1 time = 1x = 1:1? _It's a 1:1 macro?!_ No one was expecting that. I thought we were expecting a 'compact' 1:2 macro.

If it's a true 1:1, that's impressive.

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



ahsanford said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > Maximum shooting magnification: 1 time
> ...



Actually, I was expecting more. After all, the similar EF-M 28mm macro lens goes to 1.2x magnification...


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

"Lens construction: 6 10 sheets group"

DO elements?

very interesting! Very interesting indeed!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



Don Haines said:


> "Lens construction: 6 10 sheets group"
> 
> DO elements?



What would make you think that?


----------



## Chaitanya (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

Looks quite useful for flowers, product and times when 100mm is just too long. Definitely ordering it as soon as its available for preorder. 

Edit: for filter users depending on where the leds lights are located it can be a deal breaker.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



neuroanatomist said:


> Actually, I was expecting more. After all, the similar EF-M 28mm macro lens goes to 1.2x magnification...



My goodness. I missed that -- I must have assumed it was 1:2 as the 1.2 was a punctuation typo.

Thx for the correction!

- A


----------



## Berowne (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

Price?


----------



## sanj (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

Interesting. Very interesting. A lens that was written off on this forum is now being given so much praise.


----------



## slclick (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

paradigm shift anyone?


----------



## SkynetTX (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

In my opinion, if the specifications are correct, this can be one of the most useless lenses Canon ever created. 
Okay, it's a 1:1 macro. But if the MFD is 13 cm it's only good for flowers. There's no way you can get this close to any beetle, not to mention butterflies (!), unless they're dead. But who wants to take photos of dead beetles? Me not!
It's even worse that it has STM :'( motor so it *does not support real FTM*. :'( When I take macro photos, I try to focus before I turn the camera on and only turn it on if both the focus and the composition seems to be ok for me. Witn an STM (focus-by-wire) lens this is impossible.
And I really don't get it. :-[ What makes people think that macro means that you have to or want to put the lens into the subject's mouth? :-\ A telephoto macro (between 250 and 300 mm) with 1:1 magnification and about 0.75 to 1 meter MFD would be more useful for beetles, butterflies, lizards and many spiders. 
So this is another lens I won't buy ever.


----------



## ritholtz (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



SkynetTX said:


> In my opinion, if the specifications are correct, this can be one of the most useless lenses Canon ever created.
> Okay, it's a 1:1 macro. But if the MFD is 13 cm it's only good for flowers. There's no way you can get this close to any beetle, not to mention butterflies (!), unless they're dead. But who wants to take photos of dead beetles? Me not!
> It's even worse that it has STM :'( motor so it *does not support real FTM*. :'( When I take macro photos, I try to focus before I turn the camera on and only turn it on if both the focus and the composition seems to be ok for me. Witn an STM (focus-by-wire) lens this is impossible.
> And I really don't get it. :-[ What makes people think that macro means that you have to or want to put the lens into the subject's mouth? :-\ A telephoto macro (between 250 and 300 mm) with 1:1 magnification and about 0.75 to 1 meter MFD would be more useful for beetles, butterflies, lizards and many spiders.
> So this is another lens I won't buy ever.


OP mentioned MFD as 3cm not 13cm. It has better implementation of STM (Lead screw implementation which is used in lens like 18-135 IS STM i.e., fast and silent unlike 40mm pancake lens).


----------



## Chaitanya (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



ritholtz said:


> SkynetTX said:
> 
> 
> > In my opinion, if the specifications are correct, this can be one of the most useless lenses Canon ever created.
> ...





Canon Rumors said:


> *<li>Minimum Focusing Distance: 0.13 m (working distance 3 cm)</li>*



.13m=13cms
3cms is working distance of the lens.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



SkynetTX said:


> And I really don't get it. :-[ What makes people think that macro means that you have to or want to put the lens into the subject's mouth? :-\ A telephoto macro (between 250 and 300 mm) with 1:1 magnification and about 0.75 to 1 meter MFD would be more useful for beetles, butterflies, lizards and many spiders.
> So this is another lens I won't buy ever.



You're presuming the subject is alive with this lens, and that would be a mistake. :

This lens isn't for stealthily pegging dragonflies a meter away. This would appear to be a lens tailor-made for a casual *food* photographer, the travel photog who may shoot food in their travels, etc. If you want shoot food in a restaurant _at the table_ and not make a scene, you need a much wider FL macro to do that, hence this new offering.

- A


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



neuroanatomist said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > "Lens construction: 6 10 sheets group"
> ...


What do they mean by 6 10 sheets group? Could a sheet be a DO element?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



SkynetTX said:


> When I take macro photos, I try to focus before I turn the camera on and only turn it on if both the focus and the composition seems to be ok for me. Witn an STM (focus-by-wire) lens this is impossible.



Many people, myself included, find that focusing for macro photography is best accomplished using manual focus and Live View with the image magnified. Kinda hard to do that with the camera turned off, not to mention the fact that for most dSLRs the on/off switch isn't a 'soft touch' which means turning on the camera will alter it's position, and hence alter critical focus with the typical ultra-thin macro DoF. But to each, their own.


----------



## tr573 (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



Don Haines said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



they mean "bad translation"


----------



## Cochese (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



SkynetTX said:


> In my opinion, if the specifications are correct, this can be one of the most useless lenses Canon ever created.
> Okay, it's a 1:1 macro. But if the MFD is 13 cm it's only good for flowers. There's no way you can get this close to any beetle, not to mention butterflies (!), unless they're dead. But who wants to take photos of dead beetles? Me not!
> It's even worse that it has STM :'( motor so it *does not support real FTM*. :'( When I take macro photos, I try to focus before I turn the camera on and only turn it on if both the focus and the composition seems to be ok for me. Witn an STM (focus-by-wire) lens this is impossible.
> And I really don't get it. :-[ What makes people think that macro means that you have to or want to put the lens into the subject's mouth? :-\ A telephoto macro (between 250 and 300 mm) with 1:1 magnification and about 0.75 to 1 meter MFD would be more useful for beetles, butterflies, lizards and many spiders.
> So this is another lens I won't buy ever.



Huh. I could see the complaint here, but I've photographed a whole lot of beetles, ants, flys, even, with a similar macro. None of them dead, most of them stood pretty still. Even the spiders I've photographed have remained nice and still. 

Maybe you're really loud when approaching insects?


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



neuroanatomist said:


> SkynetTX said:
> 
> 
> > When I take macro photos, I try to focus before I turn the camera on and only turn it on if both the focus and the composition seems to be ok for me. Witn an STM (focus-by-wire) lens this is impossible.
> ...



[chuckle]

That said, I agree with Skynet that FBW is disappointing for macro work -- FTM mechanical focusing is strongly preferred.

But, considering that this is a relatively inexpensive EF-S lens for casual food work, I get why the more serious macro focusing performance you'd expect from the 100L, 180L will not be offered here. 

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



Don Haines said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



I'm sure it's just bad machine translation for 6 groups and 10 elements. Google Translate returns, "_Lens configuration: 6 groups 10 sheets (glass mold aspherical lens 1 sheet)._" FWIW, using Google Translate on the canon.jp product page for the EF-S 60mm Macro suggests that the lens configuration is '8 groups 12 pieces' and that the number of diaphragm blades is '7 sheets'. Since it's unlikely that the iris diaphragm is made up of DO elements, it would seem 'sheets' is a common mistranslation for some Japanese characters used in camera specs.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

Also, it would appear the new and mysterious 'M' moniker we painstakingly scrutinized about is officially not happening if Digicame and Nokish.ita's leaked pictures are indeed real (which they have had a strong track record of being).

See pic again: I don't see 'M' in isolation (as a component of the lens name) anywhere in that picture.

(I think we all knew it meant macro. I was just curious to see if Canon was changing it's naming conventions.)

- A


----------



## Maximilian (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

Specs look quite interesting.
Not bad - neither my market. But I stay interested to what it can deliver.


----------



## trulandphoto (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

This could be a fun standard lens for an SL1. I don't use my SL1 much but I might bring it with me more with this lens on it.


----------



## figaro28 (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



trulandphoto said:


> This could be a fun standard lens for an SL1. I don't use my SL1 much but I might bring it with me more with this lens on it.



My SL1 already has two fun standard lenses: the 24 pancake and the 40 pancake, depending on the mood. A part from the macro business, this lens adds nothing.


----------



## 9VIII (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

How many of you guys with access to DPAF have been trying it on Macro work?

If you can just touch the screen to get the focus point you want then manual focus should be mostly obsolete, and now that we have Rebels with DPAF it makes more sense to use focus by wire on an EF-S lens.
(Which is not to say that everyone has DPAF, but there's your sales pitch for a new body, hopefully the SL2 doesn't cost as much as the 800D.)


----------



## tianxiaozhang (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

Does anybody know what "Macro light mounted" means?


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



tianxiaozhang said:


> Does anybody know what "Macro light mounted" means?


Two LED "lamps" built into the front of the lens, effective only for distances between 3 and 30 centimeters, approximately.


----------



## Talys (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



9VIII said:


> How many of you guys with access to DPAF have been trying it on Macro work?
> 
> If you can just touch the screen to get the focus point you want then manual focus should be mostly obsolete, and now that we have Rebels with DPAF it makes more sense to use focus by wire on an EF-S lens.
> (Which is not to say that everyone has DPAF, but there's your sales pitch for a new body, hopefully the SL2 doesn't cost as much as the 800D.)




I have DPAF and shoot lots of macro. I always focus macro by live view 10x manual, even when I'm using a small aperture and the field depth is great. Anything in studio is remote release and tripod, anyways. 

I'm not really sure why, but I've never really liked touch shutter on DSLR. It's fine (great, even) on cellphone, and ok on a compact; it just seems that with big camera, it seems that in the studio I rather use a PC screen (remote shooting) or a field monitor, and when I'm not in studio, I use the OVF 99.9% of the time. 

For me, whether I buy this lens or not, I'll say depends on the optical quality and price. But in fact, like every other useful, not very expensive canon lens, it will probably just turn out to whether it's awesome, in which case I buy it at launch, or just good -- and then I may wait a little bit and buy it when it's discounted.


----------



## nickorando (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

I've got the 28mm EF-M lens, and it's astonishingly useful. Sure, it's not what I would use for live subjects, but that's only a small portion of what I shoot. But a small and compact true macro lens with built-in illumination is just such a boon for travel. If I used EF-S much, I would surely buy this at a sensible price.


----------



## photonius (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



ahsanford said:


> Also, it would appear the new and mysterious 'M' moniker we painstakingly scrutinized about is officially not happening if Digicame and Nokish.ita's leaked pictures are indeed real (which they have had a strong track record of being).
> 
> See pic again: I don't see 'M' in isolation (as a component of the lens name) anywhere in that picture.
> 
> ...



yes, just a normal macro. No M with new technology...


----------



## 9VIII (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



Talys said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > How many of you guys with access to DPAF have been trying it on Macro work?
> ...



Absolutely touching the camera to take a picture is a bad idea, but isn't there an option to just "touch to focus" and then use the remote release?


----------



## Azathoth (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

Meh not interested.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



9VIII said:


> How many of you guys with access to DPAF have been trying it on Macro work?
> 
> If you can just touch the screen to get the focus point you want then manual focus should be mostly obsolete, and now that we have Rebels with DPAF it makes more sense to use focus by wire on an EF-S lens.
> (Which is not to say that everyone has DPAF, but there's your sales pitch for a new body, hopefully the SL2 doesn't cost as much as the 800D.)



Disagree. I've never tried Macro with DPAF, but I'm not sure I need to. AF simply isn't ideal for 'classic' macro applications (bugs / flowers) as:

1) Your working DOF at macro distances is miniscule and you want to carefully fine tune what is in / out of focus.

2) The size of an AF box is often far larger than the head of the bug, the tip of the flower's pistil, etc. so there's no guarantee the AF won't whiff on what you care about.

3) S--- moves in the wind, and that can render your AF useless for up-close work. It's often best to shoot MF and nail down your focal plane and wait for the wind to subside.

- A


----------



## tianxiaozhang (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



ajfotofilmagem said:


> tianxiaozhang said:
> 
> 
> > Does anybody know what "Macro light mounted" means?
> ...



Thanks!

Didn't see that picture... 

Is is the first lens with its own lighting built in?


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



tianxiaozhang said:


> Thanks!
> 
> Didn't see that picture...
> 
> Is is the first lens with its own lighting built in?



No. *The picture above from AJ is not the lens that is about to be released.* Recently the EOS M platform got the EF-M 28mm f/3.5 IS Macro STM and it had integral illumination like this. That's the picture AJ shared.

AJ was simply presuming that the same sort of setup will happen with this new EF-S lens, and I think (in broad strokes) that it's a fair presumption. It will be a little different up front I'm sure; we already see a bayonet hood attachment for the new EF-S design (see first picture at top of thread), which would be a little different than the EF-M verison. 

- A


----------



## benkam (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

Again, count me among those interested.

Could replace swapping between the 24 STM and 50 STM -- and, unlike those two, it has IS! 2.8 is fine and the macro is a nice bonus. As expected, notably smaller and lighter than the EF 35 f2 IS. Could be a really good little walkaround prime.

Won't be for everybody but I for one welcome its addition as an EF-S lens option.


----------



## Talys (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



9VIII said:


> Absolutely touching the camera to take a picture is a bad idea, but isn't there an option to just "touch to focus" and then use the remote release?



Yeah, there is touch focus without shutter. If you're not on a tripod, it doesn't make a lot of sense, though, because as Ashanford pointed out, working depth of field is often teenie tiny with macro, so if you touch to focus, then move your hand over to the shutter release... you're probably out of focus or focused on the wrong thing. 

But really, that's the crux of it with macro. Focus and working with DOF is so important that manually adjusting focus is pretty much a requirement for me, personally. Regardless of handheld or tripod, I am usually very picky about where/what I use to focus.


----------



## illadvisedhammer (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



No. *The picture above from AJ is not the lens that is about to be released.* Recently the EOS M platform got the EF-M 28mm f/3.5 IS Macro STM and it had integral illumination like this. That's the picture AJ shared.

AJ was simply presuming that the same sort of setup will happen with this new EF-S lens, and I think (in broad strokes) that it's a fair presumption. It will be a little different up front I'm sure; we already see a bayonet hood attachment for the new EF-S design (see first picture at top of thread), which would be a little different than the EF-M verison. 

- A
[/quote]

I don't think it's a bayonet hood attachment (though it certainly could be). I thought it was the holder for the MR-14 or MT-24 flashes. Which is great, though I'm not sure there is enough room even with clever diffusers. Maybe.


----------



## scyrene (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



SkynetTX said:


> In my opinion, if the specifications are correct, this can be one of the most useless lenses Canon ever created.
> Okay, it's a 1:1 macro. But if the MFD is 13 cm it's only good for flowers. There's no way you can get this close to any beetle, not to mention butterflies (!), unless they're dead. But who wants to take photos of dead beetles? Me not!
> It's even worse that it has STM :'( motor so it *does not support real FTM*. :'( When I take macro photos, I try to focus before I turn the camera on and only turn it on if both the focus and the composition seems to be ok for me. Witn an STM (focus-by-wire) lens this is impossible.
> And I really don't get it. :-[ What makes people think that macro means that you have to or want to put the lens into the subject's mouth? :-\ A telephoto macro (between 250 and 300 mm) with 1:1 magnification and about 0.75 to 1 meter MFD would be more useful for beetles, butterflies, lizards and many spiders.
> So this is another lens I won't buy ever.



You can't have done much macro photography... what makes you think you can't get close to beetles? You don't *have* to shoot at MFD of course, but a moderately wide angle lens with close focus allows for environmental macros, where the background is part of the shot. But you're too closed minded to see the creative possibilities, it seems. Anyhow, as stated above, it's more likely this is more aimed at food photography and the like.

Incidentally, AF macro photography is possible and can work well, but it's not for everyone.


----------



## scyrene (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



ahsanford said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > How many of you guys with access to DPAF have been trying it on Macro work?
> ...



I respectfully disagree. I do a lot of macro (and I mean including true macro) photography with the 100L and it's mostly handheld, using AF. It is possible, you just have to approach it right. Indeed, AF can keep a subject in windy conditions in focus more consistently than using MF (but it's generally best to wait until it's fairly calm to do exacting closeups).


----------



## rrcphoto (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



SkynetTX said:


> When I take macro photos, I try to focus before I turn the camera on and only turn it on if both the focus and the composition seems to be ok for me.



god knows what on earth you'd do that... 

not to mention any modern canon camera, you don't have a viewfinder display, nor liveview.

here's a thought though. maybe the lens isn't made for you.

You DO know there's around 50+ million canon users out there?


----------



## rrcphoto (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



scyrene said:


> as stated above, it's more likely this is more aimed at food photography and the like.
> 
> Incidentally, AF macro photography is possible and can work well, but it's not for everyone.



food and product photography for sure.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



scyrene said:


> I respectfully disagree. I do a lot of macro (and I mean including true macro) photography with the 100L and it's mostly handheld, using AF. It is possible, you just have to approach it right. Indeed, AF can keep a subject in windy conditions in focus more consistently than using MF (but it's generally best to wait until it's fairly calm to do exacting closeups).



AF is not all bad for macro -- I shoot AF for macro at times. For 'driveby' / handheld / quick work -- say, spotting a flower on a hike and you don't want to fall behind your group -- it's gold, yes. It all depends on how much time you have to shoot.

But I stand by the size of AF points vs. the the small details you are aiming at with 1:1 work -- the boxes are bigger than the 'subject' you want to focus on and though you may get lucky with a few goes of the AF, you will more consistently nail what you want with a tripod + MF + 10x Liveview.

Even in my driveby work, I'm often spamming the shutter button to take 5-6 tries of nailing what I want and hoping one of them is dead on. Tripod + MF effectively takes that risk of a whiff off the table.

- A


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 3, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



illadvisedhammer said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > No. *The picture above from AJ is not the lens that is about to be released.* Recently the EOS M platform got the EF-M 28mm f/3.5 IS Macro STM and it had integral illumination like this. That's the picture AJ shared.
> ...



Agreed - that's the macro flash mounting ring. Likely a threaded hood attachment, and possibly like the M28 where the hood is 'required' to mount a filter (in the M28's case, there aren't commonly filters as small as the hood threading), and the hood precludes using the built-in light.


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 4, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



ahsanford said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > I respectfully disagree. I do a lot of macro (and I mean including true macro) photography with the 100L and it's mostly handheld, using AF. It is possible, you just have to approach it right. Indeed, AF can keep a subject in windy conditions in focus more consistently than using MF (but it's generally best to wait until it's fairly calm to do exacting closeups).
> ...


I agree with Ahsanford that using a tripod (at least for me) and manual focus is the best way to go..... but to be fair, I found that AF works great on handheld shots. I usually select the pattern with the central AF point and the 4 helper points... I also found that the AF on the 100L worked significantly better than on the 100..... certainly well enough to catch a moving target....


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 4, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

I bought into the M camera system *solely* because of that 28mm macro lens with the lights. Rather than carry my backup body with the 100L while hiking, the new system took off a couple pounds of equipment. 

It has been a fun little foray into the mirrorless segment. In a revision or two, I think the electronic viewfinder will be difficult to discern from an optical viewfinder, but for now, I do miss my 5D4 when shooting the M5. There are just moments of lag that I find frustrating. I do wish the 5D4 would accept input for focus point movement via the touchscreen, like the M5 does. That's pretty slick. 

Now that this 35 is coming out, I'll sell the M5 and macro lens. It's a great little rig, but I'll save even more pounds just carrying around that little 35. 

For those of us running around doing opportunistic macro while walking in the woods, it's just the thing.


----------



## Woody (Apr 4, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



scyrene said:


> You can't have done much macro photography... what makes you think you can't get close to beetles? You don't *have* to shoot at MFD of course, but a moderately wide angle lens with close focus allows for environmental macros, where the background is part of the shot. But you're too closed minded to see the creative possibilities, it seems. Anyhow, as stated above, it's more likely this is more aimed at food photography and the like.
> 
> Incidentally, AF macro photography is possible and can work well, but it's not for everyone.



Agreed. Incidentally, all my macro photos are taken with AF. I just take multiple shots since film is free.


----------



## Woody (Apr 4, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



[email protected] said:


> In a revision or two, I think the electronic viewfinder will be difficult to discern from an optical viewfinder, but for now, I do miss my 5D4 when shooting the M5. There are just moments of lag that I find frustrating. I do wish the 5D4 would accept input for focus point movement via the touchscreen, like the M5 does. That's pretty slick.
> 
> Now that this 35 is coming out, I'll sell the M5 and macro lens. It's a great little rig, but I'll save even more pounds just carrying around that little 35.



The 35 macro is for EF-S bodies only. You won't be able to mount it on the 5D4. So you'll still need a back-up like the 77D or SL2 (when it comes out). There is no weight advantage compared to your M5 + EF-M 28 mm jig, but the 77D/SL2 are equipped with OVF.


----------



## Chaitanya (Apr 4, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

Here is one more image posted today.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 4, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



Don Haines said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



The translation from Japanese always lists sheets. I read it as 10 elements in 6 groups. Nothing to do with DO.


----------



## mb66energy (Apr 4, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

While this is an interesting lens for macro + walk around it lacks some features I like on the
EF-S 60 or the EF macro lenses:
no distance scale - no prefocusing, no focusing in extreme low light (scientific photography)
no manual focusing without power on - no power efficient method to preview what you are doing
no filter mount without lens hood - no protection of the front lens without bulky lens hood ... + filter between lights and object.

But for APS-C users a very good alternative to the 2.8 40 STM because it has macro capability
and the built in light for the true macro range.

The built in light is very attractive but I like my EF-S 60 - so I have to design and print a lens hood with built in lights


----------



## Berowne (Apr 4, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

This seems to be a very "conservative" lens, nothing Special, a low Speed Prime with medium focal length. Therefor I am pretty interested in the specs and especially what Roger Cialla will say about it (OLAF-measurements). Perhaps we see a new Generation of Resolution for future Crop-Sensors with more than 24 MP?


----------



## Steve Balcombe (Apr 4, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



Berowne said:


> This seems to be a very "conservative" lens, nothing Special, a low Speed Prime with medium focal length.



No, it's a macro lens. F/2.8 is not slow for a macro lens, and 35 mm is short for a macro lens even on a crop body.

If you don't want a macro lens, look elsewhere, but if you do it will be very attractive to some.


----------



## scyrene (Apr 4, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



ahsanford said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > I respectfully disagree. I do a lot of macro (and I mean including true macro) photography with the 100L and it's mostly handheld, using AF. It is possible, you just have to approach it right. Indeed, AF can keep a subject in windy conditions in focus more consistently than using MF (but it's generally best to wait until it's fairly calm to do exacting closeups).
> ...



Hmm, I tend to take multiples of every shot, regardless of the type/method. AF is imperfect as you say, but it's often imperfect in a predictable way. That the subject (or the part you want in focus) may be smaller than the AF point is a potential pitfall in normal shooting too - e.g. a bird's eye. In macro work, it can be worthwhile selecting multiple AF points, either for handheld focus stacks, or to give the AF as much opportunity as possible to find the precise focus you want.

I find tripods just far too cumbersome and awkward for most real-world shooting, but I appreciate I'm in a minority there. If we're talking about flowers bobbing about in the breeze, or any creature that moves, then the time and fineness of setting up a camera on a tripod and magnifying Live View is redundant if the subject has already moved out of the focal plane - but I accept it must work for those who swear by the method. Anyhow, that there are different ways of achieving the same results can only be a good thing.

Back to this lens, I see the naysayers are still out in force.


----------



## AvTvM (Apr 4, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

Don't understand why Canon decided to launch this specific lens. 

Macro use: 
* for living critters, way too little working distance 
* for flowers and "food photography" ... 1:1 macro lens not needed, what for? To stick it into the heap of spaghetti on your plate 3cm away ... or what? 
* an EF-S 60 Mk. II with built in LED lighting up front would have been more useful.

For "general photography", an EF-S 35/*1.8* STM would have been more useful, since f/2.8 is already well covered by good, small and cheap pancake EF 40/2.8.


----------



## LDS (Apr 4, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



AvTvM said:


> Macro use:
> * for living critters, way too little working distance
> * for flowers and "food photography" ... 1:1 macro lens not needed, what for? To stick it into the heap of spaghetti on your plate 3cm away ... or what?



Just, those are not the whole macro uses. There are several technical macro uses this lens can satisfy.


----------



## Arty (Apr 4, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

A 35 mm macro on crop is like a 55 mm macro on full frame. I really like my 35 mm F2.8 Tokina crop macro lens. It is useful for lots of macro work: flowers, slide copying, large flat art work, document copying, copying old photos, food, etc.
A 50 mm macro for full frame gets more use - by me - than longer macro lenses on full frame. Not everyone likes to photograph bugs or small jewelry.
This is one lens that has been missing from the market. I tend to use my full frame camera more than crop currently, but I still use a 50 mm macro more often than a 100 mm macro lens on full frame. Since Tokina and Sigma have discontinued their shorter macro lens, this one fills a need in the market. If it is a good lens, it will be loved by those people who buy it.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 4, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



AvTvM said:


> * an EF-S 60 Mk. II with built in LED lighting up front would have been more useful.



The secret sauce for practicality with this central front lighting idea _may_ be a pancake like front element allow the overall lens barrel diameter to stay quite small -- look at both lenses below to see what I mean. 

In other words, I'm not sure the EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM (or a future FF macro lens) would allow the ring lighting approach without either (a) becoming a T shape from the top view of the lens or (b) the lens taking on a much larger outer barrel.

- A


----------



## rrcphoto (Apr 4, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



AvTvM said:


> Don't understand why Canon decided to launch this specific lens.
> 
> Macro use:
> * for living critters, way too little working distance
> ...



LED lighting wouldn't be that useful for a longer distance, which is why it's on a shorter macro. read people actually using the 28mm macro on the EF-M.

1:1 macro for food photography, certainly especially for things such as fruits, desserts, etc .. just because you don't need it all the time - so what? it's there if you do want to get closer.

product photography, yes, depends on how large your items are.

the thing is.. if you don't have a need for it, then you don't buy it. so what's the problem? Canon obviously designed both the EF-M and EF-S at the same time which I find intriguing .. will they continue to do so or was that a one-off?


----------



## tr573 (Apr 4, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



ahsanford said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > * an EF-S 60 Mk. II with built in LED lighting up front would have been more useful.
> ...



You also want something with a ridiculously small working distance like these two, since those LED's aren't going to do much for your exposure beyond a couple inches.


----------



## rrcphoto (Apr 4, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



ahsanford said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > * an EF-S 60 Mk. II with built in LED lighting up front would have been more useful.
> ...



as you increase the working distance, you decrease the flash power as well which is the real problem of doing this on a longer macro.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 4, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

RRC + tr573: I get you completely on wimpy lighting = needs to be shorter FL / shorter focus distance.

That could 100% be solved with more powerful lighting, but that would all but ensure the 'T-shaped' footprint I referred to. 

It's for these reasons we won't see this kind of tiny-inside-the-barrel-diameter sort of lighting for a longer FF macro lens: this EF-S/EF-M idea uniquely fits/illuminates/works for shorter FL / shorter focusing distance macro.

- A


----------



## Kwwund (Apr 4, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

Friends,
I'm a relative novice and could use some advice. 

I have a T3i. I have no interest in macro photography but would like a 35mm prime. Does the macro capability in any way diminish the performance of the lens as a plain old 35mm prime?

Also, what are the disadvantages of using an EF-S 35mm instead of an EF 35mm lens on a crop sensor camera (aside from build quality and possibly aperture differences)?


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Apr 4, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



Kwwund said:


> Friends,
> I'm a relative novice and could use some advice.
> 
> I have a T3i. I have no interest in macro photography but would like a 35mm prime. Does the macro capability in any way diminish the performance of the lens as a plain old 35mm prime?
> ...


The fact that a lens has Macro capability causes no performance reduction when used at normal focusing distances.

Compared with the "EF 35mm F2 IS" used in APS-C, an "EF-S 35mm F2.8 IS" can theoretically show more vignetting (darkening at the edges of the image) when both lenses are in F2.8 .


----------



## aceflibble (Apr 5, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



Kwwund said:


> Does the macro capability in any way diminish the performance of the lens as a plain old 35mm prime?


In most cases, macro lenses will have slower autofocus than their non-macro equivalents. They also tend to lose a little more light over transmission, meaning that through a macro and a non-macro lens may be both f/2.8, the non-macro could be t/3.2 while the macro might be t/3.5, or something along those lines.

In casual shooting, only the slower autofocus part will ever really be noticeable. And of course it is possible that this particular lens may have perfectly fast autofocus; nobody will know until it's actually available for use.



> Also, what are the disadvantages of using an EF-S 35mm instead of an EF 35mm lens on a crop sensor camera (aside from build quality and possibly aperture differences)?


The EF-S _may_ have slightly heavier vignetting and aberration toward the sides and corners. But, equally, lenses specifically made for APS-C sensors (EF-S) can often be sharper in the centre than lenses intended for APS-H and 35mm sensors (EF)

However, those differences tend to be extremely minor.

The thing is, it is incredibly unlikely that this macro lens will be any cheaper than the existing Canon 35mm lenses. Macro versions of lenses are _always_ more expensive and the fact it also has the illumination feature will put the price up further. So if you're not interested in shooting macro and will get no use out of the built-in illumination then you'll be spending more money for no particular reason.

If you just want a 35mm prime, buy a regular one.


----------



## vangelismm (Apr 5, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

Macro lens are sharper.
You can see this with EF 50mm 2.8 and EF 100mm 2.8 against any Canon 50mm and the 100mm f/2.


----------



## illadvisedhammer (Apr 5, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



ajfotofilmagem said:


> Kwwund said:
> 
> 
> > Friends,
> ...



All good advice above, the EF-S compactness advantage outweighs any macro+LED penalty in this case, 190g for the new lens vs 335 for the 35 f2 IS. I would guess that the new lens would cost about the same as the f2 IS refurbished. More importantly are the specifics. The 35 f2 IS is a delightful lens. It's my favorite lens other than the 65 MP-E, takes the best 1 or 2 shots from any day I have it out. I only have an APS-C sensor. On my camera it's a much more useful focal length indoors than the 50 1.8, and at least my copy is sharper, and more contrasty without losing detail, especially wide open. On the other hand, I would love to have this new lens, or the EF-M version, this week, as the cherry blossoms open locally, and it could catch an ok flower or bug while mostly being used for family pictures. Borrow the 35 f2 IS before you decide.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 5, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



aceflibble said:


> The thing is, it is incredibly unlikely that this macro lens will be any cheaper than the existing Canon 35mm lenses. Macro versions of lenses are _always_ more expensive and the fact it also has the illumination feature will put the price up further. So if you're not interested in shooting macro and will get no use out of the built-in illumination then you'll be spending more money for no particular reason.
> 
> If you just want a 35mm prime, buy a regular one.



Wow. Really doubt that.

35mm f/2 IS USM = $549
35 f/1.4L II = $1,649

Meanwhile, the EF-M the new 35mm macro is heavily based on -- the EF-M 28mm f/3.5 IS STM Macro (with similar integral lighting) clocks in at $299, which is more or less where we'd expect the new EF-S lens to come in.

If you need a 35-ishmm prime for EF-S, get this new one, get the EF 40mm pancake or consider the Sigma 30mm f/1.4.

- A


----------



## Kwwund (Apr 5, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

Thank you all for your help.


----------



## privatebydesign (Apr 5, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



ahsanford said:


> aceflibble said:
> 
> 
> > The thing is, it is incredibly unlikely that this macro lens will be any cheaper than the existing Canon 35mm lenses. Macro versions of lenses are _always_ more expensive and the fact it also has the illumination feature will put the price up further. So if you're not interested in shooting macro and will get no use out of the built-in illumination then you'll be spending more money for no particular reason.
> ...



I paid $325 for my 35 f2 IS, best $325 I ever spent on Canon.


----------



## slclick (Apr 5, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



Kwwund said:


> Friends,
> I'm a relative novice and could use some advice.
> 
> I have a T3i. I have no interest in macro photography but would like a 35mm prime. Does the macro capability in any way diminish the performance of the lens as a plain old 35mm prime?
> ...



Do you want a labeled 35mm on crop or a true 35mm perspective/equivalent? The lens in this thread will have a 56mm equivalent focal length, you'll need a 24 Prime to get close to 35 equiv. on a non M series (They have an actual 22mm native lens) The EF 24 IS 2.8 is a fantastic lens btw. The EF-S 24 pancake is a great lens as well.


----------



## LDS (Apr 5, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



Kwwund said:


> Does the macro capability in any way diminish the performance of the lens as a plain old 35mm prime?
> 
> Also, what are the disadvantages of using an EF-S 35mm instead of an EF 35mm lens on a crop sensor camera (aside from build quality and possibly aperture differences)?



Usually there are no diminished optical performance - sometimes are even better (sharpness in macro matters), and often they also offer features like a flat field focus, which is also useful for reproduction tasks of flat originals. Hybrid IS compensate not only angle shake, but also shifts. 

The disadvantages usually are smaller max aperture, weight, and the AF mechanism needs to handle a far longer range, don't know if this has a limiter to reduce it.

For example, the EF 100/2.8 L is an excellent all-round lens - but if you need a larger aperture.

That said, an EF 35 may have a better AF system (USM vs. STM), build and optical quality comparison could be done only when this new lens will be available, and at which price point.


----------



## Kwwund (Apr 5, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*


[/quote]

Do you want a labeled 35mm on crop or a true 35mm perspective/equivalent? The lens in this thread will have a 56mm equivalent focal length, you'll need a 24 Prime to get close to 35 equiv. on a non M series (They have an actual 22mm native lens) The EF 24 IS 2.8 is a fantastic lens btw. The EF-S 24 pancake is a great lens as well.
[/quote]

Labeled 35mm on crop. My goal is to achieve approx. 50mm equivalent. I have the pancake and I agree, great lens and fantastic value. 

Thanks.


----------



## trulandphoto (Apr 5, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



figaro28 said:


> trulandphoto said:
> 
> 
> > This could be a fun standard lens for an SL1. I don't use my SL1 much but I might bring it with me more with this lens on it.
> ...



Three things. 1) The 38.4mm and 64mm eq fields of view for the 24mm and 40mm pancakes respectively, would normally be considered at the extremes of "standard". 2) IS 3) for some, macro is more than "the macro business."


----------



## rrcphoto (Apr 5, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



ahsanford said:


> aceflibble said:
> 
> 
> > The thing is, it is incredibly unlikely that this macro lens will be any cheaper than the existing Canon 35mm lenses. Macro versions of lenses are _always_ more expensive and the fact it also has the illumination feature will put the price up further. So if you're not interested in shooting macro and will get no use out of the built-in illumination then you'll be spending more money for no particular reason.
> ...



the Yen price was leaked at around 50,500 yen or 450 USD, so it's probably 399 USD is my guess.


----------



## ahsanford (Apr 5, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



rrcphoto said:


> the Yen price was leaked at around 50,500 yen or 450 USD, so it's probably 399 USD is my guess.



Looking at the related gear and costs:

EF-M 28mm f/3.5 Macro IS STM = $299
Pro: 1.2:1 mag, IS, illumination, decent standard prime FL option on crop
Con: STM, FBW, no distance scale, no focus limiter

EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM = $399 (launched at $449 back in 2005)
Pro: USM, FTM mechanical focusing, distance scale, decent portrait FL option on crop
Con: No IS, no focus limiter

Both are enthusiast lenses but I see the EF-M option (and the new EF-S STM option) as being a little more budget than the older EF-S for focusing reasons alone. USM + FTM mechanical focusing is clearly better for stills and that functionality usually costs more.

I'll say $300-ish for the new one.

- A


----------



## Big_Ant_TV_Media (Apr 5, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

too BAD ITS NOT FOR FULL FRAME


----------



## slclick (Apr 5, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



BigAntTVProductions said:


> too BAD ITS NOT FOR FULL FRAME



We've got our big boys and girls toys...


----------



## Talys (Apr 7, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



slclick said:


> BigAntTVProductions said:
> 
> 
> > too BAD ITS NOT FOR FULL FRAME
> ...



I love when I see macro illuminators on TV. It's always some CSI dude taking crime scene photos fifteen feet away from the subject.


----------



## leadin2 (May 5, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

https://youtu.be/d0AwdRpxqkY

https://youtu.be/0ieIOF9NDXY


----------



## Talys (May 6, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



leadin2 said:


> https://youtu.be/d0AwdRpxqkY
> 
> https://youtu.be/0ieIOF9NDXY



Hybrid IS video is well done


----------



## leadin2 (May 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*

http://downloads.canon.com/nw/camera/products/lenses/ef-s-35mm-f2.8-macro-is-stm/mtf/efs35_f2.8_macro_is_stm_mtf.gif


----------



## LonelyBoy (May 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



privatebydesign said:


> I paid $325 for my 35 f2 IS, best $325 I ever spent on Canon.



I spent a bit more on mine (but it included the Canon hood). And I can't argue that last point - you can pry it out of my cold, dead fingers.


----------



## LonelyBoy (May 20, 2017)

*Re: Canon EF-S 35mm f/2.8 Macro IS STM Images & Specs Leak Out*



Talys said:


> I love when I see macro illuminators on TV. It's always some CSI dude taking crime scene photos fifteen feet away from the subject.



With a guide number of 46, wouldn't it work fine at 15" with f/2.8? Though I suppose they'd probably be using a narrower aperture.


----------

