# 35mm IS Image quality- ghosting, bokeh, fringing



## ashmadux (Jul 17, 2016)

Im wondering how other users experience has been with this lens.

I've rented the lens quite a few times over the last year or so, and i was looking forward to owning one. So I recently purchased from canon refurb (last time, never again) and to say that I am unimpressed with the image quality is an understatement.

All of the reviews - and rentals- of this lens has led me to believe that everyday use should result in superb performance, relatively on par with th2 older 35 1.4, but sharper. That is in no why the case with this copy i have. I have used on my t2i, M1 and my 5d3.

Here is some 100%, sooc crops. im looking for more examples.

Main issues: 

• Horrendous green fringing + nervous bokeh makes oof look plain UGLY
• Looks like some pretty severe ghosting. In only one single review of this lens I've seen it mentioned. and hey, correct me inf I'm wrong, it's the first time I've seen this weird effect
• Not really fixable, but the overall image rendering is definitely not L quality (imho).


In the meantime, I will be referencing images from my past rentals to compare against, then the lens will be sent to the shop.



Cheers


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Jul 17, 2016)

I had this lens for a few days and returned because of the focus problems in my Rebel. It seemed better than the monster LOCAS 50mm F1.4, but nowhere near as good as my beloved Sigma 50 Art.

How bokeh is subjective, it is not easy to determine how much is normal seem "nervous", and colored fringes in areas out of focus.
The Photozone test shows alumas of the things you mentioned:

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/856-canon35f2isapsc


----------



## Frodo (Jul 17, 2016)

None of the photos you posted show any issues. Perhaps post some enlarged sections.
I use this lens with a 5Dii and 6D and am very happy. Limited CA is easily corrected and I can't remember ghosting being a problem. Lens is sharper than my 50mm macro. Broken is generally good but of course certain combinations can upset this.
Only issue is awful coma wide open.


----------



## JonAustin (Jul 17, 2016)

I also bought a refurbished copy of this lens (18 months ago), and have been completely satisfied with it. But new, used or refurb, any lens has the potential to have defects. I hope you're still within the return window with Canon, and that you will send it back post-haste in exchange for a replacement. And I hope your new copy performs as well as mine does.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Jul 17, 2016)

I have used it with my 5D3 and no issues. JPEG files come corrected from camera and RAW files CA are easy fixable in post


----------



## ashmadux (Jul 18, 2016)

Frodo said:


> None of the photos you posted show any issues. Perhaps post some enlarged sections.
> I use this lens with a 5Dii and 6D and am very happy. Limited CA is easily corrected and I can't remember ghosting being a problem. Lens is sharper than my 50mm macro. Broken is generally good but of course certain combinations can upset this.
> Only issue is awful coma wide open.



Those are 100% crops of the problem areas- what kind of larger of sections would you rather see?

- The amount of green fringing is huge. If you see the bird crop, there fringing even in the wood- and its not 'super high' contrast.
- Whether it's coma/ghosting, some oof elements look really bizarre, like one single part of the scene is in movement. there is nothing good about it.

Im still reviewing shots from the rental versions of this lens- I just haven't seen these effects exhibited before, after 4/5 rentals. So I'm suspect that this lens is likely busted. I'm doing my research as I want to be sure, and I will need it for the upcoming fashion week.


----------



## Frodo (Jul 18, 2016)

ashmadux said:


> Those are 100% crops of the problem areas- what kind of larger of sections would you rather see?
> 
> - The amount of green fringing is huge. If you see the bird crop, there fringing even in the wood- and its not 'super high' contrast.
> - Whether it's coma/ghosting, some oof elements look really bizarre, like one single part of the scene is in movement. there is nothing good about it.
> ...



Those comments are helpful. Decking wood is often treated with copper so the colour didn't surprise me. And the photo with the fencing that could have been normal reddish.
I wonder if you have longitudinal chromatic aberration for some reason - I can't remember that this is an issue with by 35/2, but it can be with my 85/1.8. I would have thought that lateral CA would show up in the first image but its not apparent to me especially if a 100% shot.

I think the blur/bokeh is okay, but as I note, even my 85/1.8 will have disturbing bokeh in certain situations.

You are the best judge, because there is only so much I can see on a screen. If you have rented a few and this one is worse than the others, that's your answer. Bring it back! It should be a good lens (coma excepted).

Cheers


----------

