|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on November 11, 2022 Pros: size, quality, robustness, speed and precision Maf beautiful, compact, light vignette as needed to make the photos even more beautiful Cons: not received Opinion: Now I no longer use Canon Reflex , but sometimes if I think back to that kit the lens that I regret most is this. Bought too late to enjoy it to the fullest, but every now and then I would want to buy an old 5D just to be able to mate this lens. The fact that it has gone out of production and that they have not made a whole series of fixtures of this type says a lot. I am convinced that they did not do them because they knew that many would gladly give up the red line without too many thoughts. If you have canon SLRs, buy it and try it regardless of any other lens you have in your backpack. |
 | sent on October 23, 2022 Pros: Focal length, weight, sharp, stabilization Cons: It will not have the blur or quality of the 35L (which costs 3 times as much). Opinion: Personally I think it is a lens to always carry with you on the road. Lightweight, sharp, stabilized. For me, the focal length is enough to do to do "the all-rounder". I don't think its build quality can compete with zooms (16-35 / 17-40) --> tried both and 35mm, both lose quality compared to the fixed. Perfect between f4 -f8. Beautiful blurred. I find it "vintage". A lens that does not appear, but of substance. You always take home noteworthy shots. Very recommended! |
  | sent on October 21, 2022 Pros: Compact, lightweight, sharp, stabilized, AF Cons: The price that is slowly growing, blurred a bit hard Opinion: It's not the 35L. It's not the fuzzy one. That said, it is an exceptional lens, very sharp, compact and very light, moreover also stabilized. It will not be from 4 real stops but his job does. The backlight resistance is good. For the price he could have put a hood inside him. AF is a true Canon USM that is fast, accurate, reliable. It is an excellent travel companion for those who want to travel light with only one optic. You can also do portraits set if you know how to handle distortions. On aps-c it becomes a 56mm equivalent. I had it, used it and then sold it to switch to the 24mm f/1.4 Art because I was better with the focal length: 24 and 50mm yes, with 35mm love never clicked. However I recommend it. |
 | sent on October 11, 2022 Pros: Excellent sharpness, excellent soft and homogeneous blur, good construction, excellent autofocus, flare resistance, colors and contrast, stabilized and lightweight. Reliable. Cons: Nothing relevant given the value for money. Not tropicalized, little wide fire ring, three-dimensionality not at the level of the big brother f1.4. Opinion: First of all for the quality-price at which it is sold it is convenient, it can be an excellent travel and work companion, it is a reliable and efficient lens in all situations, an almost L series. Excellent construction albeit largely in plastic that still guarantees a certain lightness even if the stabilizer is present, very useful and very welcome. Very sharp already from f2, from f2.8 it is a blade even at the corners, with excellent colors and contrasts and resistance to flare. The autofocus is almost infallible, reliable even at TA, fast and quite quiet. The blur is soft and homogeneous, pleasant even for portraits, in general the three-dimensionality is not poetic and on this the big brother f1.4 outclasses it, but the aperture of f2 is almost always sufficient to detach the subject from the background and matches well with the project of this lens; Otherwise aim for the more expensive and heavy brother F1.4. Highly recommended lens, purchased like new for € 399 and used for portraiture on Aps-c and Aps-h and especially for portraiture set on Full Frame. |
 | sent on January 18, 2022 Pros: Compartment, lightweight, 35mm, is Cons: Nothing to declare. Opinion: I do not want to write poems or eleggi of opinions dictated by Dxo mark, resistance to infringements, resistance to flare etc etc .... I only give my opinion on the use of the optics in question. For my way of photographing I consider the 35 mm a better focal length than a 50mm. As a former owner of the various 35mm canon f 1.4 series one and series two I can only say that the difference in aperture f/2 vs f/1.4 is noticeable, especially in the 3D "magic" of the f/1.4, and who does not admit it is only because he has never tried an f/1.4 !!! That said, I loved and love the wonderful blurred f/1.4 which unfortunately involves bulk and weight unlike this f/2 light, compact (if used without hood) and the typical colors of canon. The stabilizer I find very effective and useful, although mounted on a classic 35mm gives you the opportunity to use fast shutter speeds and use low iso. I use it on 6dmk2, 80d, Eos R and Eos R6 and on all bodies it works which is a wonder. Would recommend? Yes, without a shadow of a doubt for those who do not want to spend too much money on an f/1.4 also used and if they want to travel light. The alternative is sigma Art,.... Tried years ago and resold after only 10 days.... to you the conclusion. |
 | sent on October 06, 2021 Pros: Extraordinary sharpness (on the other hand on DxO Mark is classified as one of the most "resolving" lenses), general optical rendering including bokeh, Beautiful color rendering, diffraction resistance, usable PdC references, good flare resistance even without hood, the aperture of f / 2 is the ideal compromise, sufficient to "detach" the subject and / or work in low ambient light, useless to look brighter. Cons: The good quality plastic construction is very accurate and even if it is not worth a magnesium alloy construction it has the advantage of lightness. Frankly on a lens of this type the IS is superfluous and levitates the price and the bulk compared to the previous version, I would have preferred more compactness, the hood and bag provided instead of the stabilizer. The MaF ring is not wide enough and its stroke a little short (AF obblige) to be really comfortable but it is precise enough to work in manual and the references of PdC are present and very usable to manage the PdC and the hyperfocal. It is not really a defect but this lens is so "sharp" that you have to be careful in post-production to dose the sharp to avoid the appearance of artifacts and give a more natural look to the details, in fact often even the Sharp values by default of the various SW are excessive. Opinion: I do not know what sense it makes to judge a lens in absolute and so to be more "objective" I compared it to the Leica Summicron 35mm f/2 R (a lens of the 70s) which has been my reference for at least 30 years. the Canon behaves very well, the contrast is equally high and maintains quite well even in blurred areas (1) and the correctness and separation of colors (2) even if not at the level of the Leica are of excellent workmanship. Due to the slightly lower contrast of the blurred areas the bokeh of the Canon is more "sweet" and less "sculptural" than the Leica (3) but remains of an excellent level, one could compare to that of a Zeiss for example. The vignetting and distortion of the Canon are much more pronounced than the Leica but now digitally they are no longer a problem. On the other hand, the sharpness of the Canon is superior to that of the Leica, it is truly extraordinary at all apertures (from f / 2 to the most closed apertures such as f / 16 and 22 which are very usable). At the level of flare and parasitic reflexes the Canon behaves well (I think they avoided the expense of the hood) but the incredible thing is that the 40-year-old Summicron is even better (incredible but what the hell of anti-reflective treatment used Leica ?). In short, after all, the Canon 35mm f/2 IS is really an excellent lens that has a beam of quality such as to make it attractive, in my opinion it is a lens not to be missed among the fixed focal lengths of the Canon catalog. (1) To some the bokeh of the Leica may seem "nervous" or "hard" but it is precisely this that makes its "magic", the beauty of its rendering and the quality of the 3D effect. It is a blurry type that of the Leica that I would define as a nice bokeh and not, as you can read here and there in the forum, a blurred "kneaded", uniform and without contrast that brutally detaches is uniformly with the subject in focus as if behind it there was pulled a tent and that unfortunately is so "fashionable" currently. (2) Qualities where Leica excel and which make the slightest chromatic nuances from the softest "pastel" colors to the most saturated colors with a unique accent of truth. (3) the subjects have a volume, they seem to be carved with summicron. |
 | sent on April 16, 2021 Pros: lightweight, super sharp, excellent stabilization, good blurry, autofocus very fast and precise Cons: nothing relevant Opinion: "Scientific" objective, made modern therefore perfect (very sharp already at full opening, from corner to corner). I don't have much to add compared to the list of pros, to the amount you buy it used is absolutely worth it. Until a couple of years ago, I was hoping canon would also make the 50 1.4 on the line of this lens (and 24 and 28), which is quite compact, lightweight, very efficient and stabilized. The 35mm focal lends itself well to many genres and if you like this lens it is a must, especially to photograph with little light (f2 and 1/3 of a second freehand, better than the fixed 1.2). The blurry is great, but not as magical as the 35 L series 1. Highly recommended |
 | sent on July 23, 2020 Pros: Nitiezza already at TA, Stabilizer (but not from 4 stops), AF, size, construction. Cons: Stabilizer not very effective and lack of tropicalization I do not feel the need. The paraluce buys it with a few euros. Opinion: Purchased to complete the trio of fixed lenses (35mm, 50mm and 100mm macro), to be combined with the zooms in my possession, to date it is the lightest and most compact lens in my possession after the Canon EF 40mm stm pancake. These factors, together with the good versatility of the focal, the reliable AF in every situation and the excellent sharpness already starting from TA, which further improves to excellent levels at f/4-5.6, make it the ideal lens to always keep attached to the machine body for uses ranging from the street to the portrait shots set etc., etc. The stabilizer, more likely from -2 than from -4 stop, is a surplus that helps in shooting with difficult lighting or at night, but that guarantees stabilized shots really usable with times of 1/8s or better 1/15s. I honestly do not like to take photos in the rain and even used in dusty environments showed no problem, so I do not feel the need for the lack of tropicalization. As far as I'm concerned it's a highly recommended purchase. |
 | sent on May 10, 2020 Pros: Lightness, minimal footprint, unbeatable price value, acceptable contrast. Cons: Not tropicalized Opinion: It's the first lens to buy, probably. And even for those who are not novice, it is a lens to have for the characteristic portableity, which no open prime lens possesses. The colors, blurring and contrast are not entirely comparable to prime L, but at this price you might ask? Recommended, everyone. |
 | sent on May 10, 2020 Pros: Sharp, light, versatile, stabilized, fast AF, price. Cons: to write one: no lampshade Opinion: Honestly I fell in love with this lens, I put it on 6D and I never took it anymore. I am not a professional photographer and my outings are mainly on Sundays with the family. Carrying my backpack with all the stuff clearly tired me. but I didn't even want to give up taking pictures with my cell phone... So I needed something light, sharp, versatile (to do everything unpretentious) and stabilized... he has all this and it's cheap. What to say... Perfect! I take pictures of my children, close-ups, landscapes, interiors... all souvenir photos of course... and something more if you need... If you have the same needs as me, it's no better... otherwise go on something else. The sharpness, however, is surprising... the fixtures are the fixed... 9/10 rating (10/10 or perfection... does it exist?) |
 | sent on January 10, 2020 Pros: Price quality, weight, stabilization, footprint, sharpness Cons: There is no better (price value) Opinion: I have been a proud owner of this lens for two years now and I can tell you that I find it impossible for me to change it with a brighter or sharper 35 (the mind goes to 35 1.4 canon and sigma art). Every time I'm there ready to change I find myself seeing the weight of the papables and their respective cost and I say (in my way, rightly) the game is not worth the candle. It has a fantastic portability, with the street you go unnoticed. Great sharpness as well as the contrast and crispness of the color. Stabilization that others do not have and that is very useful in many situations. Then the price... new costs 500 euros, it's a missed L series in my view. |
| sent on December 03, 2019 Pros: Incredibly accurate and reliable Autofocus Cons: Paralight sold at a high price, does not have the typical charm of the brightest 35mm Opinion: Bought for economic reasons, as the brightest 35mm are all more expensive. It is obviously not comparable to the various 35mm f1.4 in terms of blurry (although it is only a stop the difference is remarkable), but it is still great and is fine for the use I make. The sharpness, although slightly less than a 35 art is great. Acceptable distortion, almost absent chromatic aberrations, good resistance to flare. The real strength of this lens is the autofocus, which literally surprised me. On 5d ii (one shot af) is precise, fast and foolproof, even on the side points. I've never had any errors of focus, in any light condition. 100% shots perfectly in focus, stuff to be left open-mouthed and the prerogative of the mirrorless world alone. The self-focus of this lens is astounding, although it does not belong to the L series, it has a superior reliability to all the Ls I have, despite all my goals being well calibrated. This is not to say that the other targets go wrong, simply with these a photo slightly out of focus every now and then can happen, which with 35 f2 never happens. The stabilizer is very useful in the evening and is quite quiet, combined with the infallible autofocus allows you to always get perfect shots. Very good construction, almost L-series plastics, rather small size and weight. Ultimately it is a very balanced lens between optical quality, price, weight and size, with an extremely precise and reliable autofocus. Highly recommended for those who can't afford a brighter 35 or for those who need a perfect autofocus. Vote 9 for the usual grip for the backs of the lampshade, otherwise it would have been without a doubt a 10. |
 | sent on March 25, 2019 Pros: Autofocus, Compactness, Weight, Price, Brightness, build Quality Cons: A little flat compared to the Canon 1.4 and the Sigma Art Opinion: (on 5D Mark III) After a bit of real use on the field I decided to review this fantastic lens. I tell You immediately what is the greatest value, at least in my copy: The autofocus is not wrong a shot. Not even with low light, not even with the extreme side, even in AI Servo. In Short I was amazed because I always have the certainty of having taken the shot at home and it is not recently. From any distance, he is always accurate, the Sigma Art, despite being a sniper up close, from afar was often misfiring. The Construction is great, it is light and compact. For the rest that say, obviously does not return that dream effect that the brighter brothers know how to give, but the blur is pleasant and gradual, the overall yield is excellent. I consider it excellent also for professional use because of its reliability. You lose a stop but you gain on other fronts, all at a very honest and justified price. You have to be aware that, to have that stop in addition, the project is complicated and you find yourself then with a much more cumbersome and hardly more performanant side autofocus. In Summary an amazing lens that I can only recommend. Here's to want to be picky, for my way to conceive a 35 mm could safely avoid the stabilizer and make it even more compact. |
 | sent on November 06, 2018 Pros: Lightness, compactness, presence of stabilizer, focus, sharpness, colours, quality/price Cons: Nobody Opinion: I use it on 6d as a handyman for parties, visits to cities, portraits, family occasions etc. When I know I don't have to go down to 24mm or stretch to 105mm for space reasons. Purchased (used) after trying this focal from two friends, but they use Sigma Art, and I'm in love; I preferred it to the latter for price, size and presence of the stabilizer. The focus is fast and accurate with all the points of the 6d, even the sides. It is the sharpest lens in my possession (in the middle, while at the edges I do not know how it is, I have never taken notice as I do not care), but what I adore more than this lens is the yield: beautiful colors that return an image with an "aura" , it opens a lot of the shadows and at F2 it is already very. Ultimately it is, in my opinion, a true L-series missed, even more than the 85 f 1.8 (which I own) and the 100 F2 and less badly, in this way remains affordable |
 | sent on July 16, 2018 Pros: Sharpness, stabilizer, quick and reliable focusing, weighs and is great the right. Cons: Bokeh that I personally do not find at the top in portraits. Very high cost. Original lens hood at disproportionate price (but it is obvious with the Chinese compatible). Opinion: I bought this used lens, to use on APSC, where it becomes a 56mm. I find this focal a right choice for the full length portrait and set. Excellent focus, hardly takes home a shot. Having used and long been using the 50mm f 1.8 STM (which is far from reliable in focusing, at least my specimen) I realized how this 35mm AF level is another planet. The sharpness already at F2 is great, a f 2.8 is really excellent. Very effective and comfortable stabilizer. Here I was expecting maybe a little more blurred a bit more pleasant but I understand that APSC with an F2 can not expect miracles. Not that it is ugly but has absolutely nothing magic. I know I would have to steer on other lenses but I couldn't spend twice as many. So it's a lens I recommend. I hope I can try it one day on FF. |
 | sent on July 16, 2018 Pros: All. Cons: Absence of Lens hood. Opinion: Sharp at all Apercs, excellent colour rendition, precise and Fast AF, perfect focal length on both APSC, where the yield is also fantastic, that on FF (even better). Very effective stabilizer, excellent build quality, adequate size, and aesthetically it does not seem like a toy as someone before me wrote. Rated 10, I fell in love after a few shots, it was the lens I was looking for! For someone the weight may be overkill but if you want aperlets so open you don't expect better with a lesser weight, you will be disappointed. Perhaps the lack of tropicalization is a regret, but the one for Canon is to the exclusive prerogative of the series L... Price a little high on the new, but if you find it on the used in excellent condition do not let him absolutely. Only downside in summary, the lack of the lens hood. So let us put the soul in peace on these few aspects, which clearly do not affect the final vote, which is maximum. |
 | sent on June 08, 2018 Pros: Sharpness! Featherweight. Wonderful colors style L. Bokeh series. Incredible 4-Stop stabilizer. Versatility. Lightning focus and 24cm from the subject. Quality price performance, absolutely unbeatable! Cons: None, even if F2 the effective stabilizer compensates abundantly. Opinion: I bought this lens after seeing reviews on YouTube and technical tests on the authoritative the digital picture and Dxomark. I was looking for sharpness and Canon colors, I'd say I found them. Sure 35mm are a focal sometimes handyman and sometimes not very versatile, depends on the moments. I love it, even if I regret a handyman type the Canon 24-105 f4 L that I had in the past, now I use it and anyway I put it in the market at a price that I will not only deal because right now I need more versatility. Unfortunately it's just a matter of money, not everyone can afford 1,000 optical and then you have to diversify a little, the fact remains that if I sell it sooner or later, in a more prosperous future, I buy it with my eyes closed because I am enthusiastic. It has a beautiful and fluffy blur, even at F4 is very nice because you can approach up to 24 cm from the subject create a nice effect as well as making the interested close-up, almost macros. Take pictures in the evening and the most gratifying thing, although I have a Canon 6d that holds the ISO as few, this lens seems to be made for cameras of this type, it accentuates the performance with an inimitable character and leave home the Flash is something Great. I have had in the past several zooms such as the Canon 24-105 F4 L is USM legendary lens, 24-70 F4 L is USM, beautiful and perfect but it misses that flicker, then the Tamron 24-70 F 2.8 VC USD (unfortunately a failed version) sharpest only at 24mm, then the 100mm F2 USM Cool but a little Along, and even the 70-200 F4 L smooth-punched as few, all resold to make different experiences, all except for the 50mm f 1.8 stm that I have from the beginning and always will keep. Well, the 35mm is by far the best I have tried, sharpness best of all, if the play almost equal to the 100mm, I think it is better, certainly are no doubt the colors, it looks like an L series. What about, if you have the doubt to buy this or the much acclaimed Sigma 1.4 Art, I would say to ask you my same questions during the purchase, then: How much do both weigh? How many times do I take pictures at 1.4? How many times do I do a thousand tests to see if the Sigma has problems with front and back focus because I will never be convinced at 100%? How much does the Sigma cost? Well, the answer to every question is, ok I buy the Canon and I go safe, but I'm around more than sure! is guaranteed. As a guy said on TV years ago... try to believe! Good light. Roberto |
 | sent on May 28, 2018 Pros: Price in relation to exceptional yield, overall efficiency, light and compact Cons: Chocolate Sheep toy appearance. Opinion: The most inopportune aspect for a lens of this price, corresponds to a solidity anything but fragile or inaccurate. The brightness is excellent, but not exaggerated, so the simplicity of design has given the possibility to create a little gadget, light and an excellent performance even at full aperture. Hard to leave him at home. I personally use this lens almost always and for all possible applications. It is known that 35mm for many photographers is the lens of reference and this embodies all aspects. In addition it has a general optical performance worthy of higher class objectives, thus making this objective an instrument of a truly unique efficacy, especially if compared to the cost... Certainly the cost is not really fantastic, if you take into account his very toy, but certainly if you take into account the performance of the lens, the fact that it is not at all fragile, the lightness... You can not absolutely consider it out of cost and its effectiveness Intrinsic is exceptional. It's my favorite Canon lens. |
 | sent on February 02, 2018 Pros: Price, focus, size Cons: Lens hood (expensive), aperture only F2 Opinion: I had twice this lens that I consider a "must have" for those who want to do street or otherwise set portraits. Missing character, stopping at F2 as an opening limits it compared to the 1.4 emblazoned (the big brother with the red line and the Sigma). Different instead if you aim to have a bright and clear lens (does his job very well) to bring it always behind given the size and weight.rnCosto maybe a little high in my opinion and accessories (hood) exaggerated for a lens that, as said, part already from a high cost.rnI would recommend. |
| sent on December 10, 2017 Pros: Weight, focal, incisiveness and fast autofocus Cons: Lack of tropicalization and lens hood. Opinion: Bought at a great price on the internet and taking advantage of the Canon cashback, is the fixed focal lens with which I photograph more. Street, portrait set landscapes. Universal optics which, in my opinion, a photographer should have in his outfit. I had thought of the Canon EF 35 f/1.4 L USM II but the price and weight have discouraged me in buying. I opted on this lens and the choice was happy. It's giving me a lot of satisfaction. Frankly the flaws that write other owners I have not found. Engraved already at full aperture from the best closing already to 2.5. I used it at dusk with excellent results. |
 | sent on August 10, 2017 Pros: Weight, sharpness, stabilized, lightning fast Cons: Blurred anonymous, 3d nonexistent, colors not to the top Opinion: An excellent objective that can be found at a great price, blown for anonymous blurry, I do not know how to define it better, is not ugly or hard, but not even creamy, it is anonymous, besides the colors are not really from series L, they are slightly So that this lens is too perfect, it would have wanted some "defect" in the positive sense, that is blurred more creamy or some aberration to give it character, so these defects I found are really negligible compared to the general quality of the optic , Superior to many Lrn series |
 | sent on June 24, 2017 Pros: Sharpness, Construction, Standard Weight, Stabilization, Bokeh Cons: For my humble opinion no one unless the lack of tropicalization for the rest is a L series Opinion: When love is said at first glance. I came from 24-105L one of the best canon zoom ever. But I missed something, that moving, that creativity that only a fixed one can give you. At that point the amletic doubt of many .. what to choose? I realized that I used a lot of 24-40 focal lengths but when you have a zoom like 24-105L it's not so simple because laziness can bump you over instead of half-step. Reading the various reviews on the 24 did not convince me as well I found it more than enough as wide-angle on a FF and I said that with 28 or 35 and two steps back I would have got the same result, with two steps forward I got to 50 so I chose 35 and not the bank. 40 because f2.0 gave me much more creativity than 2.8 which offered the 40 but it weighed much less. No choice was more right. You will love it. It's a L series all over and for everything except tropicalization. I also love it in the bokeh. What to say is the focal point for me as it ranges from landscaped street pictures to full-length portraits and meBisexual, the latter I adore because they contextualize the photo. I would never go back. |
 | sent on March 23, 2017 Pros: AF quickly and precisely, and Sharpness. Cons: Stabilizer of dubious effectiveness. Opinion: Taken to replace the old Canon EF 35 f / 2 that has accompanied me for a long time that I wanted to improve the speed and accuracy of the great AF.rnLa form difference with the old model is also in sharpness at full aperture that was far improved on the new versione.rnl'unico dark side of this lofty goal is that the stabilizer from tests carried out gave no appreciable results. (Maybe it's the fault of my copy?!). RnSu FF I find an exceptional and very functional focal while on APS-C is neither neither fish nor fowl, too long for street and too short to ritratti.rn |
  | sent on February 07, 2017 Pros: overall quality noticeable when you are holding, brightness, very clear (in the center, but not bad either at the edges) already f2, autofocus and excellent stabilizer. Cons: Nothing important. Opinion: For the kind of photography I do I needed brighter perspective (both opening as * vision * in the viewfinder) the 24-105L, still essential to aim for my photos. It had to be stabilized (very low usage times) and I saw that most of my shots were among the focal 30 / 38mm. I discarded the 35L 1.4 for reasons of cost / footprint / unregulated and why I would not have taken advantage of for what can give and so I took the 35 f2. Thoroughly tested in two events I was very happy. Already clear (at the center) to f2, it improves the edges to f2.8 onwards. Shooting in low light situations not known special vignetting even at f2. The lens hood I bought the original and with the Canon L series lenses do not you know that it is so, as always, and the expense to be put in quote. Good lens indeed. |
 | sent on November 17, 2016 Pros: Very sharp from the start, good construction, stabilized, lightweight. Cons: Severe lack of hood which costs 50 Cucuzza and is separately. Opinion: So, I took it with a 5D old because having a 1Ds Mark III, I wanted to have something more 'light to carry giro.rnMi amazed at pisitivo for AF precision, excellent sharpness at the center already at room temperature and a good construction , realized with a good porous plastic material and by good robustness, at least that 'a pare.rnEssendo f2, has a valid blurred indibbuamente, considrando that you can' approach the subject, to 24 centimeters, but the three-dimensionality that offers its big brother f1 .4 is from another planet, as well as the price naturalmente.rnIn summary, a great glass, even better if you buy used, I was lucky enough to find it used as new and original lens hood to 350 euro, highly recommended if you do not find the detachment of the plans and the three-dimensionality of 1.4 very good on the old bodies as 5D and 1DsII and III who maybe can not be sfurttate at high ISO, the stabilizer does its dirty work, and the photo, the more and take home , even in low light. |
 | sent on November 14, 2016 Pros: Value for money, bright, stabilized Cons: I do not see ... Opinion: And 'one of the best goals you may have in your hands: it weighs little, is not cumbersome and the yield is amazing! RnL'ho taken after a meditation about a month on a 35 to be taken together with the 6D, the final choice was took place between it and the sigma 1.4 and ... there is no story: if you do not need this stop more light make no mistake: the canon 35 is better as yield (from 2.5 onwards), has stabilized, it has an autofocus that does not miss a beat! rnHo instead took 24 Article 1.4 sigma, and I say this because the difference in yield you see all right with this iS USM, the risolvenza is greater and microcontrast is REAL! rnrnLa lack the hood is something useless from consider: I have taken aim + paraluceORIGINALE at a price lower than the minimum AMZ ... and with warranty Italy! rnIl hood is perfect, and it's worth it to buy it and keep it installed! RNLA lack of weather sealing is NOT a defect! Because if one spends € 500 for a obOBJECTIVE and claims it is weather sealed to mount it on a camera not Tropicalized then ... I do not know what to write in false! final rnrnIn the coupled 35 f / 2 is usm + 6D from a hard to combinations of lenses + expensive and more cameras expensive! Hardly it will not be installed if you want to go light, and hard to miss in your bag even when you have no place where to put it! RnStraconsigliato! |
 | sent on November 12, 2016 Pros: Sharpness, weight, autofocus, construction, handy, f2. Cons: hood not included. Opinion: I state that I use this lens on APS-C, and effectively becomes an 56mm. rnL'obbiettivo immediately gave me a feeling of strength, almost as much as the L series for instance, is built very well, fast, quiet autofocus, stabilized and size compatte.rnLo recommend it to everyone, it costs a bit 'but the quality you see and once installed does not mai.rnSolita downside would remove for canon, not a series L, the hood must be bought separately, the original costs the modest sum of 50 € .. compatible, virtually identical to the original is on 20 € rete.rnrnAggiornamento December 2016: I add that I use now also on 5D (ie full frame) and never disappoints, it's so bright in many situations helps a lot. The very often used even if L series use as main optics. A must have, I prefer it on full frame 50, are similar but 35 is wider and I prefer it as a lens before. |
 | sent on August 09, 2016 Pros: Light and handy Cons: quality / poor value for money, clarity of expectations, colors. Opinion: I expected a lot from this goal by reading reviews but was disappointed: my yardstick are the goals that I know very well (canon 24-105 f4 and f2.8 canon 40 stm); I made the same shot with the 24-105 set to 35 mm to f4 and the comparison is awkward: the sharpness of which extol the praises of the 35 I only read in the reviews, the 24-105 is not only sharper, but the autofocus it is more accurate and the colors are another story. Even comparing with the 40 it comes out badly if here the colors are identical sharpness is all in favor of the 40 it costs a third ... a note in favor of the 35 is the speed autofocus compared to that of 40 stm.rnLa vignetting full aperture is remarkable but that is easily corrected, the autofocus is fast but accuracy is not his forte ... I'll try to make a microtaratura autofocus hoping to improve the situation .rnP.S. After the auto-calibration the situation has greatly improved, although the prevision autofocus can be improved |
 | sent on July 14, 2016 Pros: optical quality, no ac, fast and accurate af, stabilizer. Cons: Lack tropicalization, hood not standard. Opinion: Optics at good value price. Sharpest already at TA. is almost no chromatic aberrations. Great for street, landscapes and portraits ambientati. Compared to f1.4 L II, the opening to f2 does not let you easily get blurred: a stop in more than 35mm is not little; for the rest of the f2 is is very close to his older brother. rnNon is weather sealed but is built well and while lightweight, by a feeling of solidità.rnConsiglio to buy the original lens hood that, while costing 50 euro, worth combined with such an excellent optics. |
 | sent on June 02, 2016 Pros: Weight overall performance. Cons: Vignetting, lens hood is not included. Opinion: I own this lens for a few days and I made a few shots, but definitely the first impression was very very light positiva.rnOttica that attacked a pro body makes very handy to have, sharpness at f2 already quite good and have the advantage af buono.rnUn stabilizer, which in many cases especially when shooting indoors with poor lighting're certainly helped. rnal currently the only negative that I can give is quite pronounced vignetting, nothing sensational, and all fixable PP with automatic fixes, but for me that often work and deliver the jpeg can be a problema.rnIn last after spending 550 € is outrageous to have to pay another 50 for a piece of plastic (I am referring to the hood) |
 | sent on January 19, 2016 Pros: Brightness, image stabilization, USM, image quality Cons: Nothing ... maybe a bulky sleeping Opinion: Objective fantastico..lo use of 60d as all do. Bright and stabilized, closed 2.8 is perfect (in TA is cmq very sharp). The maf is fast, accurate, in practice it never staccherei from the machine! I expected a bit smaller in size but not anything annoying. I can not help but straconsigliarlo! |
 | sent on December 08, 2015 Pros: Lightweight, compact stabilized clear Cons: Lack hood and soft bag tropicalization Opinion: Great goal from the use of lightweight c aps as good handyman already in TA sensor reduced by f4 perfect, nice and fuzzy 'that is thought is superfluous, however, essential to take no stand at night af always ready and quick l' I preferred the sigma for the size and weight .rnCredo to be one of the best goals I can not L series rnNon recommend it all together '85 1.8 form a very good coupled missing only tropicalization but probably would not have been so small and light and the lens hood but This now Canon has accustomed rnVoto 9.5 |
 | sent on October 25, 2015 Pros: from f2.8 it is higher as sharpness and image quality to 35 and sigma canon F1.4. Cons: the hood is mandatory, I'd rather have it as standard paying a little 'more than taking it apart. Opinion: I have to take it sold: canon 40 2.8 .stm, canon 50 1.8 ii, 24-70 2.8 sigma. I gained something and find myself a lens magnifico.non hesitate to take it (I have benefited from the cash back of 60euro), which once again makes me prefer canon in any other brand. I find no flaws, some say that it is heavy, you have never had a heavy lens? RNE generous in size, this is because in focusing on the internal mechanism is extended. the exterior is a kind of frame to hide this thing. It has become my favorite handyman, the alternate only 100 f2.rnse look tests DXO Mark are the first two goals of the canon in the standings and I can only confermare.rn |
 | sent on May 10, 2015 Pros: clarity, lightness, construction, stabilizer Cons: supplied in relation to price Opinion: aim beautiful, clear already at full aperture becomes virtually a blade from f / 4 focal suitable for almost all uses (of course you do not really photo hunting), lightweight and built ottimamente..il most obvious flaw is not even his, but in policy canon that considers wasteful provide a lens costing 500 euro hood and soft bag fitted to the series L ... in any case I would recommend it without hesitation, it will not be super sharp as the sigma art, but It is really a lens Mr. |
| sent on May 05, 2015 Pros: Clarity, weight, noise and speed of focus Cons: no hood Opinion: I bought a little over a month this point is to gradually blend into the world of portrait (shot mostly landscapes) and to take it with me to the mountains in those days of low light or rainy where a wide angle is not strictly necessary. Also it states that it is the first time you purchase a fixed lens and I must say that after the first exit I had a good impression. Its light weight and speed of focus are at the top for me and also to f2 creates a blurred very pleasant. This Sunday I went out with the fog and even in the woods could shoot at ISO 800 and f4, the photos that I got I like a lot. I chose this over the more quoted Article 35 of sigma simply for weight and size, and at the moment I do not regret absolutely as with portraits settled, for my little experience, it performs very well and has nothing to envy to the sigma. Landscapes close is fantastic, generates saturated color and sharpness is excellent ... coupled with 6d complete success! RnVoto 9.5 just because nL is on and does not have the lens hood. |
 | sent on January 16, 2015 Pros: Sharpness; construction; reduced weight and dimensions; optical worthy of a series L; excellent yield of FF. Cons: Absence of the hood; bought original € 55 00 !! (Very well built) Opinion: I purchased a few days this 35mm, 28mm f2.8 IS USM selling, which also has a view of a very good standard, since a moderate wide angle, like 35mm, has a focal length that are sure to use a lot more and meglio.rnLe very first impressions are really great: very well built, quiet and fast in the MAF; bright enough for any light condition. I use it on my 6D and is a perfect place between the other two fixed focal I own: the Zeiss Planar T * 50mm f 1.4 and the Canon ef 135mm f 2. I have already made some first impression even on blurred that, although it is a moderate wide angle, and thus not particularly intended to fuzzy 'pushed', is very soft and graduale.rnSono really happy with the purchase, as even the price, in time, fell to below 600 euro.rnConsigliatissimo as lens itself and also as a focal generally, for portraits settled, landscapes, urban photos. If I can give a vote, I would say a 9.8. |
 | sent on December 23, 2014 Pros: sharpness, IS, maf speed and low noise, color rendering Cons: hood, vignetting to ta Opinion: Very good lens for not being a series L. Construction cured, sharpness really high. Without IS sharpness improves ulteriormente.rnLa focus is always very prompt and accurate even in low light. It 'very silenzioso.rnOttica really performing with the only' neo 'a slight vignetting at the corners to TA. From f4 forward the problem disappears. rnVisto the cost and the presence of the stabilizer, compared to the more famous Canon and Sigma f1.4, is a best buy.rnL'attacco the original lens hood (optional) with retaining clip, is very well done. |
 | sent on November 07, 2014 Pros: Excellent construction, although not totally metallic, excellent auto focus and stabilizer quiet. Cons: Perceptible aberration barrel. Opinion: Fixed focal length lens very versatile. It provides excellent image quality and brightness coupled with the ability to focus very close (24 cm!) Widens even more creative potential. The blur is great. There is some barrel distortion where the best correction would have greatly increased the quality / price ratio of this goal. One feature I particularly like is the quietness of the stabilizer and its great utility during shooting both photos and especially video. In my opinion it should be a firmware update for the camera bodies (I mean the 5D Mark III but I guess for the other reflex) that did appear in the viewfinder and the LCD displays a warning that the stabilizer is activated. Often I leave it on even if you do not need and this increases the demand on battery power. The warning of active stabilization have it also compacts is very strange that this solution there is on the 5D. However, the noise ofllo stabilizer is a priority. Excellent and refined the focus manually without play and the "texture" comparable to the focus on the best targets vintage. Highly recommended. Rating 9 |
 | sent on October 12, 2014 Pros: Construction, sharpness in TA, autofocus another level compared to the previous version. Presence of the stabilizer. Cons: Cost. Presence of a TA in Coma night photos. No lens hood and soft custudia. Opinion: After you have learned to appreciate the 35 mm with the old version I decided to try this new model. rnPer regarding the construction we're on another level, by the impression of extreme solidity and sturdiness. E 'already very sharp wide open and use is able to return a fuzzy soft and pleasant which greatly enhances the detachment of the plans. Great for portraits ambientati.rnAmavo the colors of the old version, saturated and warm. This new version seems more neutra.rnLa presence of the stabilizer allows you to take home shots in other situations are difficult to obtain. The motor autofocus and fast and responsive, a completely different planet than the old version. All of these improvements, however, come at a price, dimensions are doubles as well as the weight, however, nothing dramatic especially when compared to the latest releases lenses on the market (and 35ART 50ART, Zeiss) .rnPurtroppo I have found a considerable amount of coma in TA in tests of night photos, which is reduced by stopping down but at this point I would not recommend it to chi was intending to use it primarily in these ambiti.rnL'assenza in kit lens hood and soft pouch is anachronistic, especially considering that at the time of launch it was a lens 800 euro, a price much out of business. Now it was around 500euro with a slight trend in the final ribasso.rnIn excellent lens for those who love the classic focal length and do not want to use in astrophotography. the presence of the stabilizer, and other improvements makes it an excellent upgrade from the old version but at a price even a hair high. If you find it used around 400 euro is a good buy. |
 | sent on September 23, 2014 Pros: Sharpness, stabilizer, color, construction. Cons: A bit cumbersome than the previous version, it 'hood, it' soft case (which amply deserving). Opinion: Purchased for bridging the gap between 50 1.8 and 24 2.8 IS, I immediately liked the sharpness of the image, as well as' the absence of chromatic aberrations. Beautiful colors. The construction and 'quality' high and has nothing to do with that of the model precedente.rnCio 'has resulted in an increase in size, but not at the level insopportabile.rnOttimo handyman on FF, streetlife, his views are forte.rnNota really out of tune: no lens hood and a custodia.rnNon you understand this trade policy that Canon seems to want to consider these lenses compared to standard B series L.rnSe one wants the hood has to spend big bucks (luckily there are commercial ones) , and it certainly does not bring many fans to the lenses prime.rnIo my choice I made and I am not sorry. |
 | sent on August 17, 2014 Pros: Size, brightness, stability, solid feel. Crisp, "three-dimensional". Easy to manage. Cons: Ergonomics: Manual focus ring just a little 'cramped and a bit' too far ahead, but it's a subjective question, and perhaps habit. Opinion: If I were forced to take a single fixed lens for my camera, for personal taste, without a doubt would take a 35mm. If you then tell me I can have it too bright, even f / 2, then all the better, in most the lens is well stabilized and at a fair price after all, when compared to that of other more famous optics. From this it can be used in different contexts and never looks good, you go from landscape to portrait, combined with the most modern cameras that have remarkable quality even at high ISO, allows you to exit tranqullamente at night and bring home good pictures ( handle permitting). Personally, I would not change for ever the older brother with the red line, bag and lens hood, which costs at least twice as much! Fair price, which so bright and equipped with optical stabilizer can boast a price lower than 600? |
 | sent on July 15, 2014 Pros: Optical quality and construction, excellent at all apertures. Right size and weight, well balanced, great stabilizer and fast maf Cons: For the money it costs could endow the hood. However, little bad because the hood is around 15 euro not original. Opinion: Objective of excellent quality, well-built and the price / quality ratio very favorable. Sadly, there paraluce.rnIn past I have had the old 35 f2, already great lens at an affordable price, but this new version is better in all respects vista.rnLa focal length puts him among the handyman tools: street, landscape, portraiture? In case you want to avoid clutter and weight, this light lets face it many situazionirndi recovery without regret the renowned L-series rnL'ho also tested on video and I can guarantee that is outstanding! |
 | sent on June 01, 2014 Pros: Very clear already at room temperature, the stabilizer can be used for the street at night, affordable price. Cons: Lack of hood Opinion: I took this lens by replacing the 40mm STM because I wanted the classic 35mm to street, I must say that the feeling is immediately born, a heavy coat but gets into the habit soon, very sharp upper fast AF, a purchase that I would recommend to tutti.rnUsato for portraits even without the red line of the L-series behaves very well, the fuzzy and creamy and delicate. |
 | sent on March 05, 2014 Pros: Very sharp, very good build quality, good color rendering is excellent. Cons: Not being an L series lens hood is not supplied as standard but you buy it as an accessory and costs fairly. Opinion: I come from the previous 35 mm f 2, the difference is mainly in the diaphragm 2: almost no distortion and more clarity, the new version is designed exhibits an optical unit with the latest technology, it has a massive barrel but not heavy. The sharpness is good already at full aperture in the center of the frame, closing the diaphragm gradually improves, f 4 is excellent. Stabilizer excels in low light situations and static subjects (still picture with times of 1/8 s) but with faster times than 1/60 the disinserisco, the focus I have never given a problem and I find it very efficient . The lens hood is essential as well as well-made and has a side button to unlock it, very easy to install and remove. good color rendering, in short, a view that fixed by satisfaction, allows you to take in all situations in a smooth and comfortable. great for street photography and reportage. Fortunately, the purchase price has been lowered to levels commensurate with the quality of the optics, buying it as soon as I came out I Pagator more. |
 | sent on December 17, 2013 Pros: Among the pros is certainly the lightness does not seem so great to see him but the goal, while very solid and very well built, it is definitely very light, not much heavier than the 50 1.4 it replaced. Sharpness already wide open, fuzzy creamy and is also used in the report, which is his field of choice. About the SI: I thought it was useless on a normal / wide angle but I have already solved a couple of shots with stationary subjects and in low light. Cons: for now the only cons is the stinginess of Mom canon. come on, the hood could put it in the box! the price is even more against a ... paid less than € 500 is a very good lens. Opinion: Shooting with fullframe ... ! Love at first click! I happened by the time a similar feeling. Since I discovered / decided that even for work - or at least for certain types of work - I can afford to use only the fixed, this 35 was the best buy for a few years now. It should be substituted for a good while and bright 50/1.4, focus with which I have never had a great feeling and is supplanting even my good 28 instead focus I still like very much. What can I say, it's perfect for the story. Coupled to the 5d2 without bg is perfect, not too flashy, very balanced. I have already said on the SI in the pro .. maybe perhaps lacks the weather sealing ... I have not yet used in the rain or in the snow (something that happened to me with other lenses), we will see how it behaves in everyday use. |
 | sent on October 21, 2013 Pros: Excellent sharpness, build quality while not an optical L Cons: Size, price, missing hood Opinion: As excellent optical performance and very fast autofocus. Dimensions exaggerated to be a 35mm F2, especially in relation to the size of the previous version. I notice that in the new lenses you go losing the sense of compactness, now a fixed lens also not too bright, approaching the size of some zoom losing one of its biggest advantages over the latter. The is is superfluous for my type of use, I would have preferred two versions, one without an IS and IS with costs and sizes. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
