How sharp is your 35L?

Photogaz

Photogaz

Messages
445
Edit My Images
No
I've had my 35L for six months which I bought second hand. I do love it but it's not as sharp as some samples I've seen and lacks some micro constrast.

Would be greatful for some 100% crops at f1.4 - f1.8.

Thinking of sending it to Canon for re-alignment.


full_14.jpg



crop_14.jpg
 
Last edited:
Photogaz said:
I've had my 35L for six months which I bought second hand. I do love it but it's not as sharp as some samples I've seen and lacks some micro constrast.

Would be greatful for some 100% crops at f1.4 - f1.8.

Thinking of sending it to Canon for re-alignment.
Click to expand...

have two and both are brilliant at 1.4

I did have one really soft copy that I sent back to the retailer. Will try and post some images
 
I don't think micro adjust will help as I also tried to manual focus with the same result. Focus it's spot on.

I've updated the original thread with an example at f1.4

Most shots, the lens is fine. It's distance subjects where I find the problem. There's just a lot of softness. Maybe I'm expecting too much.

I'm pretty sure when I first got it I did test and was happy. Now I'm pixel peeping though when I didn't before.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/ shows some CA at f1.4 but not the softness I get.
 
Last edited:
Photogaz said:
I don't think micro adjust will help as I also tried to manual focus with the same result. Focus it's spot on.

I've updated the original thread with an example at f1.4

Most shots, the lens is fine. It's distance subjects where I find the problem. There's just a lot of softness. Maybe I'm expecting too much.

I'm pretty sure when I first got it I did test and was happy. Now I'm pixel peeping though when I didn't before.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/ shows some CA at f1.4 but not the softness I get.
Click to expand...

Distance objects shot at f1.4.... That could be your problem. Your probably expecting too much by pixel peeping and shooting at the extremes of the lens performance.
 
hsuffyan said:
Distance objects shot at f1.4.... That could be your problem. Your probably expecting too much by pixel peeping and shooting at the extremes of the lens performance.
Click to expand...

To be honest, I was fine until I saw some samples of somebody elses on another forum and I was like wait, mine isn't that sharp.

Maybe I am expecting too much...which is why I posted samples.
 
Last edited:
That does look a bit soft if im honest. not even my nifty fifty is that soft wide open at f1.8


try a different subject
 
shoot more distant things at better light for a start. Do things on the left look as sharp as on the right? Many lenses ship defective, and a little help from the postman or a careful previous owner can also go a very long way to creating very buttery images even at f/8
 
Will look to post some more samples, but I'd appreciate some 100% crops from people.

I'm pretty sure mine has gone weird because my shots from July weren't as bad at f1.4. Though they were real world shots.
 
I too wasn't over impressed with my 35L sharpness wide open.
This photo was with a +10 micro adjust, which I found was the best I could get it. With closer targets the sharpness is much better, and I think the lens really is optimised for fairly close focus especially at 1.4
If I was shooting the below shot for anything other than test reasons, Id have been at f2+ probably.

5D3_2523.jpg


Another example
Full

full by futureal33, on Flickr

100%

100 by futureal33, on Flickr

Here is an example of where the lens is extremely sharp at 1.4


Samara & Mark by futureal33, on Flickr

It is a very hard lens to use... by far my most hit and miss lens... but when you hit, its great :)
 
futureal33 said:
I too wasn't over impressed with my 35L sharpness wide open.
This photo was with a +10 micro adjust, which I found was the best I could get it. With closer targets the sharpness is much better, and I think the lens really is optimised for fairly close focus especially at 1.4
If I was shooting the below shot for anything other than test reasons, Id have been at f2+ probably.

5D3_2523.jpg


Another example
Full

full by futureal33, on Flickr

100%

100 by futureal33, on Flickr

Here is an example of where the lens is extremely sharp at 1.4


Samara & Mark by futureal33, on Flickr

It is a very hard lens to use... by far my most hit and miss lens... but when you hit, its great :)
Click to expand...

Thank you! I would say that's exactly how my lens is. Over at another forum they have a sample archive and photos look killer but they are all web sized so its impossible to tell really.
 
Something has definitely gone wrong with the lens. I looked at photos from back in April and May when I first got it and they are sharp at f1.4. In fact they are outstandingly sharp.

I've not knocked it at all, so why would it suddenly go soft.
 
Last edited:
I've a 24/1.4 that gives shots a bit like this. Wide open it can sometimes be a bit mushy. I've a feeling that it tends to do this in backlit photos with a very high shutter speed - no idea why this might be the case but your photo of the woman in glasses is just the kind of shot where my 24mm would struggle. I took a load of photos of my wife in bright sun and binned everyone as the focus was awful. But the next week I took shots in overcast conditions and they came out fine. Probably user error, of course.
 
I keep trying but just can't get it sharp! All my test shots back in April as well as my actual photos are outstandingly sharp.

I called Canon Elstree who said it was odd for it to happen on its own.
 
Photogaz said:
Yay! Canon repaired it! £96 for replacement of lens rail replacement and re-alginemnt.

It's sharper than I've ever seen it!
Click to expand...

awesome, post some pics! :D
 
I'm desperately trying to decide between the Canon 35L or new Sigma 35mm f1.4 (which is getting outstanding reviews).

£850 from Panamoz for the Canon or
£700 for the Sigma UK sourced for their 3yr warranty...

Haven't bought a Sigma since the dark days of my 300D in the form of their 70-300, been a bit of a Canon purist since, but the all initial reviews of the Sigma are glowing...
 
Matholwch said:
I'm desperately trying to decide between the Canon 35L or new Sigma 35mm f1.4 (which is getting outstanding reviews).

£850 from Panamoz for the Canon or
£700 for the Sigma UK sourced for their 3yr warranty...

Haven't bought a Sigma since the dark days of my 300D in the form of their 70-300, been a bit of a Canon purist since, but the all initial reviews of the Sigma are glowing...
Click to expand...

Just want to check that you know the difference between the two? I've never used the sigma but have two canon ones and its my fave lens!
 
hsuffyan said:
Just want to check that you know the difference between the two? I've never used the sigma but have two canon ones and its my fave lens!
Click to expand...

Both are f1.4, the Sigma samples seen in reviews have been sharper than Canon's L, there's disagreement about which lens has the best bokeh. Both focus at about the same speed, but the Canon tends to be warmer than Sigma shots.

Some lens rental guy in the US compared the first one they received, and found it sharper than all 100+ versions of their Canon L (but could've been very lucky sample). Read three other reviews all glowing. But I've been lusting after the 35L since reading a thread here about a guy on holiday in NZ with the 5DmkII and 35L. Sold a load of equipment to fund it, and Sigma have bought out this lens to make my choice harder ;)

Canon international warranty, the sigma available from OSD for £560, but HK warranty (Sigma UK won't touch unless proof of import duty paid), so UK at £699 with 3yr warranty.
 
Matholwch said:
Both are f1.4, the Sigma samples seen in reviews have been sharper than Canon's L, there's disagreement about which lens has the best bokeh. Both focus at about the same speed, but the Canon tends to be warmer than Sigma shots.

Some lens rental guy in the US compared the first one they received, and found it sharper than all 100+ versions of their Canon L (but could've been very lucky sample). Read three other reviews all glowing. But I've been lusting after the 35L since reading a thread here about a guy on holiday in NZ with the 5DmkII and 35L. Sold a load of equipment to fund it, and Sigma have bought out this lens to make my choice harder ;)

Canon international warranty, the sigma available from OSD for £560, but HK warranty (Sigma UK won't touch unless proof of import duty paid), so UK at £699 with 3yr warranty.
Click to expand...

apologies, I hadn't realised that Sigma had brought out a 35 1.4. I stupidly thought it was the crop sensor version, the 30 1.4
 
Photogaz said:
Out of interest why do you have two?
Click to expand...

Cos I'm a gear snob!

Just kidding, one for me and one for Mrs. We shoot independently of each at times and we sold our 50 1.4's and put some new money into getting this lens. To us, its literally two or three paces forward and your field of view changes to match a 50.
 
hsuffyan said:
To us, its literally two or three paces forward and your field of view changes to match a 50.
Click to expand...

I'd keep hold of that copy, it defies the laws of physics :lol:

Seriously, the field of view can't change - it's fixed, no matter how many steps forward or back you take, it'll always look like a 35mm lens. Take a picture with a 35mm lens and 50mm lens from the same spot - move forward and take your '50mm' shot with the 35mm and the difference will be obvious. I don't mean to labour the point but the whole 'zoom with your feet' thing gets my goat :bang:
 
jpw said:
I'd keep hold of that copy, it defies the laws of physics :lol:

Seriously, the field of view can't change - it's fixed, no matter how many steps forward or back you take, it'll always look like a 35mm lens. Take a picture with a 35mm lens and 50mm lens from the same spot - move forward and take your '50mm' shot with the 35mm and the difference will be obvious. I don't mean to labour the point but the whole 'zoom with your feet' thing gets my goat :bang:
Click to expand...

No one said they'll be identical but back on the real world, I can live with what I see out of 35 and not have to carry a 50 as well :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top