Reviews and Problems with Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM
Showing 1-10 of 16
Gina Hoskins "Gina", Amazon
24 February 2015
Summary: Ok, so at first I didn't understand that you needed to have the macro lens attached to the wide angle lens in order for this to "work" I tried using it separately and was irritated that it would screw onto my lens and was ready to return it.
Excerpt: I loved this lens, problem was it had me questioning if I was going to get the shot in focus or not. I had some awesome pictures from this lens, and then some that would have be awesome if they would have been in focus.
Excerpt: This is a good lens, don't get me wrong. However, for the price I think you could do much better. The 50mm is by far the better lens. The 35mm had trouble focusing in low light, and was surprisingly slow. I found myself having to switch to manual focus quite a few times to get the right focus.
Pros: Durable, Easily Interchangeable, Rugged, Strong Construction
Excerpt: While not sharp wide open, still an amazing lens optically. Unfortunately the build quality is worse than the newest EF-S lenses. My particular copy also had a focus ring that was very sloppy, causing quite a bit of slack each time you reversed focus direction.
Pros: Consistent Output, Fast / accurate auto-focus, Nice Bokeh
Excerpt: This is a very good wide angle prime lens from Canon. The focal length is commonly one that can be a walk around lens. It is well balanced and easy to hold during shooting. The lens is not overwhelmingly sharp at the wide apertures but good bokeh. The corners are not so great at these apertures.
Excerpt: This is a great length for indoor people photography on crop cameras. Should be perfect for low light shots without flash. My copy has been to Canon twice and it is still blurry below 2.0. Those who get a good copy really like this lens, as would I if mine worked.
Excerpt: not as sharp as the cheaper 50mm 1.4L at wide open aperture. the lens performs well at f/2.0, but not worth the extra 800 bucks.their built quality are also inconsistent. had to return the first one, the quality was even worse.