There is a choice now stood the Sigma 35mm 1.4, the Canon 35mm 1.4 L and the Canon 35mm 2.0 IS. The Sigma has a great advantage the great bokeh and has - when it dims Gate 2 - compared to the 35mm 2.0 a little sharpness advantage of but not really gigantic failure. The Sigma and the Canon L naturally have the advantage that you can take pictures with F1.4 when things get too much for dark or movements are to be frozen and not much light. Since the 35 IS 2.0 can of course not keep up, because the initial aperture is F2.0. The Canon L has compared to the Sigma 35mm and the IS has the disadvantage that the edges are quite soft. This can Sigma and the Canon 35mm 2.0 IS better. The bokeh or the highlights of the Canon L is in aperture from 2.8 angular and ugly, while the Sigma because conjures significantly rounder highlights. The 35 2.0 IS has the roundest highlights of all when the iris from f2.8. In general, the new 35er Canon magic a truly round, creamy bokeh.
Now we come to the first impressions: The new 35x is nice and light, but does not look cheap processed but quite dibasic. The dimensions are kept small and really nice compared to the 1,4er candidates it's just downright dainty. That is of course if you have long worked with the lens or on the road just do not want to carry around so much weight with you a real advantage. The focus is on maximum aperture really good and crisp, and the contrast performance is convincing from open aperture. One shortcoming in the KB is the significant vignetting at maximum aperture, but already significantly less pronounced at f2.8. Now the vignetting is an objective problem that quasi with one click from the world is to create via Lightroom and probably for most photographers thus not carry much weight. CAs and other similar errors fall in this lens of little consequence, since Canon has really done his homework, because the 35 L is in this discipline not so good. Also, the edges of which are significantly sharper than those that provides the Canon L. The IS is for static shots without a tripod, for example, for atmospheric shots in churches, at weddings, etc. a really great tool and works fine. Pictures 1/8 were not a problem, inasmuch as there is nothing to complain about.
Anyone who attaches importance to maximum exemption, of course a slight advantage (after all, a whole panel) with the Canon L and the Sigma. This can of course be back into perspective a bit, because 35mm is of course not necessarily the first choice for absolute exemptions, but there are other specialists. Who shoots mainly portraits, possibly even outside very often, and want to have maximum exemption, in my opinion, is not anyway around the squad Canon 50mm 1.2 L, Canon 85mm 1.2L II or Canon 135mm 2.0 L. If it should be a bit cheaper, accesses the photographer for Canon 85mm 1.8 or the Canon 50mm 1.4.
However, the 35mm focal length, I see rather than to always plan, as I said as an allrounder. This task Fulfill the 35 2.0 IS very good. Some criticisms remain, however:
- The rather high compared to the previous price. The very likely many potential customers belching sour, because it is precisely the predecessor was available at a fraction of the new lens. However, we must not forget here: The build quality is better, the AF is fast, silently and accurately, the lens is noticeably sharper than its predecessor and also contrast and to top it all, the Bokeh is colossally improved through the use of rounded fins. In my opinion, the lens is the price absolute value (currently 730 EUR), but also not a bargain. Only actually prohibits a comparison with its predecessor, since it is entirely different lenses which only coincidentally have the same focal length.
- Absence of the lens hood. That's a bit annoying, because that would really like Canon can spendieren with. However, the lens hood the practice is part of Canon L lenses only resolve not new, but it is a pity.
- The strong vignetting at maximum aperture, but is, as described above nowadays no problem and easy to walk on the software side.
Advantages of the new lens:
- Sharply from open aperture
- Contrast sharply open aperture
- Faster, quieter and more accurate AF thanks USM
- IS
- Lightweight and compact dimensions
If you now of course necessarily requires a F1.4 lens, I would rather recommend to Sigma 35 1.4 than the Canon, because the Sigma has a better bokeh and a better P / L ratio and is the more modern lens. In addition, the L tends with difficult backgrounds at a slightly more restless Bokeh. This issue has the 35 2.0 IS not, but the design of the Canon L also has a few years under their belts (15 years).
