Boy, I sure hope this guy is wrong.

insanefredinsanefred Registered Users Posts: 604 Major grins
edited October 7, 2010 in Cameras
Or just something wrong with his sample.

"The only thing that I disliked about the new 35G was the focusing speed. It is slow as a kit lens, slow like a 35mm f/1.8 DX or a 50G"
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=36511632

Slow like the 50 1.4G?! Man, I tell ya, that af speed of the 50 1.4G felt like a kick in the nuts. I can't imagine the 35mm 1.4G being that slow.
And don't get me started accuracy at the cost of speed. What's that point of accuracy if your lens can't even focus fast enough?

Honestly.... if this is the case... I will *gasp* consider switching to Canon.. :cry

Comments

  • cab.in.bostoncab.in.boston Registered Users Posts: 634 Major grins
    edited October 4, 2010
    Is my 35 f/1.8G slow? Seems pretty decent to me, but I don't have any "fancy" lenses, so I have nothing faster to compare it to.
    Father, husband, dog lover, engineer, Nikon shooter
    My site 365 Project
  • insanefredinsanefred Registered Users Posts: 604 Major grins
    edited October 4, 2010
    cab.in.boston wrote: »
    Is my 35 f/1.8G slow? Seems pretty decent to me, but I don't have any "fancy" lenses, so I have nothing faster to compare it to.


    For $200 it's more than decent, actually the AF is noticeably faster than the 50g 1.4G,

    However, for a $1800 lens... It better be faster than the 35mm f2D. Closer to the 24-70mm and 105mm VR
  • Matthew SavilleMatthew Saville Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 3,352 Major grins
    edited October 4, 2010
    This is definitely a huge concern I have. But before I draw a conclusion, I'll have to answer some personal questions- by whose standards is this guy calling the lens "slow"? Is it still going to feel lightning fast to ME? Or will I notice it too? And on which body? And is the grass any greener on the Canon side? The Canon 50 1.2 and 85 1.2 are SLUGS. The Canon 35 1.4 is snappier, but not ridiculously fast by any means. And the Canon 35 1.4 has huge issues with field curvature, most copies of the lens are completely useless for certain things like star pictures, etc. (You would think that focusing on stars is easy, they're all *EXACTLY* the same distance away from the camera so to speak. But in fact field curvature can completely ruin your shots any faster than f/5.6 or f/8... :-(

    So the jury is still out for me, until I can personally test the lens on a D3s, or at least a D700.

    And hopefully Nikon is currently working on some new AF technology breakthrough that will make this all seem petty. :-D


    =Matt=
    “My first thought is always of light.” – Galen Rowell
    My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
  • insanefredinsanefred Registered Users Posts: 604 Major grins
    edited October 4, 2010
    Matthew Saville wrote: »
    This is definitely a huge concern I have. But before I draw a conclusion, I'll have to answer some personal questions-

    And hopefully Nikon is currently working on some new AF technology breakthrough that will make this all seem petty. :-D


    =Matt=


    I concur.
    But I am still worried. I have really been looking forward to this lens since the announcement. 35mm is one of my all time favorite FL, I get MORE use out of my 35mm f2 than my 24-70, (smaller, lighter, sharper).
  • borrowlenses.comborrowlenses.com Registered Users Posts: 441 Major grins
    edited October 4, 2010
    Some of the comments in that thread are pretty funny. The wider lenses usually have slightly slower AF though -- at least compared to the 24-70 and the 70-200.
    http://www.BorrowLenses.com
    Your professional online camera gear rental store

    Follow us on Facebook
    http://www.facebook.com/borrowlenses
  • tarapachecotarapacheco Registered Users Posts: 21 Big grins
    edited October 5, 2010
    I swear, there's no pleasing anyone on dpreview. Love the reviews, but some of the forum threads... rolleyes1.gif
    Tara Pacheco Photography
  • NeilLNeilL Registered Users Posts: 4,201 Major grins
    edited October 5, 2010
    Matthew Saville wrote: »
    ... And the Canon 35 1.4 has huge issues with field curvature, most copies of the lens are completely useless for certain things like star pictures, etc. (You would think that focusing on stars is easy, they're all *EXACTLY* the same distance away from the camera so to speak. But in fact field curvature can completely ruin your shots any faster than f/5.6 or f/8... :-(=Matt=

    ????

    The EF 35mm f/1.4 L lens has significantly better sharpness (resolution and MTF) from f/2 to f/4 than the EF 35mm f/2 lens. Corner sharpness is very good if stopped down. The EF 35mm f/1.4 L is an excellent fast lens for wide field astrophotography and performs optimally at f/2.8. It is also a fast focusing lens when used for general photographic purpose. Performance is excellent at f/2 for non-astro photography. wlcastleman.com
    "Snow. Ice. Slow!" "Half-winter. Half-moon. Half-asleep!"

    http://www.behance.net/brosepix
  • Matthew SavilleMatthew Saville Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 3,352 Major grins
    edited October 5, 2010
    NeilL wrote: »
    ????

    The EF 35mm f/1.4 L lens has significantly better sharpness (resolution and MTF) from f/2 to f/4 than the EF 35mm f/2 lens. Corner sharpness is very good if stopped down. The EF 35mm f/1.4 L is an excellent fast lens for wide field astrophotography and performs optimally at f/2.8. It is also a fast focusing lens when used for general photographic purpose. Performance is excellent at f/2 for non-astro photography. wlcastleman.com
    Maybe if you get a perfect copy then the field curvature is gone by f/2.8 for stars, but I've had trouble finding "perfect copies" of this lens. My biggest memory is with a particular lens that was so tweaked, it was like using a TSE lens when shooting stars at f/1.4 or f/2.

    It's a great, sharp lens, but definitely not perfect.

    =Matt=
    “My first thought is always of light.” – Galen Rowell
    My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
  • NeilLNeilL Registered Users Posts: 4,201 Major grins
    edited October 6, 2010
    Matthew Saville wrote: »
    Maybe if you get a perfect copy then the field curvature is gone by f/2.8 for stars, but I've had trouble finding "perfect copies" of this lens. My biggest memory is with a particular lens that was so tweaked, it was like using a TSE lens when shooting stars at f/1.4 or f/2.

    It's a great, sharp lens, but definitely not perfect.

    =Matt=

    The lab reviews I've seen regard geometric distortion with this lens as not being a problem at all. Likewise chromatic aberration and astigmatism. On the other hand, coma is marked in corners (FF), which I can imagine would mar star shots. I have seen no discussion about quality control problems with this lens, no mention of bad copies, apart from yours here. The typical comment is how sharp it is from f1.4, and its ability to deliver the goods in low light, and wide angle pov. All particularly advantageous to wedding and event shooting. So, I find it hard to reconcile your hard punches at this lens, and in addition I'd ask which wa lens you think *is* "perfect" for star shots.

    Neil
    "Snow. Ice. Slow!" "Half-winter. Half-moon. Half-asleep!"

    http://www.behance.net/brosepix
  • Matthew SavilleMatthew Saville Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 3,352 Major grins
    edited October 6, 2010
    NeilL wrote: »
    The lab reviews I've seen regard geometric distortion with this lens as not being a problem at all. Likewise chromatic aberration and astigmatism. On the other hand, croma is marked in corners (FF), which I can imagine would mar star shots. I have seen no discussion about quality control problems with this lens, no mention of bad copies, apart from yours here. The typical comment is how sharp it is from f1.4, and its ability to deliver the goods in low light, and wide angle pov. All particularly advantageous to wedding and event shooting. So, I find it hard to reconcile your hard punches at this lens, and in addition I'd ask which wa lens you think *is* "perfect" for star shots.

    Neil
    Fair enough. Sounds like I just had bad luck with multiple lemons. Although I still doubt that the focal plane on the AVERAGE lens is perfectly flat, not at f/1.4 and infinity. Which is maybe too much to ask, but some day when I've got tons of money to burn, I'll read up on which fast wide primes have the most "star friendly" field curvature when shot wide open... Until then, I will certainly agree that I LOVE the 35 L for portraits and events. I've shot with two different copies of the lens on the 5D mk1 and 5D mk2, and each time it has been a dream of sharpness and bokeh. As long as I only need to focus on one thing at a time...

    =Matt=
    “My first thought is always of light.” – Galen Rowell
    My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
  • RichardRichard Administrators, Vanilla Admin Posts: 19,962 moderator
    edited October 6, 2010
    Can't say anything about astro, but FWIW, I got a 35L about a month ago and it has been on my camera ever since. iloveyou.gif
    My Pics
  • NeilLNeilL Registered Users Posts: 4,201 Major grins
    edited October 6, 2010
    Richard wrote: »
    Can't say anything about astro, but FWIW, I got a 35L about a month ago and it has been on my camera ever since. iloveyou.gif

    Congratulations, R! Yep, that sounds like the ole 35L refrain! Any shots to show?

    Neil
    "Snow. Ice. Slow!" "Half-winter. Half-moon. Half-asleep!"

    http://www.behance.net/brosepix
  • NeilLNeilL Registered Users Posts: 4,201 Major grins
    edited October 6, 2010
    Matthew Saville wrote: »
    Fair enough. Sounds like I just had bad luck with multiple lemons. Although I still doubt that the focal plane on the AVERAGE lens is perfectly flat, not at f/1.4 and infinity. Which is maybe too much to ask, but some day when I've got tons of money to burn, I'll read up on which fast wide primes have the most "star friendly" field curvature when shot wide open... Until then, I will certainly agree that I LOVE the 35 L for portraits and events. I've shot with two different copies of the lens on the 5D mk1 and 5D mk2, and each time it has been a dream of sharpness and bokeh. As long as I only need to focus on one thing at a time...

    =Matt=

    The points you raise about the particular challenges of astrophotography are certainly interesting and valid. When those tons of $$ fall on you, you'll probably get a handmade lens done to your specific requirements, which we'll find out about when we Google the "Saville infinity flat focal plane killer astro lens"!!rolleyes1.gif

    Neil
    "Snow. Ice. Slow!" "Half-winter. Half-moon. Half-asleep!"

    http://www.behance.net/brosepix
  • RichardRichard Administrators, Vanilla Admin Posts: 19,962 moderator
    edited October 7, 2010
    NeilL wrote: »
    Congratulations, R! Yep, that sounds like the ole 35L refrain! Any shots to show?

    Neil

    Most of the recent pics gallery link in my sig was shot with the 35L. Two that I posted on Dgrin and am particularly happy with are:

    http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=178166
    http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=1471601&postcount=47

    I'm still trying to get the hang of it, particularly at the widest apertures.
    My Pics
  • NeilLNeilL Registered Users Posts: 4,201 Major grins
    edited October 7, 2010
    Richard wrote: »
    Most of the recent pics gallery link in my sig was shot with the 35L. Two that I posted on Dgrin and am particularly happy with are:

    http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=178166
    http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=1471601&postcount=47

    I'm still trying to get the hang of it, particularly at the widest apertures.

    Thanks. Have you posted "Here's one" on S&PJ? It's nuts!!:D:D:Drolleyes1.gifiloveyou.gifbarb

    Neil
    "Snow. Ice. Slow!" "Half-winter. Half-moon. Half-asleep!"

    http://www.behance.net/brosepix
  • RichardRichard Administrators, Vanilla Admin Posts: 19,962 moderator
    edited October 7, 2010
    NeilL wrote: »
    Thanks. Have you posted "Here's one" on S&PJ? It's nuts!!:D:D:Drolleyes1.gifiloveyou.gifbarb

    Neil
    Yeah, that's where it lives. Thanks. thumb.gif
    My Pics
Sign In or Register to comment.