Back2Back: Canon 35/2 AND Hexanon 35/2 UC - Not a Versus Thread

RayPA

Ignore It (It'll go away)
Local time
3:42 PM
Joined
Jan 28, 2005
Messages
4,417
Location
The GOLDEN State
Just posting some back-to-back lens shots. I primarily look for contrast differences in lenses, and also bokeh. This was done very quickly, when I realized I had some time, a subject, a camera and both lenses. I tried to add some contrast in the shadows by draping the clean laundry in the background. Hey, it was laundry day, and it was available (my wife would kill me if she saw this)! 😎 Anyway, not even slightly scientific, but it helps me characterize the lenses. Hope it helps you.

Details:

Hexar RF
Fuji S400
Shot at f2
Same shutter speed
Lighting was overhead recessed halogens
Same scanner settings
No PS adjustments other than spotting and sizing to 72 dpi


see pics HERE
 
Last edited:
Hi Roland. Not a V2. I like the size of both these lenses. The extra knurling (?) on the Canon is nice, but it's hard to compare beyond that, one being so new and the other much older.

.
 
I think you should keep the Canon and maybe find a 50mm Rigid to go with it. There might be one in the classifieds. Better yet, maybe you could just trade the UC Hexanon for a 50mm Rigid. Maybe someone would like a M-mount version of the Nikkor 35mm f1.8 they already have. Who knows what possibilities are out there?

(Thanks for posting those. I find my Nikkor fish-scales at f1.8, but it's pretty much gone by f2)
 
Fish scale bokeh.. ah , this should reduce the price of the Canon 35mm f2 lens from now on.
 
Last edited:
It really is a shame that the bokeh of the Canon 35 f/2 is so naughty. The UC-Hexanon has a nice rendition, the Canon a more pleasing contrast.

I'd just keep both; the UC-Hexanon for indoors, the 35 f/2 Canon for outdoors.
 
Gabriel M.A. said:
It really is a shame that the bokeh of the Canon 35 f/2 is so naughty. The UC-Hexanon has a nice rendition, the Canon a more pleasing contrast.

I'd just keep both; the UC-Hexanon for indoors, the 35 f/2 Canon for outdoors.

I agree. Just know the limitations of your lenses and use them where the work best.

I think you should keep the Canon and maybe find a 50mm Rigid to go with it. There might be one in the classifieds. Better yet, maybe you could just trade the UC Hexanon for a 50mm Rigid. Maybe someone would like a M-mount version of the Nikkor 35mm f1.8 they already have. Who knows what possibilities are out there?
hmmm... the mind reels at the possibilities... 😉

Fish scale bokeh.. ah , this should reduce the price of the Canon 35mm f2 lens from now on.

prices aren't bad for the Canon 35/2


.
 
Do keep both until I get the 35/1.4, Ray. Then we can do a gas light
test including Summicron, the Noktons, the Color Skopar and the Ultron if you like 🙂
 
ferider said:
Do keep both until I get the 35/1.4, Ray. Then we can do a gas light
test including Summicron, the Noktons, the Color Skopar and the Ultron if you like 🙂

Sounds like fun. And I can throw in the Canon 35/2.8 and the Leica Summaron 35/3.5 lens into the test if you want to broaden it a bit. Oh, and a version 4 Cron as well.

-Randy
 
I'll throw in the Biogon. I think Raid has had enough of high volume comparisons for awhile, so thanks for taking this on Ray, we can't wait to see your results.
 
It's not new that the wide open bookeh of the Canon 35/2 is a little harsh. As with most older lenses pushed for contrast wide open. Try the 35/1.8 instead of, or the 35/1.5.
Both cheaper than the 35/2 UC-Hex.
Beside, except wide open the 35/2 is a fine and lightweight lens. With backlite it tends less to ghosting than all other Canon wideangle lenses plus the 35/1.7 and 35/2.5 Cosina/Voigtländer. So a 300-400 USD tag for this lens is justified from a user's standpoint.
The ZM-Biogon 35/2 plays in another league: Mount, size and design-wise.

cheers Frank
 
I`ll throw in some sexy pinup photo samples with my f1.8 35mm Canon

I just found a very clean one a few weeks ago - great Bokeh and crisp focus wide open on a RD-1 (was tested before I received it)

I`ll be working with it on a Canon 7s and real film

Tom
 
Back
Top Bottom