Got back my 35/2 from DAG

raid

raid

Dad Photographer
Local time
1:02 PM
Joined
Nov 2, 2005
Messages
36,603
Location
Florida
View My Gallery
I recently bought a Canon 35/2 with jammed aperture, and I mailed it off to DAG. Two-three weeks later, I got back the lens in mint- condition. It snaps into focus on my Canon P. I am dying to use it.

Could you share here your experiences with such a lens? Is it really "like the 35mm Summicron of its time"?

Thanks.
 
raid said:
Has anyone used side by side the Canon and a Summicron?
Click to expand...

The Canon is a nice lens. Small, compact and with good image quality. It compares very favorably to the Leica Summicron ASPH, even at full aperture. I found the Canon to be the equal of the Summicron in the center of the frame at F2.0, but the corners are noticeably softer. If you believe bokeh should be creamy soft, you'll hate the Canon (fish-scale like bokeh). I sold my Canon because I was dissatisfied with the build quality. Compared to the Summicron, the Canon appears to be cheaply made. A lot of play in the focusing and aperture rings. Still, if you want a quality, fast 35mm lens, you'll be happy with the Canon.

Jim B.
 
Bokeh is the main point of difference. Both the canon and crons are equally sharp to the average viewer.

Miss the size on that tiny bugger.
 
Mackinaw said:
The Canon is a nice lens. Small, compact and with good image quality. It compares very favorably to the Leica Summicron ASPH, even at full aperture. I found the Canon to be the equal of the Summicron in the center of the frame at F2.0, but the corners are noticeably softer. If you believe bokeh should be creamy soft, you'll hate the Canon (fish-scale like bokeh). I sold my Canon because I was dissatisfied with the build quality. Compared to the Summicron, the Canon appears to be cheaply made. A lot of play in the focusing and aperture rings. Still, if you want a quality, fast 35mm lens, you'll be happy with the Canon.

Jim B.
Click to expand...

I question whether, as a general matter, the Canon is cheaply made - that's not the reputation of this lens. My sample has no play in the focusing and aperture rings, and the focus is very smooth. The build quality is on par with the 35/1.8 and 50/1.8 I've got, which is to say excellent. Sample variation? I can't compare it to a summicron, but it's on par with my Rokkor 40/2 CLE which is supposed to be comparable to the 35 chron of the same era.
 
So the main two sources for complaints by some users are bokeh and craftmanship. I have to use ti lens to see its bokeh, but it feels rock solid to me after DAG did a repair plus CLA on it. Don did not caution me about its built. He would have told me to treat the lens with gloves otherwise. It is tiny indeed. Ince I already have other 35mm lenses, the Canon 35/2 will be used when I need a small (travel) lens with a "devilish sharp center". Using it on the M8 will give me a normal lens with overall sharpness across since we crop out the softer areas from the corners of the lens.

It could be that due to its age and due to luck, depending how it has been used the past 40-50 years, some lenses need repair. Stil, my lens cost me $400 repaired and cleaned, and it looks like a new lens.
 
raid said:
So the main two sources for complaints by some users are bokeh and craftmanship........
Click to expand...

My own thoughts is that Canon made every effort to make the 35/2.0 a lightweight lens. No question the extensive use of aluminum made it light, but, to me, it lacks the quality feel of my much heavier Canon 35/2.8. That lens, the chrome-on-brass version, which I still own, is a veritable jewel. I won't even bother to compare the build quality of the 35/2.0 to the Summicron ASPH.

I'm not the only person to mention the "looseness" some 35/2.0 lenses have. It may very well be due to sample variation, which in itself, is hardly an endorsement of Canon quality.

But hey, you bought the lens so enjoy it. I'm sure you'll love it. Optically, it's quite good. Just watch the bokeh.

Jim B.
 
raid said:
I recently bought a Canon 35/2 with jammed aperture, and I mailed it off to DAG. Two-three weeks later, I got back the lens in mint- condition. It snaps into focus on my Canon P. I am dying to use it.

Could you share here your experiences with such a lens? Is it really "like the 35mm Summicron of its time"?

Thanks.
Click to expand...
No, the W-Nikkor 35/2.5 is. (except for the 2.5 part.)
 
Well, the 35/2.8 is rock solid, but we cannot expect all lenses to appear as a metal block. I expect all Canon RF lenses to be of reasonably high quality of construction.

Mackinaw said:
My own thoughts is that Canon made every effort to make the 35/2.0 a lightweight lens. No question the extensive use of aluminum made it light, but, to me, it lacks the quality feel of my much heavier Canon 35/2.8. That lens, the chrome-on-brass version, which I still own, is a veritable jewel. I won't even bother to compare the build quality of the 35/2.0 to the Summicron ASPH.

I'm not the only person to mention the "looseness" some 35/2.0 lenses have. It may very well be due to sample variation, which in itself, is hardly an endorsement of Canon quality.

But hey, you bought the lens so enjoy it. I'm sure you'll love it. Optically, it's quite good. Just watch the bokeh.

Jim B.
Click to expand...
 
a little fish-scaling going on in the background (tp roll holder)

8065011363_216ff4097a_h.jpg
 
As far as loose focusing, I have a similar, earlier Canon 35/1.8 that developed a looseness after a year of hard use. Right when I was about to send it off for an adjust, a local lens guru friend said "have you tried tightening the back?" I didn't know what he meant, but went home and grabbed the lens. Sure enough, by grabbing a brass fixture at the rear and turning, it snugged down nicely, removing all play. Something to check. And at least the 35/1.8 has excellent build quality, and it's all brass.
 
I recently bought this lens (Canon 35/2 Type2). My kit was 28/50 and I never really thought that I needed another lens, but after seeing a few pictures taken with this lens I decided to give it a try. I really like the character (or ugly bokeh) of this lens. I only had it for a few weeks but I like it already. It's sharp enough in the centre, but corners are not that good. I can only compare it to Summicron 28 and M-Hexanon 50. Both are, surprise, sharper in the corners. Personally, I don't care much about corner sharpness. I was really surprised how small and especially how light it is. Mine has perfect glass and perfectly smooth focusing. Aperture ring is not as smooth as on my other two lenses, but no problems.


First shot to see if my lens has the 'character' I was looking for (it does 😀). This was on my M8 and I didn't have UV/IR filter yet:


sis 'n' bro by boachi, on Flickr

The rest are on film...

Ektar:


deep thoughts by boachi, on Flickr


rooftops by boachi, on Flickr


things will be less hairy from now on... by boachi, on Flickr



Some others taken with Canon 35/2 that I have on Flickr...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

farlymac
Leica IIIf Post DAG Overhaul Test
Replies
18
Views
2K
Godfrey
Godfrey
L
How to improve rangefinder readability
Replies
11
Views
952
rick oleson
R
Miles.
What just came back from repair?
2 3 4
Replies
72
Views
4K
qqphotos
qqphotos
A
Fast mid-long zooms - why not?
Replies
18
Views
658
Ko.Fe.
Ko.Fe.
C
HELP - Broken Ricoh FF-1s
Replies
3
Views
333
p.giannakis
p.giannakis
Back
Top Bottom