05-04-2012, 10:28 AM
As BC states, the 35 F/2 is a great lens, exceptionally good, and even more so considering its price. Its only possible cons are indeed the pentagonal specular highlights if you don't like them, and possible the noise the AF-engine makes - it isn't USM, but the older AF-D drive. Very reliable, and quite accurate, just a little noisy.
Another alternative not yet mentioned, although that might be just above budget, is the Canon 28 F/1.8. The specimen I owned definitely did much better in real life shooting than the PZ test seems to indicate. Actually, it was better from an optical and AF POV than any of the three 85 F/1.8s I owned. The one I owned was usable from F/1.8, good at F/2, and excellent from F/2.2. And a lot less CA and/or PF than anything the 85 F/1.8 had on offer.
Finally, if you want a really great lens for a (short) standard lens on an APS-C body, see if you can stretch the budget a bit and try to get a (used) 24 F/1.4L Mk I. Rendering by this lens is really great, it does exceptionally well in difficult lighting conditions, plus bokeh for such a WA is really very good too. Prior to the introduction of the TS-E 24L Mk II and the 24L Mk II, it was the world champion in its class, and on APS-C I know it will hold its own against, e.g., a 24L II. I loved it on my 400D, 40D, 5D and 5D II, and only replaced it with a 24L II because I essentially was offered the price I paid new for it. The 24L II is very similar, but a little better on FF for a variety of reasons (less field curvature, less CA towards the corners).
With a bit of luck you might be able to pick up a good used 24L Mk I for about 600 to 700 euros.
HTH, kind regards, Wim
Another alternative not yet mentioned, although that might be just above budget, is the Canon 28 F/1.8. The specimen I owned definitely did much better in real life shooting than the PZ test seems to indicate. Actually, it was better from an optical and AF POV than any of the three 85 F/1.8s I owned. The one I owned was usable from F/1.8, good at F/2, and excellent from F/2.2. And a lot less CA and/or PF than anything the 85 F/1.8 had on offer.
Finally, if you want a really great lens for a (short) standard lens on an APS-C body, see if you can stretch the budget a bit and try to get a (used) 24 F/1.4L Mk I. Rendering by this lens is really great, it does exceptionally well in difficult lighting conditions, plus bokeh for such a WA is really very good too. Prior to the introduction of the TS-E 24L Mk II and the 24L Mk II, it was the world champion in its class, and on APS-C I know it will hold its own against, e.g., a 24L II. I loved it on my 400D, 40D, 5D and 5D II, and only replaced it with a 24L II because I essentially was offered the price I paid new for it. The 24L II is very similar, but a little better on FF for a variety of reasons (less field curvature, less CA towards the corners).
With a bit of luck you might be able to pick up a good used 24L Mk I for about 600 to 700 euros.
HTH, kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....