pro lenses

[HoppyUK]

The Canon 35L mk2 barrel is made of plastic though.

Canon 35/1.4 L Mk2 is an interesting case in point. It's one of Canon's newest and best-ever, and like many of the highest quality and most expensive lenses these days it has a plastic outer barrel. But this isn't a structural component and plastic saves both weight and cost, and is warmer to the touch in extreme conditions.

What's important is inside, and here the Canon 35/1.4 L Mk2 is as well made as any you'll find, with great attention to detail that's almost over-engineered to military grade. See this review, and links to the tear-down by Lens Rentals in Roger Cicala's blog https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-35mm-f1-4-ii/3

In contrast, some high grade lenses do have metal barrels and invariably score extra points in reviews because of it. A cynic might even say the decision to use metal was more marketing led, and it's certainly almost impossible to say how well made a lens actually is without pulling it apart.

 

[Raymond Lin]

Canon 35/1.4 L Mk2 is an interesting case in point. It's one of Canon's newest and best-ever, and like many of the highest quality and most expensive lenses these days it has a plastic outer barrel. But this isn't a structural component and plastic saves both weight and cost, and is warmer to the touch in extreme conditions.

What's important is inside, and here the Canon 35/1.4 L Mk2 is as well made as any you'll find, with great attention to detail that's almost over-engineered to military grade. See this review, and links to the tear-down by Lens Rentals in Roger Cicala's blog https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-35mm-f1-4-ii/3

In contrast, some high grade lenses do have metal barrels and invariably score extra points in reviews because of it. A cynic might even say the decision to use metal was more marketing led, and it's certainly almost impossible to say how well made a lens actually is without pulling it apart.

You made the point for me as I know that tear down article and have posted it in the past.

Thus plastic barrel is not indicative of "pro" lens. It's what's inside that counts.

 

[StevenS]

The professional comment on this lens is consistent in that it is the best fast 35mm SLR available, very sharp, but has a fundamental issue with spherochromatism. You can see this on test images online. They have tried to deal with this in the Mk2 with an additional filter and killed the bokeh. It really does look dull. So this lens will serve a purpose in being what you need for very low light or night-time photography, in particular astrophotography. For normal daylight use, there seems no point.

The reference is the Leica 35/f1.4, introduced in 1960. Optically, that model is probably better than this and Leica have improved upon it twice.

Apparently there are plastic internal elements, but optical issues are due to the optical design, not the physical construction.

If I was after a 35/1.4 SLR I'd probably get the Mk1 version. £1,800 for a not optically perfect lens sounds like a lot of money, the earlier version seems to be available for around £1,100. Perfection comes at a price - the Leica 35/f1.4 is £4,100 and I paid £2,100 for a second hand 50/f1.4.

 

[PhilH04]

Who really cares if a lens is 'pro' not (No such thing IMO)... Just get out and use the things

 

[john.margetts]

Who really cares if a lens is 'pro' not (No such thing IMO)... Just get out and use the things

Being seen with the best kit is important to some folk.

 

[viewfromthenorth]

So here's what happened when a 'pro' lens fell off the seat of a railway carriage onto the floor the other day...


17225 by viewfromthenorth on Talk Photography

Whether a lighter 'non pro' lens of plastic build would have faired any better is open to debate. The combined weight of the lens and camera body were heavy enough to cause it to hit the floor with sufficient impact to dent the filter ring. I can still screw filters in, but am a bit wary, and I can see it costing a few quid to repair The lens still seems to work fine though, I'm just a bit worried that if it takes another knock in my bag or something, the damaged chunk will come away and scratch the glass!

 

[kendo1]

So here's what happened when a 'pro' lens fell off the seat of a railway carriage onto the floor the other day...


17225 by viewfromthenorth on Talk Photography

Whether a lighter 'non pro' lens of plastic build would have faired any better is open to debate. The combined weight of the lens and camera body were heavy enough to cause it to hit the floor with sufficient impact to dent the filter ring. I can still screw filters in, but am a bit wary, and I can see it costing a few quid to repair The lens still seems to work fine though, I'm just a bit worried that if it takes another knock in my bag or something, the damaged chunk will come away and scratch the glass!

That bit can be replaced. Hopefully any shock damage has not affected the lens.

 

[chris malcolm]

Being seen with the best kit is important to some folk.

Years ago I bought an old 2nd hand lens which came with a Zeiss lens cap because the original had been lost. "ZEISS" was displayed in big bright blue letters right across the lens cap. I was amazed at how much more often the elite of the local camera club stopped by for a friendly chat. Until the word got around that I didn't actually have a Zeiss lens, just a Zeiss lens cap

 

[ABTog]

I certainly noticed when I moved from a kit 18-55 to a Sigma 18-50 f2.8 and then again when I moved up to a Canon "pro" L zoom.
But that move took a number of years during which my skill level increased.
Pro gear is nice, but experience and skill is also important.

Put it this way:
I am an enthusiastic DIY-er. I have a £15 set of chisels from Wickes.
If I try to use them to carve a dovetail joint, it'll take me quite a bit of time and will be a bit messy, with imprecise edges and not fitting precisely.
If I give you @Tekagudun (the joiner with 30 years experience) the same cheap set of chisels, you'll be able to create the dovetail joint in less time, make it neat with crisp edges and detail.
Now give me an expensive professional set of chisels, the joint isn't going to look any better, but give you the pro set of chisels and you'll likely find the task quicker, more enjoyable/less frustrating and the result maybe even crisper to your trained eye.

Simply put, better tools *can* be of benefit to people of all skill levels, but it's the skill that will make more difference to the result than the tool.