I've been shooting with this lens since I was a kid. I inherited this lens with my father's camera gear (5dmkii) after he passed. Not a lot of people know about this lens. I even called a Canon warehouse in California, and the lady said that she couldn't find that model lens in their database, and had no clue what I was talking about... I recently just switched camera systems & have finally retired my father's camera gear. Thank you for making this video about the 35-350mm pull focus lens. It's still one of my favorites to this day. -CHRIS*STARR 🤓❤️✌️
Hi, many thanks! Another lens from this area is the Canon EF 4.5-5.6/100-400mm L IS USM which I purchased from a Japanese reseller some years ago. It features image stabilization (3 stop compensation) and I made really great images with it! Highly recommend! Best wishes from Germany, Ralf
@@SMGJohn lack of IS which is a legitimate complaint. complaints dont mean the product is bad. it means it has room for improvement which some people dont get
@@F59PHI I do not see the complaints still, almost every camera these days have IBIS which negates the need of IS, people complaining about lack of IS in an almost 30 year old lens, LOL
@@SMGJohn I’ve got a canon 100-400 l which they started making in 1998 which does have is so it’s not unheard of. If you want something similar with stabilization just go for the 28-300mm l is usm
@@F59PHI Sure, but thats not going to a relative wide to telephoto like the 35 to 350mm does. I understand people want to complain but in the 1990s, the technology to stabilise such a lens, was not invented. 100 to 400mm is relatively simple element design wise. And therefore VASTLY easier to stabilise internally.
When I saw this video I had to look on eBay immediately and I foudn it for a little over 400, it's supposed to be in good condition, I'll pair it with a Canon R5. I can't wait to get it.
@@eszeezee6967 It is very useful for trips, I will definitely take it on trips sometime. Mine is in good condition, clean lenses, but not as sharp as other L lenses.
The optical performance is better than I expected from an old superzoom. That is a pretty neat find. The ability to get really close with the lens is also stunning for pseudo-macro. For flying without checked bags, the size of the lens and weight of the lens isn't as nice. Something like the 12-100mm or 12-200mm by Olympus (read: 24-200mm and 24-400mm in 135 format angle of view) is more travel-sized. Plus, I could throw in an f/1.8 or f/1.2 prime for low light and still be able to pack more than if I flew with the 35-350.
My father handed me his box of Canon lenses and his camera today and asked me to sell it or use it. I am pretty sure this is one of the lenses that was included in the box. I've been reaching out to people to try to get prices on the lenses from the box. This video really makes me want to shoot on it!
EF glass is criminally underrated these days, thanks to mirrorless all of this is suddenly 'old tech' and people are selling it for next to nothing what it used to be. Which is always quite funny to me, but still, its pretty amazing to be able to safe so much money on what essentially still is amazing glass, sure its not up to par with RF lenses which are clinical and super sharp not quite sure why people want that unless they are architecture or landscape photographers, but you know, gotta do some improvements to justify the prices on the RF glass I guess.
Such a cool video, and another cool part about old EF lenses is that pretty much every mirrorless system can easily adapt and use them. They are like the universal format, and you'll never be trapped into a system. People whine about adapters versus "native" glass and I've never seen a review that actually proves "native" glass is actually faster to focus.
"Mint" in Japanese terms means the lens is like new. There might be a little chipped paint somewhere but that's it. I have this lens as well and it is the only one I carry everywhere.
same. Mine has a glitch, and there are no parts available for it anywhere. Buying either a second from Adorama, right now, or another 28-300 (yeah I've had both it and it's replacement... love these lenses) On a side note, allegedly Canon has filed a patent for an RF version of this lens.
Some of these old lenses are great. I shoot a lot of vintage glass that is pushing 70 years old. If you know the lens design, correcting for distorting and CA is easy. The best part about the older Canon lenses is that the correction data is built right into some processing software packages.
I walked past a 2nd hand camera shop last night, saw it in the window, and this morning I immediately went and bought it. I didn't know this lens existed. From a test photowalk every image came out pleasing and it was fun to use. I shoot events in low light and I'd still use my RF 70-200 f2.8 for that, but for any kind of event or reporting in good light this 90s lens is impressive.
Actually I really didn't know about this one. The 28-300L came to my mind when I saw the thumbnail. Those "outlier" lenses often perform really good. I took the old 20-35 2.8L on vacation and it didn't disappoint. Another prime example would be the 100-300 5.6L push-pull zoom. Sharp, very little CA, light and cheap - just not that robust.
Hehe have had mine for a least 20 years, mainly for walking round the pits a motor race's but it works well for track work as well. You should also take a look at the 80-200 F2.8 (magic drainpipe) the glass in that is soooooooo good.
Ughhhh, I just sold my Canon 70-20mm f/4L and I am regretting it! Bought that over 30 years back as well and it was one of my favorites, with ample sharpness and contrast, and fast as hell focusing. That 35-300mm might just soothe my soul, needing that bit more reach!
I have this lens as well and love it. I think of taking this lens on a walkabout on a trail where you can take photos of just about anything you desire (macro, landscape, birds, wildlife and etc.). It's heavy but I still love shooting with it on my 1D Mark IV and 7D Mark II.
I love this lens! It was universally hated when it came out and i could never quite figure out why. Sadly I rarely pick up my canon 1DMk2 (!!) but when i do, this lens is a joy to shoot with!
Thanks for the review, I'm curious if this would resolve the R7's 32MP sensor. It's a really interesting focal length range, as a birder is it fast enough?
Well, you have convinced me to pick one up for my r7! I'll report back if I remember to ;p Ordered a 'mint' quality one from one of the sellers in Japan.
Lens is interesting for the focal range, my concern is the sharpness and resolving power, I had the ver I of the 100-400L and it to me didn't perform the best on my 90D, R7 and R6MII. But I am thinking of getting this lens for my 70D that gets used once in a great while. Kinda regretting selling my Sigma 150-600 now since my EF range is limited to 200mm now..sigh..
@@JohnnyMcPro as an owner of the 28 to 300 it works exceptionally well with the R6 Mark II. And if I think it produces a quality image and video then I can only assume the 35 to 350 is even superior
Great video man. And you are right, I had no idea this lens existed 😂. The only thing holding me back is the lack of IS (I film with a c200) but that's a fantastic range and the image is great
@@JohnnyMcPro what I'm most curious about is that the right upper corner is in focus - the branches in the background, but the other trees in the center and left aren't in focus. So is the lens crooked, a lens element crooked or can the sensor tilt while stabilizing? I have seen that with my own Sony camera multiple times with different lenses and it drives me nuts.
@@sulev111 argh. I have noticed that it's often the focusing group that has some play, i.e. it can shift and rotate a bit when you shake the lens or just pull focus back and forth. The other thing is that most lens mounts have a little bit of play too and may also allow the lens to shift slightly.
I don’t see why it wouldn’t! I bet it works perfectly on the photo side of things. I don’t shoot Sony, but heard that EF lenses don’t have AF when doing video.
Don't know, but it works with a Metabones adapter on Olympus (MFT). It's sharp/pretty good resolution for a (old) superzoom, but not compared to a good quality 70-200 or 100-400.
@@JohnnyMcPro wow thanks, how is it hardly anyone knows about this lens, i dont think its because it old, i knew about the 28-300. Great review, you seriously changed my mind from buying the 100-400 v11, it cant be that much sharper and the range is unheard of.
Sharp, cheap and old is right down my alley!
I've been shooting with this lens since I was a kid.
I inherited this lens with my father's camera gear (5dmkii) after he passed.
Not a lot of people know about this lens.
I even called a Canon warehouse in California, and the lady said that she couldn't find that model lens in their database, and had no clue what I was talking about...
I recently just switched camera systems & have finally retired my father's camera gear.
Thank you for making this video about the 35-350mm pull focus lens.
It's still one of my favorites to this day.
-CHRIS*STARR 🤓❤️✌️
Hi, many thanks! Another lens from this area is the Canon EF 4.5-5.6/100-400mm L IS USM which I purchased from a Japanese reseller some years ago. It features image stabilization (3 stop compensation) and I made really great images with it! Highly recommend! Best wishes from Germany, Ralf
It's a bit sad how people can complain about the smallest things and not appreciate the enormouse effort it took to make it this good.
Are you a bot? Cause I aint seeing the complaints.
@@SMGJohn lack of IS which is a legitimate complaint. complaints dont mean the product is bad. it means it has room for improvement which some people dont get
@@F59PHI
I do not see the complaints still, almost every camera these days have IBIS which negates the need of IS, people complaining about lack of IS in an almost 30 year old lens, LOL
@@SMGJohn I’ve got a canon 100-400 l which they started making in 1998 which does have is so it’s not unheard of. If you want something similar with stabilization just go for the 28-300mm l is usm
@@F59PHI
Sure, but thats not going to a relative wide to telephoto like the 35 to 350mm does.
I understand people want to complain but in the 1990s, the technology to stabilise such a lens, was not invented.
100 to 400mm is relatively simple element design wise. And therefore VASTLY easier to stabilise internally.
OMG I love that you got it in a box. In my experience, Some people in Japan buy things like this to collect them. Same for golf clubs and other items.
When I saw this video I had to look on eBay immediately and I foudn it for a little over 400, it's supposed to be in good condition, I'll pair it with a Canon R5. I can't wait to get it.
Have you gotten it? How is it?
@@eszeezee6967 It is very useful for trips, I will definitely take it on trips sometime. Mine is in good condition, clean lenses, but not as sharp as other L lenses.
It's been my daily driver for 2 years now, from a Canon 7d, to an R6m2, and now onto a 5dii
The optical performance is better than I expected from an old superzoom. That is a pretty neat find. The ability to get really close with the lens is also stunning for pseudo-macro.
For flying without checked bags, the size of the lens and weight of the lens isn't as nice. Something like the 12-100mm or 12-200mm by Olympus (read: 24-200mm and 24-400mm in 135 format angle of view) is more travel-sized. Plus, I could throw in an f/1.8 or f/1.2 prime for low light and still be able to pack more than if I flew with the 35-350.
The OM system is really nice for travel! Such a small package paired with incredible image quality!
My father handed me his box of Canon lenses and his camera today and asked me to sell it or use it. I am pretty sure this is one of the lenses that was included in the box. I've been reaching out to people to try to get prices on the lenses from the box. This video really makes me want to shoot on it!
EF glass is criminally underrated these days, thanks to mirrorless all of this is suddenly 'old tech' and people are selling it for next to nothing what it used to be.
Which is always quite funny to me, but still, its pretty amazing to be able to safe so much money on what essentially still is amazing glass, sure its not up to par with RF lenses which are clinical and super sharp not quite sure why people want that unless they are architecture or landscape photographers, but you know, gotta do some improvements to justify the prices on the RF glass I guess.
Such a cool video, and another cool part about old EF lenses is that pretty much every mirrorless system can easily adapt and use them. They are like the universal format, and you'll never be trapped into a system. People whine about adapters versus "native" glass and I've never seen a review that actually proves "native" glass is actually faster to focus.
"Mint" in Japanese terms means the lens is like new. There might be a little chipped paint somewhere but that's it. I have this lens as well and it is the only one I carry everywhere.
same. Mine has a glitch, and there are no parts available for it anywhere. Buying either a second from Adorama, right now, or another 28-300 (yeah I've had both it and it's replacement... love these lenses) On a side note, allegedly Canon has filed a patent for an RF version of this lens.
Some of these old lenses are great. I shoot a lot of vintage glass that is pushing 70 years old. If you know the lens design, correcting for distorting and CA is easy. The best part about the older Canon lenses is that the correction data is built right into some processing software packages.
I walked past a 2nd hand camera shop last night, saw it in the window, and this morning I immediately went and bought it. I didn't know this lens existed. From a test photowalk every image came out pleasing and it was fun to use. I shoot events in low light and I'd still use my RF 70-200 f2.8 for that, but for any kind of event or reporting in good light this 90s lens is impressive.
How much did you end up paying for it? I'm trying to price my fathers old lens collection and this is one of them
There realy is no other lens anywhere in the univers at any price from any other brand. Respect to Canon.
Actually I really didn't know about this one. The 28-300L came to my mind when I saw the thumbnail. Those "outlier" lenses often perform really good. I took the old 20-35 2.8L on vacation and it didn't disappoint. Another prime example would be the 100-300 5.6L push-pull zoom. Sharp, very little CA, light and cheap - just not that robust.
nice lens . it is usefull for close and far away photos in one single lens. it is great.
Yea, it's amazing what all you can do with this one lens!
Hehe have had mine for a least 20 years, mainly for walking round the pits a motor race's but it works well for track work as well. You should also take a look at the 80-200 F2.8 (magic drainpipe) the glass in that is soooooooo good.
I've heard the magic drainpipe is leagendary!
Two thumbs up on the lenses from ebay sellers in Japan. Great deals, and the shipping has been lightning fast in my experience.👍👍
Ughhhh, I just sold my Canon 70-20mm f/4L and I am regretting it! Bought that over 30 years back as well and it was one of my favorites, with ample sharpness and contrast, and fast as hell focusing. That 35-300mm might just soothe my soul, needing that bit more reach!
Planning on purchasing one soon for my R5. I want to use it for field sports like soccer
I have this lens as well and love it. I think of taking this lens on a walkabout on a trail where you can take photos of just about anything you desire (macro, landscape, birds, wildlife and etc.). It's heavy but I still love shooting with it on my 1D Mark IV and 7D Mark II.
Sweet! Have you tried it with a mirrorless body yet?
I'm gonna get it for my 1Dmkiv as well. There's nothing like it.
I love this lens! It was universally hated when it came out and i could never quite figure out why. Sadly I rarely pick up my canon 1DMk2 (!!) but when i do, this lens is a joy to shoot with!
I always called these "pump zooms".. I may try this one..
Thanks for the review, I'm curious if this would resolve the R7's 32MP sensor. It's a really interesting focal length range, as a birder is it fast enough?
Great discovery ! Although I am a sony sooter. Love from Bangladesh
You can use this lens on Sony! You just need a metabones or Sigma MC-11 adapter.
Well, you have convinced me to pick one up for my r7!
I'll report back if I remember to ;p
Ordered a 'mint' quality one from one of the sellers in Japan.
Lens is interesting for the focal range, my concern is the sharpness and resolving power, I had the ver I of the 100-400L and it to me didn't perform the best on my 90D, R7 and R6MII. But I am thinking of getting this lens for my 70D that gets used once in a great while. Kinda regretting selling my Sigma 150-600 now since my EF range is limited to 200mm now..sigh..
Nice lens
They also made the 28-300mm f3.5-5.6 L
I was looking for this comment
yea, that one has IS too, but I heard the optical perfomance may not be as good (based on forum comparisons)
@@JohnnyMcPro as an owner of the 28 to 300 it works exceptionally well with the R6 Mark II. And if I think it produces a quality image and video then I can only assume the 35 to 350 is even superior
Great video man. And you are right, I had no idea this lens existed 😂. The only thing holding me back is the lack of IS (I film with a c200) but that's a fantastic range and the image is great
I ended up getting the 28-300L IS, it's almost double the price though, but for me I wanted IS
Got mine in 2009 ,mounted on my 7D
I just got one and just like so far big downside for me is no image stabilization
What are your thoughts on the image at 3:51? What is going on with the focus?
checking the actual file, looks like the R5 failed eye-AF and focused on the grass behind the people (which is in focus)
@@JohnnyMcPro what I'm most curious about is that the right upper corner is in focus - the branches in the background, but the other trees in the center and left aren't in focus. So is the lens crooked, a lens element crooked or can the sensor tilt while stabilizing? I have seen that with my own Sony camera multiple times with different lenses and it drives me nuts.
@@sulev111 argh. I have noticed that it's often the focusing group that has some play, i.e. it can shift and rotate a bit when you shake the lens or just pull focus back and forth. The other thing is that most lens mounts have a little bit of play too and may also allow the lens to shift slightly.
What brand cage are you using? Great video!
Awesome video
Gracias por la información, me encantaría tener este lente.
Is it possible to use a 1.4x or 2.0x teleconverter with this lens and the R5? I know it may not be ideal, but I have a specific application in mind.
According the Canon web site no. You could probably use a 3rd party extender, but I doubt you would be happy with the results.
21 elements in 15 groups. Interesting.
Do you think that this would be good for aviation photography matched with a 7D MKII?
Yes! would be good since you have one lens to do everything! especially when you have good light.
Does it work with a metabones V and a Sony body?
I don’t see why it wouldn’t! I bet it works perfectly on the photo side of things. I don’t shoot Sony, but heard that EF lenses don’t have AF when doing video.
Don't know, but it works with a Metabones adapter on Olympus (MFT). It's sharp/pretty good resolution for a (old) superzoom, but not compared to a good quality 70-200 or 100-400.
@@frstesiste7670 optically, yea, won't be as good as a 70-200 or 100-400, but very impressed how it performs on modern day mirrorless high MP cameras!
I feel old. Thought 30 years where in the 80s
how is the sharpness at the long end
The bird at 3:34 was shot wide open at 350mm
@@JohnnyMcPro wow thanks, how is it hardly anyone knows about this lens, i dont think its because it old, i knew about the 28-300. Great review, you seriously changed my mind from buying the 100-400 v11, it cant be that much sharper and the range is unheard of.
It's sharp?
for wildlife? it is good?
Not really. Focal length is too short.
The 150-600mm lenses from Sigma or Tampon are a better choice for wildlife.
It is good for Brid photography??
On apsc with a camera that has good sensor shift image stabilization, definitely yess.
It's not bad, but a 400mm f5.6 would be better.
"old school" *looks at my FD canon L lens*
and if you really want to blow your mind with it? Go shoot flowers, etc. at 300mm, 10' off the camera, that 5.6 Hawg, yield f/1.2 Bokeh.
But it's quicker to say woo woo woo ;)
Dude
£500 is NOT cheap sorry....
For this kind of a lens it is, compared to the competition.
The 28-300 from canon, new, is about 2900 dollars in europe.
Damn cool lens i need this for video shoot