Canon Zoom Lens EF 35-80mm 1: 4-5.6 Ultrasonic Review

For the opportunity Zoom Lens EF 35-80mm 1: 4-5.6 Ultrasonic many thanks to Mikhail Rybak, who sent I have a lens from another area.

Canon Zoom Lens EF 35-80mm 1: 4-5.6 Ultrasonic Review

Canon Zoom Lens EF 35-80mm 1: 4-5.6 Ultrasonic Review

Canon Zoom Lens EF 35-80mm 1: 4-5.6 Ultrasonic or simply, Canon EF 35-80mm F / 4-5.6 USM - very lightweight and compact full-time zoom for full-length film cameras. There are 5 lenses of the Canon EF 35-80 series:

  • This is a USM version with an ultrasonic motor. This version is presented in this review.
  • Canon EF 35-80 (I) version, has an MDF of 37 cm.
  • Canon EF 35-80 II version
  • Canon EF 35-80 III version (USM, I, II, III versions have the same optical design with 8 lenses in 8 groups)
  • and the Canon EF 35-80 PZ version with a zoom motor and other optical circuitry

Nowadays, the Canon Zoom Lens EF 35-80mm 1: 4-5.6 Ultrasonic is nothing special, but you should pay tribute to the really quiet focusing of the lens and its super compactness. The lens weighs only 170 grams, it is only 50 grams heavier than fifty dollars Canon EF 50mm F / 1.8 II. True, the lens mount is plastic.

Optical design Canon Zoom Lens EF 35-80mm 1: 4-5.6 Ultrasonic

Optical design Canon Zoom Lens EF 35-80mm 1: 4-5.6 Ultrasonic

The lens has an average auto focus speed when focusing front lens rotates and drives forward. This is the usual focus method for low-cost full-time lenses. The focus ring rotates 90 degrees. Auto focus with my copy of Canon EF 35-80mm F / 4-5.6 USM on Canon 350D just terrible, the lens constantly misses when focusing, sometimes it simply refuses to focus, 'thinks' and cannot go to focus at all. And the worst thing is the focusing ring is just the front lens frame lens, even without rubber seals or streaking. When focusing manually at 50mm focal length, the 'focus ring' is very narrow and awkward.

The only advantage of the focusing system is a small MDF, which is only 38 centimeters. The lens aperture has a total of 5 blades. The zoom ring is rubberized, the diameter of the front filter is only 52mm.

Sample photos:

Everything is filmed on Canon 350D without processing. The lens, to my surprise, produced good image quality when used on Canon APS-C cameras. Distortion and vignetting are almost invisible, sharpness is normal. The lens can catch strong glare in backlight. Good contrast and even good bokeh.

Personal impressions

This is one of the worst auto focus lenses I've ever used. And the depleted manual focus ring does not cause any sympathy. Perhaps I didn’t get the most successful copy of the review, who used this lens, please write in the comments.

Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.


Canon EF 35-80mm F / 4-5.6 USM is a very compact and lightweight lens, very cheap at flea markets. For cropped cameras, it is of little interest, and for users of full-frame cameras, I would recommend getting something more decent. Of the shortcomings of the Canon EF 35-80mm F / 4-5.6 USM, I want to highlight the bad (not slow, but bad) autofocus.

Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram

Add a comment:



Comments: 30, on the topic: Canon Zoom Lens EF 35-80mm 1: 4-5.6 Ultrasonic review

  • RSA

    There is an LED next to the focus mode switch, what is it for? I've never met anything like this before.

    • Alexey

      This is not an LED, but a mark of docking with the camera mount. There is also a red circle on the camera mount

    • Yaroslav

      This is not an LED, but a mark for connecting the lens to the carcass :-)

    • NikitosZs

      The mark is white if the lens is for crop matrices and red if for full-frame.

  • Alexander

    On KENON 1100D, autofocus is acceptable in principle, it is deflected on black and fairly dark surfaces, noticeably worse than the EF-S18-55 whale by autofocus, oberations are very strong, but weight, size and price are acceptable, more correct color reproduction (at least of my copy ) than that of the native EF-S18-55 whale and EF-50.1.8II, it is quite sharp enough on all diaphragms, in the prince if it is completely normal glass for the first case. As for me, the EF-S18-55 is better than a whale, but nothing more.

    • NikitosZs

      Use an eerily dark full-frame lens on a crop matrix .... This is horror)) Do you yourself see anything in the viewfinder? Even your whale will be lighter than this miracle of technology.

      • French

        just got a bad option, mine works quickly and quietly. the focus "grabs" instantly, does not "replete", is no worse than the other objekiv ...

  • Initiator)

    Yes, it is, all of the Canovian optics are very bad, just awful, no matter how, well, they don’t fit into any gates, why, just do it at all ???

    • Albert

      If you have hands from the fifth point, then Nikon, Sony, Pentax and the rest will not work for you either =)

    • Gene jb

      This is an old optics for film; compatibility with a number does not imply accuracy and full usability.

      • Denis

        And what is the difference between the principles of autofocus in film and digital SLR? But there are no differences. Exposure metering and autofocus work the same way, the lens mount is the same (I'm talking about Canon EF), so they are compatible and the accuracy will not differ.

  • Gene jb

    A small aperture, so autofocus. whale 18-55 and captive 28-80 are not better.

  • apd

    Arkady, you are just out of luck with this lens. I recently bought a Canon Zoom Lens EF 35-80mm 1: 4-5.6 III, for 1000r, the state of the new, I wanted a small, light zoom for a full frame (EOS-5D), so as not to always carry heavy and large 24-105, catchy. First impressions are favorable, focusing is fast and accurate, without unnecessary noise, although not USM, the worker is already at an open aperture and at all focal lengths. Certainly inferior 24-105 in sharpness and contrast, it’s soft on the open, but I even like it. At aperture 8.0 becomes perfectly sharp across the field. It does not work against light. Liked more than 28-80 3.5-5.6. He shot reportage portraits on an open aperture, without lifting the apparatus to his eyes, in an electric train against the windows, everything turned out very worthily and without mistakes. In the landscapes on f.4.0 at the edges of the sharpness reduction, had to cover up to 8.0. For its price, the lens is very decent.

    • Sergei

      Where did you buy this lens? And where can I buy it at all?

  • Valentine

    Will the lens fit from a film canon eos rebel xs 35-80mm to a digital canon 1100d 18-55mm

    • Alexander

      Read above in the comments.

  • Alexander

    Quite a good lens, it focuses normally if there is a point of contact, even in low light. On a uniform surface does not focus at all, "zhik-zhik", back and forth. By closing the aperture over 7,1, you get decent sharpness, even very much. The lens is stable in its result, the pictures are good. I say after prolonged use at 10D and 20D.

  • Emigrants

    Having seen sharp at short shutter speeds or a tripod and aperture above 7, but there are a lot of such glasses. The advantage is that it does not require an adapter for digital technology (Canon EOS 550D), a ridiculous price and weight. The usual KIT 18-55mm bypasses it in everything. I would not buy it, they just gave it to me.

  • Olya

    But he does not fit on nikon?

    • Dmitry K


  • Victor

    yes ... Ark, the focus ring is terrible ... the image rattles when focusing)

  • anonym

    How To Hack A Canon 35-80mm f / 4-5.6 To Shoot Macro

  • Boris

    Hello Arkady! Thank you for the site! He gained invaluable experience for himself.
    For the sake of interest, I purchased this lens at a flea market in very good condition for 1 tr. without lids the truth (it does not matter).
    I put it on my 550d and you know a miracle:
    1. Focusing is clear without misses.
    2. The image is moderately saturated and the contrast pleases the eye.
    3.And he is quiet))
    In my opinion (someone may disagree) a little better than my whale 18-55, but the angle in the whale is still greater for the premises. In the future I want to try canon 10-22 instead of a whale, I want to hear your opinion Arkady on this subject as the price bites.
    For the street, in principle, 35-80 will go. I'm pleased with the purchase. Ridiculous price, lightness and noiselessness ... We will look further what will happen.
    Thank you.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Add good shots from it here. And just make sure that this is this version :)

    • Andrei

      Canon 10-22 (they shot them on 40D, 1000D, 1100D) often demanded $ 300 for it is not even close. For significantly less money with moderate requirements for width, you can take it.

  • Boris

    Here is a test shot from this lens. Daughter’s corner)))

  • Alexmenzer

    Remove the front lens block. Switch to the manual. We hang on the carcass. We enjoy a budget and good macro with a working aperture and focus confirmation. You can refine it: knock out the lenses from the frame of the front lens block and screw the frame into place. It looks more civilian, there is the possibility of normal use of the cover, the installation of a protective filter (so as not to pull the excess dust), an annular macrolight. Angoy;))

  • 4ma

    ok, it all focuses apparently you have a broken instance

  • Yaroslav

    What’s interesting is that on eos r it works quite acceptable in terms of focusing)

  • Vladimir

    In 1995 I bought a Canon film film with this lens. The quality of the photos was head and shoulders above that of Zenit-12SD with Helios. And now sometimes I use the Canon 5DM3 when I don’t want to carry heavy glass. Focusing errors of less than 10% also do not fail.

Add a comment

Copyright © Blog author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2023

English-version of this article

Version en español de este artículo