35L II > If every lens could be this good

hermit383 wrote:

2.) : Moose sculpture- My guess- Picture1 = 35L - Picture2 = 35LII

This one, to me, in my opinion, shows the advantages of the lens in "Pic-1" ( Picture 1) original the strongest.

-The nose of the moose appears more 3D when flipping back and forth to my eye and has higher levels of "clarity" it looks clearer.

-The forehead above the nose texture pops more and has greater clarity in "Pic-1"

-"Pic-1" ( Picture 1), The ear on the left ( moose's right ear) also shows more liveliness and clarity to me. The spots between the highlights and the adjacent shadow appear to my eye, to pop more and look more striking.

-"Pic-1" shows more fine depth along the shoulder/ arm and torso of the body especially with the concave cut marks

"Pic-2" look like it has a milky film over it in certain areas of the body. Mainly the torso, this shows stronger to me. this negatively impact the image significantly in my eye

"Pic-2" makes this moose pop more in other areas further away from the center of the frame, such as the moose's left ear. here the lens in "Pic-2" superior edge of the frame resolution, global contrast, and micro contrast outperform the lens in "Pic-1", especially in this set of photos as they appear to be shot with a wide aperture (the known weakest point for the 35L Original)

Have you ever considered the change of the lighting? Some parts of the moose with the II are brighter (which is not a surprise - better contrast) and some are darker - his left "hand" for example.

You want to convince yourself that the I is better, OK, go ahead.