If you look at the first page the wall test corner even F4 is darn good. Optimum is 6.3 so 5.6 is even very very good. Now in general use should not be a issue. Don't forget you can push the ISO very good on the A7rII so for those moments when you need great corners at 5.6 going to even ISO 800 if really needed is not going to hurt you. I bought this lens for a more wide open look but discovered it can be a awesome landscape lens as well. Heck this would be the first lens I would throw in a bag traveling around the globe. Pair this with a VC 15 , Loxia 21 and you have one heck of a wide travel kit that's in a really small bag. I have the ZM 85 which is outstanding and small to boot with it..
GMPhotography wrote:
You can still use a Hawk adapter or any fixed adapter until you feel more comfortable with the TAP which is really nice even right now. I consider it a option and even on manual focus with it you still can use the lens closer than the standard minimum of the lens itself. That's a big bonus as they are I believe .7 minimum focus. The Hawk adapter does extend for closer focusing. I just sold mine to Gregg. Great adapter too
Thanks, Guy. I have used the CV close focus adapter together with the CV 35 1.2 in the past. It worked OK on the a7r back then, but my eyes aren't great and for a fast 35mm I prefer AF. If I were to get the 35 1.4 ZM, I'd use it exclusively with the TechArt adapter.
I have found this thread very helpful, but I'm still undecided what to do. Get the 35 1.4 ZM or the 24-70 GM (reasonably sized, best? fast 35mm versus the flexible, but big zoom) or simply try to locate a reasonably priced, used Loxia 35 to go along with my rx1rii.
With the Loxia 21mm Zeiss has shown me how beautiful sunstars can look. It's really hard to settle for anything else, after using this lens.
Well if your shooting for money than get the zoom first. Sell the RXRIII as the new price for one shot through the roof and get the ZM . If you did not see it the RXr II here in the states just increased price by 600 dollars to 3900 bucks. See for me having that zoom gives me the luxury of playing around as much as I want since the zoom is so good at least to 50mm. I'm keeping my 50 1.4 as its the best there is and it's fast. The ZM trio that I will have 35,50,85 will be my fun,travel and landscape kind of lens but I still have that zoom in my back pocket to do all the heavy lifting. If I was not a Pro I may not need the zoom because it would all be about me not about clients. The Zoom is awesome has great sharpness, great corners and it has really nice bokeh but it's a recorder of images not so much a ART lens if you know what I mean. It does not have that 3D pop like this ZM which is why I really like this ZM quirks and all.
As much as some say it's awesome on a Leica or modified sensor. I can't go by that as I won't be doing either. I have to go by what we have been posting. And I have yet to do any really nice processing on any of these files. These are out of the can. I enjoy the discussion no question but WYSIWYG for me on this thread. . I know I can speak for Fred here too as we have discussed this we bought them for more wide open but soon discovered at 6.3 it's perfect pretty much across the whole frame. You want it better here at faster apertures than either the mod or Leica will do that. I'm happy the way it is, and I think Fred is as well but we both have our 24-70 backups. We maybe crazy but we are not stupid.
GMPhotography wrote:
Well if your shooting for money than get the zoom first. Sell the RXRIII as the new price for one shot through the roof and get the ZM . If you did not see it the RXr II here in the states just increased price by 600 dollars to 3900 bucks. See for me having that zoom gives me the luxury of playing around as much as I want since the zoom is so good at least to 50mm. I'm keeping my 50 1.4 as its the best there is and it's fast. The ZM trio that I will have 35,50,85 will be my fun,travel and landscape kind of lens but I still have that zoom in my back pocket to do all the heavy lifting. If I was not a Pro I may not need the zoom because it would all be about me not about clients. The Zoom is awesome has great sharpness, great corners and it has really nice bokeh but it's a recorder of images not so much a ART lens if you know what I mean. It does not have that 3D pop like this ZM which is why I really like this ZM quirks and all....Show more →
Thanks for your input, Guy. For me this is just (an admittedly expensive ) hobby. Honestly, I'm not so much into character lenses, even though I love Walter Mandler's Elmarit 90 2.8. My current conundrum is that I want those damn Zeiss sunstars that my Loxia 21 gives me in a 35mm. The 35 ZM fits the bill here, but I also like my rx1 as a secondary camera that allows me to do less lens switching on my a7rii. With the zoom, I'd have to do less switching and not have to worry about settings on the adapter, but the sun stars aren't as great as with the 35 ZM. As you said, there is no perfect lens. I'm just not sure which compromise I'm willing to accept at this point.
Being in Japan I imagine you can walk into a store and maybe try it. Plus on eBay at least the Asian sellers are selling these at 1600 or below. Maybe try and rent one for a day or two.
Even though I sold my RXr1 II it was a great camera but as far as my workflow it just would not work itself in and I had some compromises with flash too. I had to drop my EVF to use my Sony trigger or my bigger Godox on camera flash plus it was a little unwieldy to use. So in the end it was a issue. I love it but I think this is a nicer look .
GMPhotography wrote:
As much as some say it's awesome on a Leica or modified sensor. I can't go by that as I won't be doing either. I have to go by what we have been posting.
That's understandable and entirely fair, but the Leica and Sony mod aspects need to be included in the discussion because Leica is what the lens was designed for and adapting it to Sony alters its characteristics. Someone looking for a fast RF 35 might land on this discussion and get the impression the lens has a field curvature problem and assume it's a general problem when it's actually a thick sensor topping specific problem. Besides, this topic is rightly x-posted in Alt where not everyone shoots Sony.
Obviously as a Sony shooter, you need to determine if the out-of-the-box performance of the ZM meets your needs and expectations. Your findings greatly help others in a similar equipment situation.
I think those of us injecting the Leica aspect into the discussion aren't doing it for fanboy reasons, rather, to give a complete picture of this lens's capabilities. I've thus far 'bit my tongue' in respect to the Leica camera = fanboys comment and resisted pushing the discussion off topic explaining the advantages of Leica's UI over Sony's.... We can start another thread for that, though as Fred implies, it's probably pointless.
rscheffler wrote:
That's understandable and entirely fair, but the Leica and Sony mod aspects need to be included in the discussion because Leica is what the lens was designed for and adapting it to Sony alters its characteristics. Someone looking for a fast RF 35 might land on this discussion and get the impression the lens has a field curvature problem and assume it's a general problem when it's actually a thick sensor topping specific problem. Besides, this topic is rightly x-posted in Alt where not everyone shoots Sony.
Obviously as a Sony shooter, you need to determine if the out-of-the-box performance of the ZM meets your needs and expectations. Your findings greatly help others in a similar equipment situation.
I think those of us injecting the Leica aspect into the discussion aren't doing it for fanboy reasons, rather, to give a complete picture of this lens's capabilities. I've thus far 'bit my tongue' in respect to the Leica camera = fanboys comment and resisted pushing the discussion off topic explaining the advantages of Leica's UI over Sony's.... We can start another thread for that, though as Fred implies, it's probably pointless....Show more →
Ron I'm all for the complete discussion on it, don't get me wrong at all. I'm a open data source guy that everything is welcome no question. Not everyone fits in my shoes nor wants too. being a working Pro throws a lot of curve balls that many do not have to deal with. I have said it many of times I envy the hobbyist.
rscheffler wrote:
That's understandable and entirely fair, but the Leica and Sony mod aspects need to be included in the discussion because Leica is what the lens was designed for and adapting it to Sony alters its characteristics. Someone looking for a fast RF 35 might land on this discussion and get the impression the lens has a field curvature problem and assume it's a general problem when it's actually a thick sensor topping specific problem. Besides, this topic is rightly x-posted in Alt where not everyone shoots Sony.
Obviously as a Sony shooter, you need to determine if the out-of-the-box performance of the ZM meets your needs and expectations. Your findings greatly help others in a similar equipment situation.
I think those of us injecting the Leica aspect into the discussion aren't doing it for fanboy reasons, rather, to give a complete picture of this lens's capabilities. I've thus far 'bit my tongue' in respect to the Leica camera = fanboys comment and resisted pushing the discussion off topic explaining the advantages of Leica's UI over Sony's.... We can start another thread for that, though as Fred implies, it's probably pointless....Show more →
I just love giving the Leica folks shit. Lol it's just my nature to have fun. I was a Leica golden child. I had 2 M8s, m9 a DMR system and just about every lens they made in both M and R. I love the glass bodies are meh to me. But I have diffrent needs there
Ron do want to ask you as your very involved here . Are you a bit surprised how it is running on this A7r II body or something you expected. I have future thoughts which I have not mentioned. There certainly is another Sony camera going to hit the market soon and I kind of planned on this lens hopefully even working better on it. I try and think ahead although with Sony they are a bit wild in some decisions. Just not sure what they are doing next the price of the RXr1 II going up 600 dollars overnight spells get rid of this sensor we have another in production and new body. From everything I have read this lens in the corners was not even good at F4 on older bodies and yet it does look pretty acceptable on this body. Sure 6.3 is the optimum but from what I read folks where saying even F11. I think there is more to it than just sensor stack thickness.
I had this lens for Leica. It is no question a great technical lens but I am not a fan of this lens even with Leica system.
In many situation the lens indeed look impressive reminde me of 55OTUS. But bokeh highlight for light source can clear see strong color fringing indicating over corrected SA. And that is not correctable by software. The Bokeh is neutral most of case similar as OTUS55 (but never as smooth) which is a complement actually but I'd say it never gives me the look I consider beautiful in term of rendering at any situation save for close focus subject far away background . In contrast of OTUS 55mm, which give APO performance WO and smooth, neutral rendering 95% of time, this one has strong color fringing and busy bokeh quite often.
The lens is sharp in extreme corner at WO on my M9. It is a neutral lens which can be good or bad depend on your preference. If I am in the market of fast 35 for my M, it would be either this one or 35ASPH pre-fle, either way I know what I am getting what I am losing.
zhangyue wrote:
I had this lens for Leica. It is no question a great technical lens but I am not a fan of this lens even with Leica system.
In many situation the lens indeed look impressive reminde me of 55OTUS. But bokeh highlight for light source can clear see strong color fringing indicating over corrected SA. And that is not correctable by software. The Bokeh is neutral most of case similar as OTUS55 (but never as smooth) which is a complement actually but I'd say it never gives me the look I consider beautiful in term of rendering at any situation save for close focus subject far away background . In contrast of OTUS 55mm, which give APO performance WO and smooth, neutral rendering 95% of time, this one has strong color fringing and busy bokeh quite often.
The lens is sharp in extreme corner at WO on my M9. It is a neutral lens which can be good or bad depend on your preference. If I am in the market of fast 35 for my M, it would be either this one or 35ASPH pre-fle, either way I know what I am getting what I am losing.
I think getting a lens that is deadly on center would be tough to also be as smooth on bokeh. Seems like it is fighting each other in a way. Now I say that but the new Sony 50 comes to mind that does both but it's a modern design and it's no small lens either. A lot of elements and aspherical elements to control that. I'm not sure about this design per say if it has that type of ability
I've tried finding an answer to this in a few places, but hoping one of you can help: does the Kolari mod on an A7Rii cause any difference in the colors from the sensor (especially skin tones)?
My 35 Distagon is a favorite on my M240, but I'd love to be able to use it reliably on a Sony as well - but not if I have to deal with wacky colors.
RyanFlynn wrote:
I've tried finding an answer to this in a few places, but hoping one of you can help: does the Kolari mod on an A7Rii cause any difference in the colors from the sensor (especially skin tones)?
My 35 Distagon is a favorite on my M240, but I'd love to be able to use it reliably on a Sony as well - but not if I have to deal with wacky colors.
Hi Ryan,
The Kolari modification will change the color output of the camera. I can not say how the colors change for skin tones since I use my cameras for nature, landscape and wildlife. After the modification to my A7r camera I purchased and used the X-rite ColorChecker and software to make new profiles for my camera. These profiles were saved directly into my Adobe Software into Lightroom 6. I have had good success with these but with time I may wish to go back and to run additional checks on the color. When I process my files though, I still rely on the color profiles and continue to adjust the output to my liking and have never based my finished work on the out of camera RAW files.
GMPhotography wrote:
Being in Japan I imagine you can walk into a store and maybe try it. Plus on eBay at least the Asian sellers are selling these at 1600 or below. Maybe try and rent one for a day or two.
Even though I sold my RXr1 II it was a great camera but as far as my workflow it just would not work itself in and I had some compromises with flash too. I had to drop my EVF to use my Sony trigger or my bigger Godox on camera flash plus it was a little unwieldy to use. So in the end it was a issue. I love it but I think this is a nicer look . ...Show more →
If I was in Tokyo or Osaka, I'd probably could test the Techart ZM combo in a store. The largest camera store in town here has pretty much Sony's entire line-up on display, allowing me to toy around with the 24-70 GM a bit, but I haven't seen a 35 ZM on display, let alone a TechArt adapter. I guess, I have to sleep over this decision a few more nights.
) hobby. Honestly, I'm not so much into character lenses, even though I love Walter Mandler's Elmarit 90 2.8. My current conundrum is that I want those damn Zeiss sunstars that my Loxia 21 gives me in a 35mm. The 35 ZM fits the bill here, but I also like my rx1 as a secondary camera that allows me to do less lens switching on my a7rii. With the zoom, I'd have to do less switching and not have to worry about settings on the adapter, but the sun stars aren't as great as with the 35 ZM. As you said, there is no perfect lens. I'm just not sure which compromise I'm willing to accept at this point. 
We can start another thread for that, though as Fred implies, it's probably pointless.