Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1 2 3

5 6 end

Archive 2017 · Your experience with the FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA

philip_pj
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #1 · p.4 #1 · Your experience with the FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA

Would be good to see comparos, as several reviewers have liked the Canon 35/1.4, though it is fair to say they are oriented more to the sharpness uber alles scale of image appreciation. Once past a certain point, many others are not so inclined in a fast 35mm.

A small point but important is that the FE 35/1.4 is a Sony lens, has nothing at all to do with Zeiss other than a marketing deal of sorts. The Zeiss 35/1.4 issues include the ZM, the ZEF and the new Milvus (just $300 more than the Canon 35/1.4).

The Canon II is a same size, equally complex but heavier optic made more so by an adapter, of course. It starts out at 760 grams, then you add on more, taking it into a different usability class entirely. PZ seemed to be having serious problems with it on one of the 50mp bodies, asph elements leading to onion rings, harsh background and a world away from sharp across the frame. A mixed bag for them, good LoCA, low CoF, sound fringing control and a seductively strong center performance combined with corners that never quite get there, and languish in mediocrity even at f5.6. Here is their 'MTF' chart for wider apertures:

Sep 15, 2017 at 04:40 PM

Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #2 · p.4 #2 · Your experience with the FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA

GabrielPhoto wrote:
Yes usually just went the topic comes up comparing them or asking for 35mm recommendations etc, I mention it.

Basically my needs for a 35mm 1.4 are sharpness across the frame, not necessary to be flatout sharp but since I use it for environmental portraits, my subject is usually not centered so been able to get great detail whenever I place my subject at 1.4 was crucial.
Also, bokeh of course matters a lot for me.
So...the Zeiss as you know has beautiful rendering but the first time I took it on the field...I came home with one of our favorite shots from...Show more →

Canon shooter, Duston Abbott, tested the Canon 35/1.4L II vs Zeiss Milvus 35/1.4.

There are many 4k side-by-side comparisons in his video review. Based on his copies, the Canon comes on top as far as pure resolution wide open, especially when shooting at close distances. (as the DxO tests suggest)
The Zeiss shows its power on color rendering and micro-contrast. (I thought the Canon samples looked a bit flat). The Zeiss seems to match the resolution stopped down a bit.

But on OOF rendering (bokeh), the Zeiss shows much smooth rendering in comparison and I think that's a main consideration when shooting with a fast 35mm.
Both have great color aberration correction but I would give the Milvus a slightly advantage against the Canon on CA suppression...Sadly the Sony 35/1.4 ZA is not well corrected for color aberration. (Lateral and axial). It's its biggest negative to me. (together with the onion ring pattern on bokeh balls)

Here is the video on Bokeh and rendering:

Sep 15, 2017 at 04:43 PM

GMPhotography
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #3 · p.4 #3 · Your experience with the FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA

Personally with a 35mm I'm more inclined to go with rendering as it's my people lens but by F4 I need the mid zone to match center. If your shooting 3 or 4 people I can't have one side soft. So at some point F4 or F5.6 I need it to be really good across the frame a single person I can go wider and more for OOF . Now I don't shoot weddings but my bet every wedding guy would want the same as I do. For event work or portrait folks the will need that mid zone sharp. The FE 35 as you can see in my tests will do that at F4. As the VC stands right now looking at my test, no way in hell. I'll have all kinds of falloff. I'm hopefully fixing that with a front filter. But I think F4 is like the minimum for group type shots but one or two people you can get wider and go for more OOF?

Sep 15, 2017 at 04:50 PM

GabrielPhoto
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #4 · p.4 #4 · Your experience with the FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA

Fred Miranda wrote:
Canon shooter, Duston Abbott, tested the Canon 35/1.4L II vs Zeiss Milvus 35/1.4.
There are many 4k side-by-side comparisons in his video review. Based on his copies, the Canon comes on top as far as pure resolution wide open, especially when shooting a close distances. The Zeiss shows its power on color rendering and micro-contrast. (I thought the Canon samples looked a bit flat). The Zeiss seems to match the resolution stopped down a bit.

But on OOF rendering (bokeh), the Zeiss shows much smooth rendering in comparison and I think that's a main consideration when shooting with a fast...Show more →
I did watch that video review as well. The Milvus rendering is surely better than the Zeiss 35mm 1.4 because my comparison shots were not showing results like that.
For my needs , there is not one single main consideration. I need sharpness, no CA and great Bokeh..
Now with that said, it is very easy to do a quick pass of a bit of blur when editing if there is any area that may need a bit more"taming" vs trying to bring out detail where there is not specially when the differences were so pronounced as they were testing the Canon vs the Zeiss (not the Milvus). Sure if I am posting on IG then we can fake sharpness due to the small size etc but I like to know that my REAL detail is there if I need to print big, crop and print, etc.
But like I said...to each its own and I see a lot of happy Zeiss owners as well. For my needs though, the Canon is hands down the better option.
Regards

Sep 15, 2017 at 04:51 PM

Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #5 · p.4 #5 · Your experience with the FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA

GabrielPhoto wrote:
I did watch that video review as well. The Milvus rendering is surely better than the Zeiss 35mm 1.4 because my comparison shots were not showing results like that.
For my needs , there is not one single main consideration. I need sharpness, no CA and great Bokeh..
Now with that said, it is very easy to do a quick pass of a bit of blur when editing if there is any area that may need a bit more"taming" vs trying to bring out detail where there is not specially when the differences were so pronounced as they were testing the...Show more →

That's interesting as the original Zeiss 35/1.4 should have even smoother OOF rendering compared to the Milvus...(based on the side-by-side samples I've seen)....although MUCH more axial CA.

Here is a Milvus vs Classic comparison:
https://diglloyd.com/articles/lenspire/lenspire-20170615-ZeissMilvus35f1_4.html

Sep 15, 2017 at 04:58 PM

GMPhotography
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #6 · p.4 #6 · Your experience with the FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA

I shot the older Zeiss 35 1.4 for Canon/Nikon years ago . It was pretty poor performance wide open with a lot of lens aberrations and was soft wide open.

Sep 15, 2017 at 05:05 PM

Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #7 · p.4 #7 · Your experience with the FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA

GMPhotography wrote:
I shot the older Zeiss 35 1.4 for Canon/Nikon years ago . It was pretty poor performance wide open with a lot of lens aberrations and was soft wide open.

Yes, that was the consensus. But...it has gorgeous smooth bokeh if you ignore the fringing.

The new Milvus is a much better lens IMO.

We need a slightly slower "Milvus-like" lens for the E-mount. Perhaps the next Batis 35?

Sep 15, 2017 at 05:07 PM

GabrielPhoto
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #8 · p.4 #8 · Your experience with the FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA

Fred Miranda wrote:
That's interesting as the original Zeiss 35/1.4 should have even smoother OOF rendering compared to the Milvus...(based on the side-by-side samples I've seen)....although MUCH more axial CA.

Here is a Milvus vs Classic comparison:
https://diglloyd.com/articles/lenspire/lenspire-20170615-ZeissMilvus35f1_4.html
That is interesting and makes me want to try the Milvus myself now. I recall another test where the Milvus did not look as good as those shots from Dustin nor the 3Dish look was as good as the Canon or the Zeiss 35mm either.
The one thing I know for sure is about the tests I did myself with them though and was really surprised to see how good the Canon did as I expecting the Zeiss to beat it in Bokeh under any conditions which was not the case at all. In fact, I felt that the times the Zeiss beat it..the differences were less dramatic than when the opposite occurred.
Time to hunt down a Milvus to test!

Sep 15, 2017 at 05:23 PM

chiron
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #9 · p.4 #9 · Your experience with the FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA

Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes, that was the consensus. But...it has gorgeous smooth bokeh if you ignore the fringing.

The new Milvus is a much better lens IMO.

We need a slightly slower "Milvus-like" lens for the E-mount. Perhaps the next Batis 35?

I would buy a Batis 35 f/2 in a flash--that would really be perfect. I'm beginning to hunt for a good and well-centered used copy of the Sony 35 1.4 ZA, but I think I'd be very happy with a Batis 35 instead. Be nice if they gave it a different character than the Loxia 35, so one could imagine a rationale to own both.

Sep 15, 2017 at 05:35 PM

Jonathan Brady
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #10 · p.4 #10 · Your experience with the FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA

chiron wrote:
I would buy a Batis 35 f/2 in a flash--that would really be perfect. I'm beginning to hunt for a good and well-centered used copy of the Sony 35 1.4 ZA, but I think I'd be very happy with a Batis 35 instead. Be nice if they gave it a different character than the Loxia 35, so one could imagine a rationale to own both.

I'd rather have a Batis 35/2. Honestly the only reason I decided to go ahead and pick up the 35/1.4 is because the 35L II is the only lens tying me to the 5D Mark IV, and that's a LOT of money tied up in a single focal length camera. In fact, a RX1RII would be a MUCH wiser choice. If I decide to keep this 1.4 lens then I could easily see me selling it as soon as a Zeiss Vatis 35/2 is available

Sep 15, 2017 at 05:50 PM

Jonathan Brady
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #11 · p.4 #11 · Your experience with the FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA

I'm not gonna lie... this bothers me...
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4412/37112365251_0f022efef2_o.jpg

Check that out! The α7RII, a camera with a 42mp sensor WITHOUT an AA filter + the FE 35/1.4 is less sharp (has less accutance) than the 6D, a camera with a 20mp sensor with an AA filter + the EF 35mm f/1.4L II.

That's kinda disturbing, honestly... :-(

And then it just gets worse when you pull out the 5Dsr...

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4377/36417284514_860a4726cd_o.jpg

Finally...
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4350/37083287412_ce91ab481c_b.jpg

The difference in sharpness between the 5Dsr and the 6D with the same lens is about the same as the difference between the 6D and α7RII with the 35L II and FE 35/1.4 respectively. And of course, that difference is approximately doubled for the 5Dsr + 35L II.

Now... sharpness isn't everything... but... DAAAAAAAAAMN....

This lens is going to need to blow me away or it's heading back....

Then there's this...
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4431/37083262082_e6a45d353b_b.jpg

What are they hiding....? *suspicous*... lol

Sep 16, 2017 at 02:02 AM

genji
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #12 · p.4 #12 · Your experience with the FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA

Jonathan Brady wrote:
What are they hiding....? *suspicous*... lol

They're hiding everything and nothing. I got exactly the same response when I begged a Zeiss representative for a 28mm Loxia. They probably have that "We can't talk about future products..." text assigned to a hotkey.

Sep 16, 2017 at 05:47 AM

Jonathan Brady
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #13 · p.4 #13 · Your experience with the FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA

Yeah. Standard response from all companies.

Sep 16, 2017 at 06:32 AM

DavidBM
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #14 · p.4 #14 · Your experience with the FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA

Jonathan Brady wrote:
I'm not gonna lie... this bothers me...
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4412/37112365251_0f022efef2_o.jpg

Check that out! The α7RII, a camera with a 42mp sensor WITHOUT an AA filter + the FE 35/1.4 is less sharp (has less accutance) than the 6D, a camera with a 20mp sensor with an AA filter + the EF 35mm f/1.4L II.

That's kinda disturbing, honestly... :-(

And then it just gets worse when you pull out the 5Dsr...

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4377/36417284514_860a4726cd_o.jpg

Finally...
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4350/37083287412_ce91ab481c_b.jpg

The difference in sharpness between the 5Dsr and the 6D with the same lens is about the same as the difference between the 6D and α7RII with the 35L II and FE 35/1.4 respectively. And...Show more →

Yep there's maybe 10% acutance difference between the Lii and the Zony normalized for sensor. But acutance is only one measure. And the amount is not a big deal (problem with visualization methods is they give misleading impressions of he importance of values: oh my god, the Zony goes into YELLOW!

But yes the Canon is slightly sharper wide open, they are much the same a stop or so down, and the canon has slightly better correction of LoCA. But the bokeh on the Zony is to die for, IMHO, even with the LoCA and onion rings...

Remember in terms of sharpness wide open these lenses (and the Sigma Art) are playing in a different league from any classic 1.4/35. They are fully usable for portraits to give critically sharp eyes. Once you've got hat, its other features that should be in your comparison list.

Sep 16, 2017 at 06:43 AM

GMPhotography
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #15 · p.4 #15 · Your experience with the FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA

Honestly you want a sharp 35 1.4 than grab the Sigma Art lens but doing that your going to be giving up the nice Bokeh of the Sony. Lenses in modern era are usually what we call sterile in look . Very sharp wide open but also no look to them or rendering if you will. The Sony kind of bucks that trend and is a little more classic in look. Still sharp but better falloff and OOF.

The one lens that does both very well is the Sony 50 1.4 as it's really got it all both very sharp wide open but a great look to it at 1.4. The Sony 35 if you shoot it at F2 you can get the sharpness back and still have the look.

From a Pro seat it's nice having these 1.4 lenses but they also pose a risk as if you blow it your lost. I really stop down a touch to cover myself.

Sep 16, 2017 at 08:12 AM

GabrielPhoto
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #16 · p.4 #16 · Your experience with the FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA

DavidBM wrote:
Yep there's maybe 10% acutance difference between the Lii and the Zony normalized for sensor. But acutance is only one measure. And the amount is not a big deal (problem with visualization methods is they give misleading impressions of he importance of values: oh my god, the Zony goes into YELLOW!

But yes the Canon is slightly sharper wide open, they are much the same a stop or so down, and the canon has slightly better correction of LoCA. But the bokeh on the Zony is to die for, IMHO, even with the LoCA and onion rings...

Remember in terms of...Show more →
Sorry man but after comparing 3 copies of the Zeiss vs the Canon, saying the Canon is slightly sharper is a big understatement and specially the moment you start moving a little away from the center the differences are anything BUT slight. Considering that the last copy of the Zeiss which was my best one I got it for an awesome from a local that was in a rush to sell his gear which means I could have recovered a lot of $$$ by selling the Canon....I had all the bias towards keeping the Zeiss. And yet I still have the Canon instead.

Sep 16, 2017 at 08:26 AM

chiron
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #17 · p.4 #17 · Your experience with the FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA

GMPhotography wrote:
Honestly you want a sharp 35 1.4 than grab the Sigma Art lens but doing that your going to be giving up the nice Bokeh of the Sony. Lenses in modern era are usually what we call sterile in look . Very sharp wide open but also no look to them or rendering if you will. The Sony kind of bucks that trend and is a little more classic in look. Still sharp but better falloff and OOF.

The one lens that does both very well is the Sony 50 1.4 as it's really got it all both very sharp...Show more →

Yes, I would imagine it is tough being a pro in terms of having to get each necessary shot in a form that looks professional. Many of us have the luxury of missing as many shots as we want and it is only a mild disappointment to us. But if that third person on the side of your shot isn't sharp, it is a hit to your professional reputation with your client and maybe an unusable photograph.

Sep 16, 2017 at 08:26 AM

GMPhotography
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.4 #18 · p.4 #18 · Your experience with the FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA

That's really the big issue is that mid zone person you really don't want to be soft. So 1.4 is lovely but may not get the results you are after. Also I agree hobbyists can mss a shot and it's not the end of the world but you also want to be accurate for your own sake and knowledge of this. I just get paid is really the only difference. You folks learn from not missing. That's important too.

Sep 16, 2017 at 08:38 AM

ecarlino
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #19 · p.4 #19 · Your experience with the FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA

chiron wrote:
Yes, I would imagine it is tough being a pro in terms of having to get each necessary shot in a form that looks professional. Many of us have the luxury of missing as many shots as we want and it is only a mild disappointment to us. But if that third person on the side of your shot isn't sharp, it is a hit to your professional reputation with your client and maybe an unusable photograph.

if your goal is to get the "3rd person on the side SHARP" then why would you be shooting at f/1.4 ?
this lens has been out long enough that it's characteristics are well known.
the fact that people are still discussing/comparing it's sharpness in the corners wide open makes less than zero sense.
that is NOT what this lens is designed for.
if you want sharp with this lens and want everything sharp into the corners, at f/5.6 this lens will do exactly that.
otherwise, pick a different lens.
if someone sets a goal and knocks it out of the park (as they did with this lens, QA issues aside) then there's zero point in criticizing. if the goal isn't what you're interested in, pick another lens.

Sep 16, 2017 at 08:45 AM

Jonathan Brady
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.4 #20 · p.4 #20 · Your experience with the FE 35mm f/1.4 ZA

ecarlino wrote:
if your goal is to get the "3rd person on the side SHARP" then why would you be shooting at f/1.4 ?
this lens has been out long enough that it's characteristics are well known.
the fact that people are still discussing/comparing it's sharpness in the corners wide open makes less than zero sense.
that is NOT what this lens is designed for.
if you want sharp with this lens and want everything sharp into the corners, at f/5.6 this lens will do exactly that.
otherwise, pick a different lens.
if someone sets a goal and knocks it out of the park (as they did with...Show more →
I couldn't care less about corners. For me, it's an entire soft side I'm worried about. As for the lens I want it's not available.

Sep 16, 2017 at 09:13 AM

1 2 3 4 5 6 end
FM Forums \| Sony Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 5 6 end

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.