AndrewNYC wrote:
Nobody looking at a decent photo would know.
I agree but there is certainly a special look to certain lenses, like my Leica. I have the 28 FE and it’s ok but doesn’t have the same feel as some of my other favorite lenses.
chez wrote:
Looking for another brick? No thanks...enough of them already out there. Time for more compact medium fast primes.
Certainly not. I want a compact lens. At f2 it shouldn’t be that difficult. Maybe the Loxia is still the best solution for those who want quality in a compact design.
Wow, really disappointed on price. I just switched from Canon about 2 months ago and they had a nice $499 RF 35 1.8 is. $750 seems unreasonable from Sony - disappointing.
I checked, as excited as people get about Sony, and the size, this lens is about the same as the 35/2 ais nikkor, all metal. But longer. Larger.
So I guess they used lighter materials?
I might not say anything, but it's hard to stay quiet about a largish, expensive 35mm FL lens, after all the trashing of Canon on the canon board previously. If you want to use one, I'm not saying I wouldn't. $750 seems,steep though.
AmbientMike wrote:
Surprised how big it is. But I guess since the lens mount to sensor distance is less, the lens has to be longer.
I need to compare it to the size of my 35/2 af nikkor. The Sony might be better, but for $750 it kinda needs to be
---------------------------------------------
AmbientMike wrote:
I checked, as excited as people get about Sony, and the size, this lens is about the same as the 35/2 ais nikkor, all metal. But longer. Larger.
So I guess they used lighter materials?
I might not say anything, but it's hard to stay quiet about a largish, expensive 35mm FL lens, after all the trashing of Canon on the canon board previously. If you want to use one, I'm not saying I wouldn't. $750 seems,steep though.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Designing wide lenses has gotten a bit easier with the short flange distance of mirrorless. We see that with the GM 24 and Canon’s and Nikon’s very nice 35s for mirrorless. I am hopeful for a decent performing lens with one Asph element, two APD elements, and nine rounded aperture blades. They should also be able to have more modest distortion (say 2.5% cleaned up to near zero with a profile) than the 28 and certainly a better motor than the 50. If they do that and price it at $699 it ought to be pretty competitive with the Canon and Nikon offerings which is a good thing. ...Show more →
Well your price is $50 off but other than that you were right on the money!
RoamingScott wrote:
Thanks to the stupid 35/2.8 pricing for wrecking what should have been a homerun $500 lens from Sony.
At least we get a focus hold and AF-MF switch, which are typically reserved for G or GM models, I guess. I'd never pay MSRP for this lens, will patiently wait for a nice clean used copy for $400.
I think you may be waiting a while...
Agree that the f2.8 ZA's existence probably discouraged them from setting a price that was sub-$600. This way they can keep selling the f2.8 at a discount.
He also shows heavy light fall-off even at f5.6, with auto correction off. The auto corrected image also isn't very clean and shows a circle pattern in the monochrome image. Might as well keep my good copy of the 35/2.8. Sony should have release a G lens for the price; and given us a better 35mm option.
p.16 #11 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
The one aberration I hate most is CA (especially axial). Sadly, that seems to be exactly the weak point of this (long awaited) 35mm lens.
And it was the reason why I sold my Zeiss 35/2.8.
I totally agree pdmphoto: at 750$, it should have been a G lens with proper image quality.
p.16 #12 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
AmbientMike wrote:
I checked, as excited as people get about Sony, and the size, this lens is about the same as the 35/2 ais nikkor, all metal. But longer. Larger.
So I guess they used lighter materials?
I might not say anything, but it's hard to stay quiet about a largish, expensive 35mm FL lens, after all the trashing of Canon on the canon board previously. If you want to use one, I'm not saying I wouldn't. $750 seems,steep though.
? You compare to an old manual Nikkor lens? One for a much larger flange distance? Why don'y you compare to the Z-lens?
p.16 #13 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
stevesanacore wrote:
Certainly not. I want a compact lens. At f2 it shouldn’t be that difficult. Maybe the Loxia is still the best solution for those who want quality in a compact design.
The Loxia is 59mm long vs. 73mm, so 1.4 cm less, but more heavy (340g) and expensive, for a manual focus and slower lens.
I think the new 35/1.8 to be quite compact.
p.16 #15 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
If the price is too high the market has ways to correct it. The Batis 135 was priced too high...it has since dropped. The same will happen here if this does not sell.
Awaiting to see tests between this and the 35 2.8. The extra stop is what I'm after...but not if its not great.
I was checking out these shots and was worried about the busy bokeh, but then I read the EXIF and every single shot I checked was taken using EFC-S. 🙄
I don't understand how it's so difficult for these review sites to test using optional settings. This is something every reviewer should disable any time they're testing something...
p.16 #18 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
keepcoding wrote:
The one aberration I hate most is CA (especially axial). Sadly, that seems to be exactly the weak point of this (long awaited) 35mm lens.
And it was the reason why I sold my Zeiss 35/2.8.
I totally agree pdmphoto: at 750$, it should have been a G lens with proper image quality.
Unfortunately most 35mm lenses lack axial CA correction. The Batis 40/2 does well here but it's not 35mm. Another great lens with well corrected LoCA is the Zeiss 35/1.4 ZM.
I'm surprised you didn't like the FE 35/2.8 ZA as it has decent axial correction. All other native and faster 35mm versions like the Zeiss 35/1.4 ZA and Samyang 35/1.4 AF do not fare well either.
I don't blame you for hating axial CA because unlike lateral CA, it can be only masked in post.
p.16 #19 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
phototiimo wrote:
I was checking out these shots and was worried about the busy bokeh, but then I read the EXIF and every single shot I checked was taken using EFC-S. 🙄
I don't understand how it's so difficult for these review sites to test using optional settings. This is something every reviewer should disable any time they're testing something...
I noticed that too but although EFCS is detrimental to rendering it does not affect it that much, especially because the new 35/1.8 is not that fast.
p.16 #20 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
stevesanacore wrote:
I agree but there is certainly a special look to certain lenses, like my Leica. I have the 28 FE and it’s ok but doesn’t have the same feel as some of my other favorite lenses.
We seem to obsess over things that aren't in fact relevant to making good images. Nobody looking at a print of a great photo would even give a crap if it were shot on a 28MM FE, Holga, or 28MM Leica $5K lens. In fact, otehr than the holga, I doubt they would be able to tell teh difference.
