Bokeh on these processed images is hard to assess. They look like they've been given a global contrast and clarity boost that can make any bokeh look harsh(er).
Aug 12, 2019 at 06:42 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
Busy or distinctive? I would imagine some will like the bokeh of this lens, whereas others will not. Personally, I am on the fence and need to see more samples before I am sure what I think of it.
Like I said in another thread, I ordered it for sub-$600 for Amazon UK back when that thread materialized, but I decided to cancel the order. Most importantly, I'm not sure I need the lens, I'm more of a 50mm prime shooter and I have the wonderful 24/1.4 GM when I need to go wider. Additionally, there is always the potential issue of getting a bad copy and having return problems and/or US warranty coverage issues. It didn't seem worth the hassle to save $150.
I do hope it is a great lens, but as with most f/1.8 glass, I'm fairly certain it will be technically great but lack that je-ne-sais-quoi character I prefer in a lens.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Busy or distinctive? I would imagine some will like the bokeh of this lens, whereas others will not. Personally, I am on the fence and need to see more samples before I am sure what I think of it.
From the samples I've seen, transition zone is a bit harsh so rendering will look way worse at mid-distance.
Chad posted lovely samples but I don't think the new FE 35/1.8's rendering comes even close to the Sonnar 35/2's.
I agree that LoCA correction is similar and the new Sony seems to have less onion ring pattern in specular highlights.
Aug 12, 2019 at 03:36 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
Fred Miranda wrote:
From the samples I've seen, transition zone is a bit harsh so rendering will look way worse at mid-distance.
Chad posted lovely samples but I don't think the new FE 35/1.8's rendering comes even close to the Sonnar 35/2's.
I agree that LoCA correction is similar and the new Sony seems to have less onion ring pattern in specular highlights.
I agree, it won't be close to the Sonnar in the RX1 series of cameras. To me the bokeh reminds me of the Loxia 35 and the Zeiss Planar 50 f/1.4 lenses. Wide open it looks to have a bit of over corrected spherical aberrations, but stopped down and sometimes at close distances it can be pretty good. Some people really like the bokeh from those two lenses and I kind of like the bokeh from them stopped down to f/4 or narrower, but I am not a fan of the bokeh at wider apertures.
The lens won't have onion rings of course because it doesn't have any aspherical elements.
p.23 #10 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
Steve Spencer wrote:
I agree, it won't be close to the Sonnar in the RX1 series of cameras. To me the bokeh reminds me of the Loxia 35 and the Zeiss Planar 50 f/1.4 lenses. Wide open it looks to have a bit of over corrected spherical aberrations, but stopped down and sometimes at close distances it can be pretty good. Some people really like the bokeh from those two lenses and I kind of like the bokeh from them stopped down to f/4 or narrower, but I am not a fan of the bokeh at wider apertures.
The lens won't have onion rings of course because it doesn't have any aspherical elements....Show more →
I thought the FE 35/1.8 has one aspherical element towards the rear. I will double check that.
Aug 12, 2019 at 04:07 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.23 #11 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
Fred Miranda wrote:
I thought the FE 35/1.8 has one aspherical element towards the rear. I will double check that.
Yeah, Fred you are right. I had misremembered. I was disappointed that it didn't have any ED or APD elements, but it does have one aspherical element at the back.
p.23 #12 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
Steve Spencer wrote:
Yeah, Fred you are right. I had misremembered. I was disappointed that it didn't have any ED or APD elements, but it does have one aspherical element at the back.
Yes, the FE 28/2 has more special glass but it's wider...Complete different optical designs.
FE 28/2
FE 35/1.8
Aug 12, 2019 at 04:48 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.23 #13 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes, the FE 28/2 has more special glass but it's wider...Complete different optical designs.
Yeah, it is a completely different design from the FE 28 f/2, but I don't think Sony did a very good job here competing with Nikon and Canon. All three lenses (the Sony, Nikon, & Canon 35 f/1.8's) are 11 element 9 group designs. The similarly priced Nikon has 3 aspherical and 2 ED elements and seems to out perform the Sony lens by a fair bit (although personally I don't like the bokeh of either lens very much, but the Nikon has much better control of CA and is probably a bit sharper). The Canon is $300 less expensive, has a similar one aspherical element in its design, but focuses much closer down to .17m offering 1:2 magnification. It seems to be at least as sharp as the Sony as well. The Sony doesn't look very good with its mediocre CA control and bokeh that can best be described as distinctive. One clear positive for the Sony is that it is the smallest and weighs the least, but I can't help but be a bit disappointed in Sony's effort with this lens.
p.23 #14 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
Steve Spencer wrote:
Yeah, it is a completely different design from the FE 28 f/2, but I don't think Sony did a very good job here competing with Nikon and Canon. All three lenses (the Sony, Nikon, & Canon 35 f/1.8's) are 11 element 9 group designs. The similarly priced Nikon has 3 aspherical and 2 ED elements and seems to out perform the Sony lens by a fair bit (although personally I don't like the bokeh of either lens very much, but the Nikon has much better control of CA and is probably a bit sharper). The Canon is $300 less expensive, has a similar one aspherical element in its design, but focuses much closer down to .17m offering 1:2 magnification. It seems to be at least as sharp as the Sony as well. The Sony doesn't look very good with its mediocre CA control and bokeh that can best be described as distinctive. One clear positive for the Sony is that it is the smallest and weighs the least, but I can't help but be a bit disappointed in Sony's effort with this lens....Show more →
Dpreview just posted a review of the Nikon one where you can comparatively pixel peep it against Sony 1.8 and 1.4, and a Canon 1.4. Sony 1.4 is the worst of the bunch (soft and with high CA). The Nikon is not the sharpest - that is the Sony 1.8. Unfortunately the Sony 1.8 has high CA too. The most balanced is the Canon.
I guess Sony has to take this CA thing a little bit more seriously. Their non G(M) lenses have copious amounts of LoCA and stuff.
p.23 #15 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
vdo1 wrote:
Dpreview just posted a review of the Nikon one where you can comparatively pixel peep it against Sony 1.8 and 1.4, and a Canon 1.4. Sony 1.4 is the worst of the bunch (soft and with high CA). The Nikon is not the sharpest - that is the Sony 1.8. Unfortunately the Sony 1.8 has high CA too. The most balanced is the Canon.
I guess Sony has to take this CA thing a little bit more seriously. Their non G(M) lenses have copious amounts of LoCA and stuff.
p.23 #16 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
vdo1 wrote:
Dpreview just posted a review of the Nikon one where you can comparatively pixel peep it against Sony 1.8 and 1.4, and a Canon 1.4. Sony 1.4 is the worst of the bunch (soft and with high CA). The Nikon is not the sharpest - that is the Sony 1.8. Unfortunately the Sony 1.8 has high CA too. The most balanced is the Canon.
I guess Sony has to take this CA thing a little bit more seriously. Their non G(M) lenses have copious amounts of LoCA and stuff.
I will reserve judgement on the 35 1.8 until I see more samples from trusted reviewers. I like Chad's reviews and his style (nice take on people photography, which I don't do), but I agree the 35 1.8 looks like a bit different from the RX1 series' Sonnar 35.
I guess, the problem with dpreview just like any other review site not run by Roger is copy variation. As we all know (often from our own experience), this is especially true for the Sony 35 1.4.
As for taking "this CA thing a little more seriously", I don't know. I know most people here don't like the 55 1.8, but I think that lens still stands as a smart compromise with the CA being the price to pay for an otherwise (IMO) great (compact, yet sharp) lens.
p.23 #19 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
Chris_88 wrote:
I will reserve judgement on the 35 1.8 until I see more samples from trusted reviewers. I like Chad's reviews and his style (nice take on people photography, which I don't do), but I agree the 35 1.8 looks like a bit different from the RX1 series' Sonnar 35.
I guess, the problem with dpreview just like any other review site not run by Roger is copy variation. As we all know (often from our own experience), this is especially true for the Sony 35 1.4.
As for taking "this CA thing a little more seriously", I don't know. I know most people here don't like the 55 1.8, but I think that lens still stands as a smart compromise with the CA being the price to pay for an otherwise (IMO) great (compact, yet sharp) lens. ...Show more →
Ah, copy variation.... this is something else that Sony (not dpreview) has to address. If dpreview is most likely to get a dud, then I am also going to most likely get a dud. If it takes to buy and return 5-6 lenses to get a decent one, then I’ll just stay away from that particular model. Asking dpreview to cherry pick from 6 lenses while its readers are going to get the 5 ones left is a little bit disingenuous, isn’t it?
