xpfloyd wrote:
My FE35/1.8 seems to be functioning perfectly but when I hold the lens in my hand and tilt it forwards towards the front element I can feel the lens elements moving (something is moving, I assume the lens elements). I can then tilt it back the other way towards the mount and feel it move the other way. Like I can feel the balance point shift.
Is this normal? I havent had a lens previously that done that. Like I say it functions correctly
Mine does the same with the camera off but goes way when it's on. My Leica Q used to do something similar but this was to do with the IBIS system in the lens. I presume it must be normal behaviour
Oh and lovely phots by the way
xpfloyd wrote:
My FE35/1.8 seems to be functioning perfectly but when I hold the lens in my hand and tilt it forwards towards the front element I can feel the lens elements moving (something is moving, I assume the lens elements). I can then tilt it back the other way towards the mount and feel it move the other way. Like I can feel the balance point shift.
Is this normal? I havent had a lens previously that done that. Like I say it functions correctly
I think this is the intended use case for the lens...a fast aperture wide angle that is a balance of compromises between IQ and size/shooting experience that favors the latter.
xpfloyd wrote:
My FE35/1.8 seems to be functioning perfectly but when I hold the lens in my hand and tilt it forwards towards the front element I can feel the lens elements moving (something is moving, I assume the lens elements). I can then tilt it back the other way towards the mount and feel it move the other way. Like I can feel the balance point shift.
Is this normal? I havent had a lens previously that done that. Like I say it functions correctly
snapsy wrote:
FYI, the FOV of the Sony is noticeably narrower than other 35mm f/1.8 lenses. Here's an animated GIF I created comparing the FOV of the Sony to the Nikon Z 35mm f/1.8 using the equally-framed cityscape shot in Dpreview's 35mm comparison widget:
Thanks Viramati, Carlo and smpetty. Although I’ve had limited use so far with this lens the size and weight is perfect and the IQ is perfectly fine for the sort of stuff I’ll be shooting with it.
p.30 #11 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
Fred Miranda wrote:
At this distance, rendering is so harsh, looking very similar to what I see in images from the FE 35/2.8 ZA.
I can't believe someone said this is comparable to Sonnar 35/2.
To be fair without doing a direct comparison I'm really not sure that any 35 would show much better rendering of leaves on a tree at that sort of subject to background distance. The comparison images with the 24GM I posted reveal less of a difference
p.30 #14 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
Holger wrote:
Agree. I am really fond of the Sigma 35/1.2 and its rendering. It is of course much larger and heavier.
But I would prefer the 24/GM cropped, judging from the photos above compared to the 35/1.8.
Having done the tests between the 24Gm and 35 if you look at the final images with the 35 at f1.8 I think the rendering is in fact very similar
p.30 #15 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
as requested a quick bokeh comparison between the 16-35GM at 35 and the FE35/1.8
Examining images 1:1 I would say the GM has smoother bokeh in the corners of the frame while towards the centre it is quite similar. You can also see changes in they way they render OOF areas if you look at the area around the steps leaning up against our pear tree
p.30 #16 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
Thanks David! I ordered the lens as well.
Viramati wrote:
as requested a quick bokeh comparison between the 16-35GM at 35 and the FE35/1.8
Examining images 1:1 I would say the GM has smoother bokeh in the corners of the frame while towards the centre it is quite similar. You can also see changes in they way they render OOF areas if you look at the area around the steps leaning up against our pear tree
p.30 #17 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
Thanks
Viramati wrote:
as requested a quick bokeh comparison between the 16-35GM at 35 and the FE35/1.8
Examining images 1:1 I would say the GM has smoother bokeh in the corners of the frame while towards the centre it is quite similar. You can also see changes in they way they render OOF areas if you look at the area around the steps leaning up against our pear tree
p.30 #18 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
Viramati wrote:
Having done the tests between the 24Gm and 35 if you look at the final images with the 35 at f1.8 I think the rendering is in fact very similar
Thanks for the comparisons. Like Holger, I prefer the 24GM as to my eyes the 24GM bokeh looks a tiny bit creamier than the 35 even at 1.8. (Disclosure: I'm a proud owner of the 24GM) But agree with you that they are more similar than different for all practical purposes.
I conclude 1) the 24GM is a very good lens, which isn't a surprise - it ought to given its price. 2) the 35 also has excellent rendering, which is quite something given it is half the price of the 24GM.
Your findings make me very happy and I'll probably not bother buying the 35/1.8. Because the 24GM already gives me a 36/2.1 equiv in APS-C crop mode without having to fork out extra cash or carry extra weight around. I'm using A7R III and 18mp in crop mode is more than enough for my usage.
(Still amazed with FE mirrorless. I l used to lug around a Sigma 24-35 F/2 which is north of 900g - anyone using one of those on Sony? - and now the 24GM does effectively the same/a better job for less than half the weight not even taking into account camera body weight savings..)
p.30 #20 · Now in Stock: Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 ($748)
Danilo73 wrote:
I don't understand the logic of the crop mode, I might as well buy an apsc- and spend less, I have a full frame I want that full frame function
Well let's say you have a 85mm lens and you need closer to subject and you can't move let's say . Throw into crop and you now 135. It's like a zoom per say but you will lose Mpx and DR and at least a stop of light. No free lunch but you get the shot
