@Photosbydlee saw your year long review on PetaPixel. Liked your take. Do you do any journalistic work? I used to dip my toe in those waters occasionally, and it soooouunnndded like you'd agree with me in that this is an absolute gem of a lens for documentary work, especially with the all black α7C for maximum discretion.
JVan_02 wrote:
@Photosbydlee@ saw your year long review on PetaPixel. Liked your take. Do you do any journalistic work? I used to dip my toe in those waters occasionally, and it soooouunnndded like you'd agree with me in that this is an absolute gem of a lens for documentary work, especially with the all black α7C for maximum discretion.
Thank you! No real journalistic work, the closest thing to that would be street photography which I haven’t been doing as much recently either. But yes this lens would work really well for that.
Actually since using it more to do that review I’ve actually decided to sell the 24GM as I feel I can easily rely on that for what I shoot.
abadger wrote:
This lens is vastly better with flare than, say, the Samyang 35 f/2.8 I had a while back. That being said, I’d keep the hood on just in case if I were you. I have noticed some instances of ghosting with this lens even with the hood on.
Just chiming in on the flare issue, which really surprised me. I used the Sony ZA 35mm f2.8 which barely flared or ghosted in any way, and a vintage Canon 35mm f2.8 nFD which had a little green flare, but the Sony has such an incredible amount of ghosting, I'm kind of shocked. I think it may have been a design compromise for extreme sharpness. I think it needs more acknowledgement as most don't really discuss it, focusing on the sharpness instead. But, I take a lot of landscapes with the sun setting in frame, and the ghosting is a deal breaker sometimes.
I do appreciate a creative use of a flare or ghost for sure, but when it can't be controlled or prevented, I think it's worth noting, especially compared to other lenses in the lineup.
Just going through some of my old photos with this lens, trying to convince myself I don't need the new 35GM! I've typically been taking my CV 40 1.2 for casual pictures like this so I haven't been using the FE351.8 much recently.
cxpics wrote:
Just going through some of my old photos with this lens, trying to convince myself I don't need the new 35GM! I've typically been taking my CV 40 1.2 for casual pictures like this so I haven't been using the FE351.8 much recently.
These are some really nice photos, and that is attributable to the photographer and not the lens. This is a great little lens. I think it has a lot of strengths. But the GM takes all of these strengths and reduces the weaknesses. The weakest here for the lens is the dog in the window. Notice the trees in the background and how defined the bokeh is. A bit crunchy. This would be much more buttery smooth with the GM. I also assume you manually eliminated CA, because it’s not terrible in this picture - but it did show up in exactly this scenario with some frequency when I used it. It still does with the GM, but is much better controlled.
You can still get great photos with the FE lens. But if you are drawn more to the look of the CV40, you’ll probably be a bit happier with the result of the GM when you want/need AF. Is that worth the cost to you? That’s the question.
cxpics wrote:
Just going through some of my old photos with this lens, trying to convince myself I don't need the new 35GM! I've typically been taking my CV 40 1.2 for casual pictures like this so I haven't been using the FE351.8 much recently.
Image #3 stands out. I like the expressions of the person and the dog.
cxpics wrote:
Just going through some of my old photos with this lens, trying to convince myself I don't need the new 35GM! I've typically been taking my CV 40 1.2 for casual pictures like this so I haven't been using the FE351.8 much recently.
While the images as such are great, they are good examples of the harsh rendering of the Sony 35/1.8. I think the 35 GM would yield much smoother background blur (at the same aperture).
I still love the combination of size,weight and image quality from this lens. Don't have GAS for the GM yet. This is Eva, who runs an amazing farm in Buzzards Bay. She had been at it a while - she got her start supplying fresh herbs to Julia Child in the 1980s
cxpics wrote:
Just going through some of my old photos with this lens, trying to convince myself I don't need the new 35GM! I've typically been taking my CV 40 1.2 for casual pictures like this so I haven't been using the FE351.8 much recently.
Looking at this, well, first I wanna say great photos! Secondly though, I feel like the 35 1.8 FE should have been a lens released alongside the 55 ZA. Might have been impossible due to contract limitations and the lack of a few technologies we take for granted now, but the 35 FE isn't a bad lens at all honestly.
Just overshadowed by lenses that were released at the same time but were a little sharper, more pleasing, etc. In terms of pure utility, I still don't think there's a standard lens on any platform that combines the F-stop, size, MFD, and AF accuracy/speed like the 35 FE. If you like the images, I say keep it. You'll take it out a lot more than the GM. I do wish we had a standard 20G equivalent, but that is probably a ways down the road.
If you wanted to try out another lens, I could recommend the 40G. Personally, I find the image it puts out a little better than the 35 FE in every area... but 2.5 isn't 1.8.
I keep mine for its uniqueness. It has this very rare and special form of onion rings that only two people in the world were ever able to see (albeit never able to capture in photos).
Reviving a bit of a dead thread here but as I’m sitting mostly housebound for a few reasons with relatively new Sony gear I look to the lenses I own (this being one that I literally haven’t shot yet) and I lust over more gear, because why not list after gear when you can’t even go shooting, and I come back to the logic that made me buy this lens. It’s really. Really. Really good for the price and size. Does the gym have a bit more magic, probably. But wow this lens is good. Nice shots to those who posted.
Oh, and having paid so much for the rx1 (old school) I have to say this lens reminds me a LOT of that camera, which means for the most part the slow focusing rx1 is going to sit home except for special nights out.
