Just got mine on Friday and took it for a test run yesterday at Detroit's Eastern Market.
I like it so far, but haven't done any "testing" per se. Just taking pictures.
RSSmith wrote:
Just got mine on Friday and took it for a test run yesterday at Detroit's Eastern Market.
I like it so far, but haven't done any "testing" per se. Just taking pictures.
I like the close focusing distance of the Sony 35 mm. Some shots seem pretty clean while others are slightly soft.
Also, I noticed on your Flickr photo stream you have some nice shots with the Samyang 85 1.4. Can you tell me which of these two lenses (35 vs 85) you prefer for street shooting. i.e pro and con. I'm trying to decide between these two lenses. The bokeh seems more pleasing on the 85 1.4.
I just ordered one to see if I could replace my Batis 40. The 35 1.8 seems to have better out of focus rendering and I can still get relatively close. As a walk around lens I think the added width in the FOV would be helpful.
I like the close focusing distance of the Sony 35 mm. Some shots seem pretty clean while others are slightly soft.
Also, I noticed on your Flickr photo stream you have some nice shots with the Samyang 85 1.4. Can you tell me which of these two lenses (35 vs 85) you prefer for street shooting. i.e pro and con. I'm trying to decide between these two lenses. The bokeh seems more pleasing on the 85 1.4.
Thanks much!
I’ll say it is really up to you. In my opinion something wider than 85 is the way to go for street so you get some context from the scene in the shot. However, you can also get similar context if you shoot from a distance with the 85. But to me it feels more like I am documenting something from afar rather than being up close and personal with the subject. Not that there is anything wrong with that. I personally prefer the 85 for getting shots of isolated subjects/portrait style, and the 35 for incorporating more of the surrounding environment.
If I only had one lens for street it would be a 35 or right around there. And if I had great arm stamina I would love to walk around with something even faster than f/1.8, but this is a trade off with size and I am very happy with the 35/1.8 despite its flaws. You will certainly get nicer bokeh with a faster lens. But will you pick it up as often if it is a burden to carry for long periods walking around?
As for softness in some images, technique-wise it is probably my user error, but I will post anyway if I like the look of the scene. I’m still a work in progress myself.
Wide open at MFD it loses some sharpness. f/2.8 makes it very good, you'll have to experiment to find the optimum aperture to balance DOF & sharpness vs distance. The Batis 40 does this automagically.
vdo1 wrote:
Wide open at MFD it loses some sharpness. f/2.8 makes it very good, you'll have to experiment to find the optimum aperture to balance DOF & sharpness vs distance. The Batis 40 does this automagically.
Well, see, there’s my problem. I didn’t realize there was a magic lens available when I was considering my purchase! Should have asked around first. Live and learn.
abadger wrote:
Well, see, there’s my problem. I didn’t realize there was a magic lens available when I was considering my purchase! Should have asked around first. Live and learn.
Very interesting. I had always heard of the nonagon bokeh with that lens, which actually doesn’t bother me too much. It’s great that they are (have already?) addressing it. I was also wary of the Batis 40 due to some AF issue as I recall. I wonder if that has been addressed through software updates?
In any case, thank you as always for the interesting background information.
So after something like 2 months of waiting since i have pre-ordered it, lens finally arrived. Took a few tests shots and while i do like how this lens performs i also have Tamron 28-75 2.8 and already thinking of returning 35 1.8. It's faster lens but just doesn't stand out. Anybody else tried 35 1.8 and don't find it that exciting? Im not trying to talk anybody off this lens If i did not have 28-75 i'd probably keep it.
milkod2001 wrote:
So after something like 2 months of waiting since i have pre-ordered it, lens finally arrived. Took a few tests shots and while i do like how this lens performs i also have Tamron 28-75 2.8 and already thinking of returning 35 1.8. It's faster lens but just doesn't stand out. Anybody else tried 35 1.8 and don't find it that exciting? Im not trying to talk anybody off this lens If i did not have 28-75 i'd probably keep it.
I have the opposite problem. I find I use it much more often than the Tamron, particularly because it is lightweight, a do-everything focal length and better for low light photography than the 2.8 aperture of the Tamron. Both are excellent lenses. But because the Tamron is ‘bulkier’ I tend to grab the 35:1.8 first by default.
Same issue here. Tamron 28-75/2.8 has been sitting on the shelf. 35 1.8 on the other hand will be very useful. In fact I am thinking about trading 28-75 for 17-28 as I think it will be more useful focal distance for me
