After 4 tries, I just got a great copy of the FE 35/1.8. I find it interesting how it renders similarly to my Loxia 35/2. It's basically a sharper Loxia with similar rendering + AF.
Hi Fred! Intrigued by comparison to L35, one of my fav rendering lenses. Can you expand briefly on what similarities you’ve noticed?
I am thinking of bailing on Batis 40 for this lens as I seem to have an annoying minor occasional AF-C inconsistency with the Batis 40 that I can’t get a handle on (and this with a replacement lens from Zeiss under warranty as the first copy couldn’t AF at all outside the central area of the image).
Fred Miranda wrote:
After 4 tries, I just got a great copy of the FE 35/1.8. I find it interesting how it renders similarly to my Loxia 35/2. It's basically a sharper Loxia with similar rendering + AF.
Can anyone explain (with example images, please) how worrying is the axial CA / purple fringing risk with this lens, in what scenarios, up to what aperture... as well as how well correctable are their fringes in post-processing?
Depends almost entirely on your scenarios, Enri. Most reviewers agree lateral CA is apparent and not entirely removeable via profiles, and that LoCA is fairly easy to demonstrate at apertures wider than f2.8-f4 (opinions vary).
I'm choosing my words carefully because reviews run the gamut of 'let's find and amplify every little thing wrong' to 'it takes great images' and both may apply at once. So caveat emptor, and YMMV apply here.
Personally, I like its bokeh (smooth, no onion rings) and its images have verve and presence - lively and very useable in many instances - it's a fitting companion to the eminently sensible FEs: 55 and 85. Perhaps the final word might come from the DPR reviewer:
'In real-world shooting this (LoCA) is unlikely to be an issue for two reasons: first, landscapes and cityscapes at infinity aren't typically shot wide open and, second, the most common close-up subjects shot wide open are faces, which don't have enough contrast to reveal this aberration.'
I might add that many experienced shooters understand aberration trade-offs and don't see moderate CA as a deal killer, and it is true that many great lenses exhibit some CA at times. Much depends on usage, lighting, aperture and print size/view preferences. So take a good look at what you shoot with a 35mm and what you intend to do with it, and extrapolate from review commentary. The lens is very competent and can certainly take memorable images, as shown on this very page. Very impressive.
Nice picture!
I’m right now in NYC for holidays, soon I’ll be in San Francisco. Where did you go to take that picture? With a 35 and still that close, wow! When I was there last time 7 years ago, I took many pictures of the bridge from the beach in the other side and the promenade, etc, but I didn’t see that close high spot you’re in.
Thanks, Philip. What worries me most is the LoCA (or even LaCA) that is not controllable with Aperture. I have read almost everything written in the Internet about this lens and it seems that while LaCA is moderate it may suffer LoCA even until f/11. In the example of https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-fe-35mm-f1-8-review/3, there's purple fringe at f/11. Incidentally, the reviewer talks of LaCA there, but that fringe seems more to be LoCA.
I could reduce my question to this: can someone test if there's a (quite) safe Apertures range within which you may (enough) avoid LoCA / LaCA?
Battery Spencer. You can easily find that on the map. It's quite popular but a few hundred feet walk from parking lot. numbertwo wrote :
Nice picture!
I’m right now in NYC for holidays, soon I’ll be in San Francisco. Where did you go to take that picture? With a 35 and still that close, wow! When I was there last time 7 years ago, I took many pictures of the bridge from the beach in the other side and the promenade, etc, but I didn’t see that close high spot you’re in.
Enri wrote:
Thanks, Philip. What worries me most is the LoCA (or even LaCA) that is not controllable with Aperture. I have read almost everything written in the Internet about this lens and it seems that while LaCA is moderate it may suffer LoCA even until f/11. In the example of https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-fe-35mm-f1-8-review/3, there's purple fringe at f/11. Incidentally, the reviewer talks of LaCA there, but that fringe seems more to be LoCA.
I could reduce my question to this: can someone test if there's a (quite) safe Apertures range within which you may (enough) avoid LoCA / LaCA?
There is a lot of talk about the FE 35/1.8 LoCA under-correction but in reality it's similar to Sonnar 35/2 (RX1, and even FE 24/1.4 GM which are two of the most praised lenses. I've posted side by side tests comparing the FE 35/1.8's rendering to these two lenses.
