Well thank you @aleksander_ross for the above image which encouraged me to try out the local used copy. I compared with my Sigma 35mm art which I never truly loved and the test shots confirmed what your images above show.....stunning bokeh for a 35mm lens and sharper than the Sigma. I haven't had a chance to create something worth sharing here yet, but some observations I found with my testing:
- as sharp as the Nikon 35mm f1.8S (this was a surprise)
- nicer bokeh than the Sigma 35mm 1.4 art and the Nikon 35mm f1.8S (neither surprising)
- lower chromatic aberration than the Sigma 35mm 1.4 art and the Nikon 35mm f1.8S (the latter surprised me....I wonder if it was just the way I performed the test in the store....I don't have a copy of the 1.8S to confirm further)
- Sunstars are very good
- agree with @youie that this is not balanced that great and is weighty
When I picked up the 35mm f1.8S, I was really hoping to love it given its size and weight and no ftz. But I didn't find much to love beyond that. Right now the Tamron provides the most pleasing image and I'm hoping I'll start to love 35mm more than I had with the Sigma. Hopefully some images to come soon.....
The FTZ adapter makes any F lens function better, BUT, the size and weight and balance makes every lens shooting experience much worse. Mirrorless size and weight advantage? Gone. A small walk around kit in a sling bag? Sure, but don’t expect to have the lens and adapter on the camera. Now it won’t fit. That has been my experience and it sucks. I’m impatiently waiting for more 3rd party 1.4 primes. Nikon 1.2s are just WAY too large for a non working hobbyist. I want nice rendering and the flexibility of a larger aperture, not a sledge hammer.
It still weighs less than the 105 1.4e so if you are willing to use the 105 then this lens isn’t any worse in the same environment. For me, I feel it balances better in my hand adapted to the Z9 than native on the D5.
I love both but wouldn’t use either as a walk around/travel lens.
Kruth22 wrote:
The FTZ adapter makes any F lens function better, BUT, the size and weight and balance makes every lens shooting experience much worse. Mirrorless size and weight advantage? Gone. A small walk around kit in a sling bag? Sure, but don’t expect to have the lens and adapter on the camera. Now it won’t fit. That has been my experience and it sucks. I’m impatiently waiting for more 3rd party 1.4 primes. Nikon 1.2s are just WAY too large for a non working hobbyist. I want nice rendering and the flexibility of a larger aperture, not a sledge hammer.
A prom photo shoot from the weekend. We had a little time waiting for some family members to come by so naturally I thought an arm wrestle shot would make sense. Fun shoot with a great family.
I have to say, if money wasn't a variable here, I would likely have the 35mm 1.2S. With that said, I'm really happy with this Tamron lens which I picked up for $600CAD. It doesn't really leave me wanting for more. All shots taken at f1.4.
I agree with your assessment. The IQ you get for the price of this lens is stellar. Many will bemoan the size and weight but for me it’s a non issue since I’m not a “35mm first” photographer. I’m happy to adapt it or use it native on my D5 when I feel it’s the right situation for a 35mm photo. For that reason I’ve so far not given in to the temptation to pick up a z 35mm.
300km charity ride (in one day) from Victoria up to Quadra Island for a kids camp. Second year taking images for them. Taken on the Zf. So impressed with these sensors and LR denoise.....the first shot was a really dark silhouette in order to preserve the highlights as best as possible but the shadows pulled out well. The second image was taken at f2.8.
Picked this up as a relatively cheap 35/1.4 option with the FTZ since I don't like the rendering of the Z 35/1.4 and the z 35 1.8 S only felt "ok" to me. I am impressed with the rendering and sharpness. But it's clunky on the FTZ and the AF in video is too fast (something about the focus motor in this wont let it do smooth pulls from one point to another). Debating selling and picking up the newly releases viltrox lab 35/1.2
Picked this up as a relatively cheap 35/1.4 option with the FTZ since I don't like the rendering of the Z 35/1.4 and the z 35 1.8 S only felt "ok" to me. I am impressed with the rendering and sharpness. But it's clunky on the FTZ and the AF in video is too fast (something about the focus motor in this wont let it do smooth pulls from one point to another). Debating selling and picking up the newly releases viltrox lab 35/1.2
https://i.imgur.com/Dkw6p74.jpg
Given your experience with these various lenses, I'll be very curious to hear how you compare the viltrox with the tamron if you do indeed get the 35/1.2 lab. The price difference between the 1.2S and the tamron is just too much to justify given how good the tamron is. My suspicion is that the Tamron's bokeh will still win out for portraits, but I agree that the Tamron is clunky on the ftz.
newyork wrote:
How is the AF on a Z8 with this lens?
I've only used mine for portraits really, and it was perfectly fine for that use. I haven't tested for faster moving people / things.
I just did a quick comparison with the 24-70 f2.8S and the 2.8S is a bit snappier, but it's not a massive difference. When changing focus from a farther object to a closer object in a room with more dim light, there was a slight hesitation with the Tamron 3 times out of about 25-30 attempts which I didn't see with the 2.8S.
Not a fantastic answer, but I won't get a chance to test it with fast-moving objects for a few weeks here.
I will probably change this lens for Viltrox 35mm f1.2...I just wait for more reviews, and to try it myself.
It will be probably the same weight and size as Tamron 35mm with FTZII adapter.
urbanwild wrote:
Given your experience with these various lenses, I'll be very curious to hear how you compare the viltrox with the tamron if you do indeed get the 35/1.2 lab. The price difference between the 1.2S and the tamron is just too much to justify given how good the tamron is. My suspicion is that the Tamron's bokeh will still win out for portraits, but I agree that the Tamron is clunky on the ftz.
I ended up going a wildly different direction for now and picked up a 24-70 2.8 S instead to cover some of the wider FLs. I may check out the lab at a later date.
Really the only actual 'issues' I have with the tamron are 1) that the video AF isn't as smooth as native z lenses, or even adapted AF-S lenses (my 105/1.4 focuses more smoothly), and 2) face tracking only seems to work in the central area (at least for video). When my face was toward the edge of the frame the lens would pulse a bit trying to find me, but it's rock solid in the center. The AF motor is also noisy which isn't really an issue as long as not using on camera audio. Of course these issues don't really affect it as a photography lens. The bokeh, sharpness, and falloff are all lovely.
