This topic is in the 2020 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2020Why don’t we have an AWESOME 35 yet?
p.11 #1Why don’t we have an AWESOME 35 yet?
Sutro wrote:
I am not a Sigma fan due to weight and AF issue and from what I read it will not even continuous focus. If the lens had good AF and you could use continuous I would buy one now. I will await a Sony until that time unless the AF issues improve on the Sigma.
This is the first I’ve read someone say it won’t continuous AF. My experience is the Sigma 35 f1.2 focuses just as fast as my 24-70GM. And I always use continuous eye AF with this lens, as my primary target is my fast moving small children. The Sigma catches their eye accurately with my A7RIV slightly more often than the GM with a keep rate over 80%.
Aug 02, 2020 at 07:23 AM
p.11 #2Why don’t we have an AWESOME 35 yet?
It's the Sigma 45mm f2.8 that cannot AF-C reliably...
Aug 02, 2020 at 03:16 PM
p.11 #3Why don’t we have an AWESOME 35 yet?
Yakkosmurf wrote:
Sutro wrote
I am not a Sigma fan due to weight and AF issue and from what I read it will not even continuous focus. If the lens had good AF and you could use continuous I would buy one now. I will await a Sony until that time unless the AF issues improve on the Sigma.Yep, same here. Very happy with the accuracy of the AF at f1.2 with the sigma. Not as fast as the 135gm in low light but definitely no complaints here!
I've added the tamron 35mm f2.8 for landscapes when I'm travelling light. Both lenses impress me a lot so not too fussed if Sony doesn't release anything else here.
Aug 02, 2020 at 07:21 PM
p.11 #4Why don’t we have an AWESOME 35 yet?
j4nu wrote:
It's the Sigma 45mm f2.8 that cannot AF-C reliably...
I feel for the poor Sigma engineers, they're pushed to work hard on firmware updates that address inexistent issues....
From 35/1.2 firmware 02, June 2020 description:
"It has improved a rarely-occurring‘blinking’phenomenon during movie shooting.
It has improved AF performance."
It's the Sigma 45mm f2.8 that cannot AF-C reliably...
I feel for the poor Sigma engineers, they're pushed to work hard on firmware updates that address inexistent issues....
From 35/1.2 firmware 02, June 2020 description:
"It has improved a rarely-occurring‘blinking’phenomenon during movie shooting.
It has improved AF performance."
Aug 03, 2020 at 04:58 AM
p.11 #5Why don’t we have an AWESOME 35 yet?
Well, it's a stretch from "improved AF performance" to "AF issue and from what I read it will not even continuous focus", but take it as you will 
...
I still think someone mistook 35mm for 45mm.
vdo1 wrote:
I feel for the poor Sigma engineers, they're pushed to work hard on firmware updates that address inexistent issues....
From 35/1.2 firmware 02, June 2020 description:
"It has improved a rarely-occurring‘blinking’phenomenon during movie shooting.
It has improved AF performance."
...I still think someone mistook 35mm for 45mm.
vdo1 wrote:
j4nu wrote
It's the Sigma 45mm f2.8 that cannot AF-C reliably...From 35/1.2 firmware 02, June 2020 description:
"It has improved a rarely-occurring‘blinking’phenomenon during movie shooting.
It has improved AF performance."
Aug 03, 2020 at 06:11 AM
p.11 #6Why don’t we have an AWESOME 35 yet?
tbpeur01 wrote:
Why haven’t Sony, Voigtlander, Zeiss, or Samyang come out with a good 28mm AF lens? The Sigma is too big. The 7Artisans FE-Plus is excellent but MF. The Sony 28/2 is ok.
It’s a mystery to me why one of the most popular focal lengths is so poorly represented in the Sony system.Do you have experience with the 7Artisans 28? I’m intrigued by this lens as a possible cost-savings replacement to by 24 GM, but Phillip Reeve is the only one I’ve seen that has described its performance on a Sony body.There is a photographer on Flickr named Aaron Awad who takes some great images with the lens (on an A7RII) that sold me on trying the lens:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/blindpiggy/
I have some images taken this weekend that I haven't taken from the SD card. I will try and post some soon. The lens is nicely built and was sharp as a tack on testing, perfectly centered. Focus feel is perfect. Fair amount of vignetting wide open that improves greatly by f/4.That’s hilarious - Right before you posted this I reached out to him to get his thoughts since I enjoyed his Flickr images so much. I look forward to seeing yours.
- Tyler
The 35/1.2 Art is awesome. Most used lens for us.
smpetty wrote
tbpeur01 wrote
smpetty wrote
We need a 50 page thread with the same title concerning the 28mm focal length.Why haven’t Sony, Voigtlander, Zeiss, or Samyang come out with a good 28mm AF lens? The Sigma is too big. The 7Artisans FE-Plus is excellent but MF. The Sony 28/2 is ok.
It’s a mystery to me why one of the most popular focal lengths is so poorly represented in the Sony system.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/blindpiggy/
I have some images taken this weekend that I haven't taken from the SD card. I will try and post some soon. The lens is nicely built and was sharp as a tack on testing, perfectly centered. Focus feel is perfect. Fair amount of vignetting wide open that improves greatly by f/4.
- Tyler
The 35/1.2 Art is awesome. Most used lens for us.
Aug 03, 2020 at 07:16 AM
p.11 #7Why don’t we have an AWESOME 35 yet?
j4nu wrote:
Well, it's a stretch from "improved AF performance" to "AF issue and from what I read it will not even continuous focus", but take it as you will ...
I still think someone mistook 35mm for 45mm.
I feel for the poor Sigma engineers, they're pushed to work hard on firmware updates that address inexistent issues....
From 35/1.2 firmware 02, June 2020 description:
"It has improved a rarely-occurring‘blinking’phenomenon during movie shooting.
It has improved AF performance."
Must be a placebo update then, it doesn't actually do anything important except making the user feel good about applying it
Well, it's a stretch from "improved AF performance" to "AF issue and from what I read it will not even continuous focus", but take it as you will
...I still think someone mistook 35mm for 45mm.
vdo1 wrote
j4nu wrote
It's the Sigma 45mm f2.8 that cannot AF-C reliably...From 35/1.2 firmware 02, June 2020 description:
"It has improved a rarely-occurring‘blinking’phenomenon during movie shooting.
It has improved AF performance."
Must be a placebo update then, it doesn't actually do anything important except making the user feel good about applying it
Aug 03, 2020 at 05:11 PM
p.11 #8Why don’t we have an AWESOME 35 yet?
All I'm saying is that there never was an AF issue with Sigma 35mm f1.2 that made AF-C unusable, whereas there is (and most probably always will be) one with Sigma 45mm f2.8...
vdo1 wrote:
...
I still think someone mistook 35mm for 45mm.
I feel for the poor Sigma engineers, they're pushed to work hard on firmware updates that address inexistent issues....
From 35/1.2 firmware 02, June 2020 description:
"It has improved a rarely-occurring‘blinking’phenomenon during movie shooting.
It has improved AF performance."Must be a placebo update then, it doesn't actually do anything important except making the user feel good about applying it
vdo1 wrote:
j4nu wrote
Well, it's a stretch from "improved AF performance" to "AF issue and from what I read it will not even continuous focus", but take it as you will ...I still think someone mistook 35mm for 45mm.
vdo1 wrote
j4nu wrote
It's the Sigma 45mm f2.8 that cannot AF-C reliably...From 35/1.2 firmware 02, June 2020 description:
"It has improved a rarely-occurring‘blinking’phenomenon during movie shooting.
It has improved AF performance."
Aug 03, 2020 at 06:09 PM
p.11 #9Why don’t we have an AWESOME 35 yet?
Sigma bringing 85/1.4 native. Makes me think 35/1.4 native is not far off.
Aug 04, 2020 at 02:03 AM
p.11 #10Why don’t we have an AWESOME 35 yet?
So soon after their 35 1.2? While I'd love a 35 that's possibly better than the current ART 1.4 with a size reduction, I can't think of how that'd make financial sense.
Aug 04, 2020 at 07:41 AM
p.11 #11Why don’t we have an AWESOME 35 yet?
How does the Voigtlander 35mm f/1.2 SE (native mount) compare to the Voigtlander Ultron 35mm f/1.7 Aspherical lens (adapted)?
Aug 04, 2020 at 07:52 AM
p.11 #12Why don’t we have an AWESOME 35 yet?
I think we can be pretty optimistic about Sony bringing a GM 35 F1.2. Why? They launched 20 as a G lens. The fact that they didn’t go for 35 G and rather went for a vanilla FE version, tells us that there is a room for GM. They won’t do a F1.4 because they already have a ZA.
Aug 04, 2020 at 07:53 AM
p.11 #13Why don’t we have an AWESOME 35 yet?
JVan_02 wrote:
So soon after their 35 1.2? While I'd love a 35 that's possibly better than the current ART 1.4 with a size reduction, I can't think of how that'd make financial sense.
It doesn't.
So soon after their 35 1.2? While I'd love a 35 that's possibly better than the current ART 1.4 with a size reduction, I can't think of how that'd make financial sense.
It doesn't.
Aug 04, 2020 at 08:12 AM
p.11 #14Why don’t we have an AWESOME 35 yet?
nandadevieast wrote:
I think we can be pretty optimistic about Sony bringing a GM 35 F1.2. Why? They launched 20 as a G lens. The fact that they didn’t go for 35 G and rather went for a vanilla FE version, tells us that there is a room for GM. They won’t do a F1.4 because they already have a ZA.
A 2.8, 1.8, 1.4 and 1.2 at the same focal length. I don't think so.
I think we can be pretty optimistic about Sony bringing a GM 35 F1.2. Why? They launched 20 as a G lens. The fact that they didn’t go for 35 G and rather went for a vanilla FE version, tells us that there is a room for GM. They won’t do a F1.4 because they already have a ZA.
A 2.8, 1.8, 1.4 and 1.2 at the same focal length. I don't think so.
Aug 04, 2020 at 08:15 AM
p.11 #15Why don’t we have an AWESOME 35 yet?
smpetty said:
How does the Voigtlander 35mm f/1.2 SE (native mount) compare to the Voigtlander Ultron 35mm f/1.7 Aspherical lens (adapted)?
If adapted properly the 35 1.7 is probably only beaten in the E-mount range adapted or native by the 35 1.4 ZM, and the 35 1.2 Sigma Art. Properly involved a great deal of work or just straight up altering the filter stack, which is something also true of the 1.4 ZM.
I've said it before, but I feel like the ultron is one of the chief instigators of threads like these. Small and without any real flaw optically. The only better take on a 35 1.8/7 currently is the Nikon Z-mount version... or strictly speaking by way of optics/build the 40 CF. In good light, I'd put money down that the 40 CF would make anyone who's looking for a moderately fast, excellently performing optic pleased. However, the focus doesn't hold up in bad lighting for an a7iii owner at least. Heard it performs well on an a9, but that's like straight up modern wizardry focusing tier haha.
How does the Voigtlander 35mm f/1.2 SE (native mount) compare to the Voigtlander Ultron 35mm f/1.7 Aspherical lens (adapted)?
If adapted properly the 35 1.7 is probably only beaten in the E-mount range adapted or native by the 35 1.4 ZM, and the 35 1.2 Sigma Art. Properly involved a great deal of work or just straight up altering the filter stack, which is something also true of the 1.4 ZM.
I've said it before, but I feel like the ultron is one of the chief instigators of threads like these. Small and without any real flaw optically. The only better take on a 35 1.8/7 currently is the Nikon Z-mount version... or strictly speaking by way of optics/build the 40 CF. In good light, I'd put money down that the 40 CF would make anyone who's looking for a moderately fast, excellently performing optic pleased. However, the focus doesn't hold up in bad lighting for an a7iii owner at least. Heard it performs well on an a9, but that's like straight up modern wizardry focusing tier haha.
Aug 04, 2020 at 08:23 AM
p.11 #16Why don’t we have an AWESOME 35 yet?
JVan_02 wrote:
How does the Voigtlander 35mm f/1.2 SE (native mount) compare to the Voigtlander Ultron 35mm f/1.7 Aspherical lens (adapted)?If adapted properly the 35 1.7 is probably only beaten in the E-mount range adapted or native by the 35 1.4 ZM, and the 35 1.2 Sigma Art. Properly involved a great deal of work or just straight up altering the filter stack, which is something also true of the 1.4 ZM.
I've said it before, but I feel like the ultron is one of the chief instigators of threads like these. Small and without any real flaw optically. The only better take on a 35 1.8/7 currently is the Nikon Z-mount version... or strictly speaking by way of optics/build...Show more →
Thanks! Any tips on "proper" adaptation?
Earlier quote
smpetty said:How does the Voigtlander 35mm f/1.2 SE (native mount) compare to the Voigtlander Ultron 35mm f/1.7 Aspherical lens (adapted)?
I've said it before, but I feel like the ultron is one of the chief instigators of threads like these. Small and without any real flaw optically. The only better take on a 35 1.8/7 currently is the Nikon Z-mount version... or strictly speaking by way of optics/build...Show more →
Thanks! Any tips on "proper" adaptation?
Aug 04, 2020 at 08:31 AM
p.11 #17Why don’t we have an AWESOME 35 yet?
There is not much love for the Sony 35/1.4 anywhere, I have always liked mine, no complaints at all.
Aug 04, 2020 at 09:25 AM
p.11 #18Why don’t we have an AWESOME 35 yet?
Wow this must be the most talked about issue since the first A7R was released. I'm sure a 35 1.4 GM is in the plans but have to agree that the 24 was probably more important to Sony. I'm sure a 35 1.4 GM would be very popular. I know I would grab one almost immediately and could finally sell my Leica 35R f2 and Zeiss 35 2.8.
Let's hope the 35 appears this year so we can finally put to rest the hundreds of posts on this subject
Let's hope the 35 appears this year so we can finally put to rest the hundreds of posts on this subject
Aug 04, 2020 at 09:48 AM
p.11 #19Why don’t we have an AWESOME 35 yet?
alans220 wrote:
There is not much love for the Sony 35/1.4 anywhere, I have always liked mine, no complaints at all.
People who love it just take great photos. People who hate it ( many have not tried it but echo what they read ) shout loudly.
There is not much love for the Sony 35/1.4 anywhere, I have always liked mine, no complaints at all.
People who love it just take great photos. People who hate it ( many have not tried it but echo what they read ) shout loudly.
Aug 04, 2020 at 09:52 AM
p.11 #20Why don’t we have an AWESOME 35 yet?
This is indeed a tough one. The Sony 35/1.4 is OK but it does not excel in any particular way. It is not light, not fast to focus, prone to fringing, but it does have nice bokeh and color, even if it lacks the pop of other lenses.
The ZE/ZF line was just a much better lens (I had sold mine on move to Sony and bought the Sony lens but now have re-purchased the ZF.2).
By contrast, I think that the Sony 50/1.4 is an amazing lens. It is probably my favorite 50 ever, with the exception being its weight/size. The rendering and coloring are just fabulous.
Indeed, if we could get a 135/1.8 GM level 35mm lens, it would be fantastic.
The ZE/ZF line was just a much better lens (I had sold mine on move to Sony and bought the Sony lens but now have re-purchased the ZF.2).
By contrast, I think that the Sony 50/1.4 is an amazing lens. It is probably my favorite 50 ever, with the exception being its weight/size. The rendering and coloring are just fabulous.
Indeed, if we could get a 135/1.8 GM level 35mm lens, it would be fantastic.
Aug 04, 2020 at 10:37 AM