It looks like 35mm is a very difficult focal length to get right... all I wanted was the image quality of the SY 45/1.8 with the 35mm focal length
Well, there are some positives on the 35mm compared to 45mm :
* onion rings seem to be less pronounced
* MFD is a lot better
* weather sealing
* switch on the side .
It looks like 35mm is a very difficult focal length to get right... all I wanted was the image quality of the SY 45/1.8 with the 35mm focal length
There appears to be a bit of a contradiction here between the two sample shots. On the one hand the astro shot looks really good even into the corners. There is no obviously astigmatism or coma even when viewing at 100%. However, on this bridge night shot I noticed it as well. The bat wings are definitely there in this shot. So, it begs the question regarding the real night performance given sample variation, etc...
I would be very happy with the astro results shown, but not so much if stars actually have bat wings like so many other lenses including the Sony 35/1.8. Did they perhaps fix them in photoshop which isn't really easy to do? Or is there something else going on here?
After taking a loot at the gallery on a real screen not phone, I am less impressed by the rendering--in particular the nissen bokeh on the flower shot and the boy in the water from the samples.
The coma looks pretty good--especially considering the size/price--at least good enough for stars, probably not urban night scenes.
I'll wait for some reviews, but I was already going to sell my FE 35 and CV 35 1.7 is listed regardless.
This is really giving me pause for thought since I'm about to purchase the excellent performing Tamron 35/1.4 for Canon and adapt it. I know it's not going to be as good as the Tamron. But still, I love small form factor. I guess its too early to tell how many compromises were made to achieve the size and what its really best suited for.
If the AF is good, the only thing keeping this from being an absolutely perfect moderately fast wide-standard is the mfd. Waiting on some reviews and hands on...
Any word when this lens will be available? I think I'll trade my Samyang 35mm f/1.4 FE for this lens. I've never found a 35mm lens that rendered particularly well, so I'll trade some light gathering if this new Sam 35mm f/1.8 performs better with AF and wide open sharpness. The Sam 1.4 lens is just too bulky for my taste, despite getting a few nice shots with it and it's AF performance is even worst than a Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art + adapter (which focuses pretty well).
Jonathan F wrote:
Any word when this lens will be available?
I've pre-ordered this lens. The seller shows 2-4 weeks as delivery schedule. No idea how realistic that is. With the 75mm it was spot on when I pre-ordered it. Sadly I had to return it, since the lens didn't work (at all). And got the FE85 instead. Now this new 35 seems really promising, as I've been hoping for such a lens (the f/1.4's are too huge and the f/2.8's just too slow). I mostly use manual Voigtländers, so I have been reluctant "paying the premium" for the FE35/1.8.
The lens is cheap enough to expect some compromises although the MTF chart looks OK. Nope Sigma won’t redesign a lighter 35 to compete with Samyang. They don’t do light. Less plastic than the Samyangs.
Tonzah78 wrote:
I've pre-ordered this lens. The seller shows 2-4 weeks as delivery schedule. No idea how realistic that is. With the 75mm it was spot on when I pre-ordered it. Sadly I had to return it, since the lens didn't work (at all). And got the FE85 instead. Now this new 35 seems really promising, as I've been hoping for such a lens (the f/1.4's are too huge and the f/2.8's just too slow). I mostly use manual Voigtländers, so I have been reluctant "paying the premium" for the FE35/1.8.
While I'm tempted to get the 75mm f/1.8 FE, I currently have the Sam 85mm f/1.4 FE which was their first lens to iron out the AF bugs. The 35mm f/1.4 feels less polished. My 85mm is spot on when focusing and using eye AF. I'm hoping the Sam 35mm f/1.8 performs more like the 45mm f/1.8 which has been great for me...in fact I find it a bit too sharp and need to apply less unsharpen mask and reduce clarity when shooting raw!
I'll most likely go the Greentoe route and try to get this lens cheaper than retail. I have no problem being early adopters for these Samyang lenses even though they drop in price fast. I've gotten tons of use from my 18mm and 45mm buying early!
A nice review, with some bold statements at the end comparing it to Sony's own offering .
I'm a bit dissapointed by CA, but at this price I guess it's more than ok...
I'll probably trade my SY45 for this lens and see for myself.
Looks pretty good honestly. Looking forward to his video comparing that lens with the 35 FE, as it is going to be the most important comparison (copy variation aside). Wish he had a newer camera to test the AF on. Hopefully in another review we get to see some of that.
Looks like it reviews well enough to get a highly recommended rating, though the rendering seems kind of bland just looking at the images. I've been a bit jaded on Samyang since my APS-C days, I always associate them with poor QC... Have they improved in this area over the years at all?
NorthWinterSky wrote:
Looks like it reviews well enough to get a highly recommended rating, though the rendering seems kind of bland just looking at the images. I've been a bit jaded on Samyang since my APS-C days, I always associate them will poor QC... Have they improved in this area over the years at all?
Their new AF lenses are a step up from their MF lenses.
From Roger Cicala: This lens was a pleasant surprise. No, it’s not built like a tank. But it is built like a small, efficient, well-constructed lens. With some of the previous Samyang / Rokinon lenses we disassemble them going “Oh, that’s going to break. This could be a problem.” We didn’t see any obvious weak points like that with this lens. It’s a clear step up in construction quality. It should be, it’s also a step up in price point.
NorthWinterSky wrote:
Looks like it reviews well enough to get a highly recommended rating, though the rendering seems kind of bland just looking at the images. I've been a bit jaded on Samyang since my APS-C days, I always associate them will poor QC... Have they improved in this area over the years at all?
In my experience, Samyang lenses are no worse than other manufacturers in terms of QC (including Sony, Tamron and Sigma). I've had the 18mm, 45mm, 75mm and 135mm, and none of them showed any issues regarding manufacturing defects.
.
.