GHarris
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · A7C VS Q2 size comparison with Loxia 35mm and Sony 35mm 2.8 | |
Sondera wrote:
Thanks for a great answer @GHarris@!
I have actually been totally happy with the image quality of the 28mm f2, especially for environmental portraits and social settings. Great sharpness (center frame), nice rendering and beautiful falloff/bokeh. But I have seen that with my very active two-year old the eye focus is far less reliable than my other Sony lenses.
Since getting the A7c I have wanted to keep my walkaround prime as small and lightweight as possible, and although the 40mm is newer (and probably a tad better) its a bit too close to the 55mm, I would rather stay in the 28/35mm range. I do have the Sony 35mm 1.8, but have never really loved it, so I am considering to replace it with a used Zony 35 to keep the kit as small as possible. And the combo looks very sweet from the OPs images. 😇...Show more →
I should add a minor exception to my remarks about AF performance. The 35 2.8 Zony, like the 55 1.8 Zony, can only autofocus at a maximum of 15 fps on the highest-end bodies like the a9 and a1. An old table is provided here with details: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1492817
This, paradoxically, does not mean that its autofocus is slow. Both the 55 and the 35 have good fast autofocus. But they were released in 2013 or 14 (I forget) and perhaps there is some communication protocol issue that prevents them from letting rip at 20 or 30fps. Nevertheless, their autofocus is fast and good. There are lenses on the "can do 20fps" table whose autofocus performance is much slower, like the old Sony 50mm f/1.8, so the table doesn't mean what you might think it means - it's not an indicator of what lenses focus best.
This point is academic for your a7C but I'm just mentioning it for the sake of future-proofing awareness (perhaps you will upgrade bodies one day, to an imaginary a7Cii, etc) and the prevention of unhappy surprises. I find that autofocussing at extreme burst speeds is not something I ever actually wish to do with my a9. The fact that the autofocus is reliable and fast at lower burst speeds is all I want from it, and is a different kind of performance, a more relevant and real-world performance, than the maximum shooting rate statistic. I said earlier that there is never a time when my 35 2.8 is capable of less than top performance on my a9 - that has been true, for me. When I shoot at 10fps or 5fps or whatever I never get missed shots that are attributable to the lens. Whatever it is that prevents it from shooting at 20fps, and which never matters to me, does not affect general AF behaviour.
You mention the 55 Zony as if perhaps you own it. If so, good. That gives you a point of reference. Both the 35 and 55 are Zony lenses of the same vintage and build quality. The autofocus performance of them is the same in my opinion. The 55 is a slightly better lens all-round, however. It has slightly more punch/pop/clarity... sharpness and contrast, which I find I can notice whenever I use both lenses to take photos of the same subject. But, like I say, the 35 is quite good - especially for its size. And they do have a lot of character in common. The 55 is just... a bit better.
I'm relieved you are finding that other lenses, on your a7C, give you a better autofocus hit rate than your 28. That does indeed suggest that you will be able to obtain satisfactory performance with a change to the 35 and that your a7C is not the limiting factor. A hurtling toddler is a hard target!
The bokeh from the 35 2.8 is not amazing, just 'okay' (I refer not to the quantity, of course, which is inherent to the aperture, but the character). Much the same is said of the small 40 2.5, I believe. I don't know the 28 well enough to know whether its bokeh is 'better' than these - but since you said that you find the 28's bokeh and falloff very pleasing (and I've no idea whether it is very different in style to the 35 or not) I'm just mentioning the ambiguity so that nothing is an unpleasant unexpected surprise for you.
Hopefully nothing that you found displeasing about the Sony 35 1.8 will also be displeasing in the 35 2.8. (Hopefully you were only referring to size). The Sony 35 1.8 is a quite good, not perfect lens - so is the 35 2.8. One is a Zony, the other is a much newer Sony, they aren't direct siblings (the Zony probably has more of a dab of the Zeiss-style colour character, albeit only a weak dab of it compared to most Zeiss lenses)
... they aren't the same: but they're both quite-good, not-quite-perfect 35s (with the 1.8 being a better lens when stopped down to 2.8, than the Zony 2.8 is wide-open... I believe. I am not very familiar with the 1.8 myself, just remembering old reviews). I'm just mentioning all this to give you context and fair warning. Both 35s are a distinct overall image-quality cut above the 28mm f/2 by common consensus so hopefully nothing will disappoint you. I just don't know whether there was something unique about the 28's bokeh character that you will miss. The Zony lenses have somewhat contrasty, stark bokeh, potentially with a bit of LOCA - I wouldn't describe it as smooth, exactly. Anyway, waffle over...!
|
