p.1 #1 · Is a compact, not-so-fast but high image quality, wide autofocus lens possible?
I'm longing for a 28mm or 35mm compact Z mount, autofocus lens for street photography and landscapes on long hikes or when I'm carrying a large birding lens on my other camera. My question is: Is this a reasonable proposition or am I asking for too much to fit into a compact package?
The 35/1.8 or 35/1.4 Z are too big.
The 26/2.8, 28/2.8 or 40/2 Z don't have the image quality I seek (although some would argue with me here)
The Voigtlander 28 or 35 APO Lanthar/2 are manual focus (some would argue correctly that I don't need autofocus for landscape, but I'd want the lens to have more versatility).
If you have a 28mm or 35mm f/4 lens with autofocus, is it conceivable to approach 35/1.8 Z or 28 APO/2 image quality when comparing both at f/4?
p.1 #2 · Is a compact, not-so-fast but high image quality, wide autofocus lens possible?
You can have two out of the following three: small, high quality, affordable. Not all three in the same lens. Leica may have something for you.
Eco-Scott wrote:
I'm longing for a 28mm or 35mm compact Z mount, autofocus lens for street photography and landscapes on long hikes or when I'm carrying a large birding lens on my other camera. My question is: Is this a reasonable proposition or am I asking for too much to fit into a compact package?
The 35/1.8 or 35/1.4 Z are too big.
The 26/2.8, 28/2.8 or 40/2 Z don't have the image quality I seek (although some would argue with me here)
The Voigtlander 28 or 35 APO Lanthar/2 are manual focus (some would argue correctly that I don't need autofocus for landscape, but I'd want the lens to have more versatility).
If you have a 28mm or 35mm f/4 lens with autofocus, is it conceivable to approach 35/1.8 Z or 28 APO/2 image quality when comparing both at f/4?
p.1 #3 · Is a compact, not-so-fast but high image quality, wide autofocus lens possible?
No AF but I recommend the CV 28 APO. It is very small and has outstanding image quality. Of course there are small AF options (Nikon 26, 28, 40) but they have other compromises.
p.1 #4 · Is a compact, not-so-fast but high image quality, wide autofocus lens possible?
Doesn't exist if you think little lenses like the 35/1.8 are too big.
Get you a 28/2 or 35/2 APO and be done with it.
There's also a tremendous back catalog of old, small F primes that are up to the task but they are MF and won't have focus confirmation, so you're back to the Z APO line being the best value.
p.1 #5 · Is a compact, not-so-fast but high image quality, wide autofocus lens possible?
This is soemthing I have always wondered
Is the Leica lens actually small and high quality and with AF? Why they could make it that way but other manufacturers couldn’t?
ilkka_nissila wrote:
You can have two out of the following three: small, high quality, affordable. Not all three in the same lens. Leica may have something for you.
p.1 #8 · Is a compact, not-so-fast but high image quality, wide autofocus lens possible?
Eco-Scott wrote:
If you have a 28mm or 35mm f/4 lens with autofocus, is it conceivable to approach 35/1.8 Z or 28 APO/2 image quality when comparing both at f/4?
There is no modern 28 or 35 at F/4 with AF.
You may print a huge size of photo and looking for corner to corner that seeing 26, 28 and 40 pancake lens don't have the image quality you need.
p.1 #9 · Is a compact, not-so-fast but high image quality, wide autofocus lens possible?
Eco-Scott wrote:
I'm longing for a 28mm or 35mm compact Z mount, autofocus lens for street photography and landscapes on long hikes or when I'm carrying a large birding lens on my other camera. My question is: Is this a reasonable proposition or am I asking for too much to fit into a compact package?
The 35/1.8 or 35/1.4 Z are too big.
The 26/2.8, 28/2.8 or 40/2 Z don't have the image quality I seek (although some would argue with me here)
The Voigtlander 28 or 35 APO Lanthar/2 are manual focus (some would argue correctly that I don't need autofocus for landscape, but I'd want the lens to have more versatility).
If you have a 28mm or 35mm f/4 lens with autofocus, is it conceivable to approach 35/1.8 Z or 28 APO/2 image quality when comparing both at f/4?
Have you considered the GFX100RF? 735 grams, small, comes with a nice slow lens, has autofocus... Seems like a good fit.
There's also an E-mount 35 f/2.8 ZA. I don't know anything about it, but it's small and it says "Zeiss" on the side, so how bad can it be? Seems like E gets along fine with a Nikon sensor stack at 35 and longer, but can't say for sure.
But for native glass, you've pretty much laid it out. The Voigtlanders are great if you don't mind manual, the 35 f/1.8S is great if you don't mind the size, and the 26/28/40 are good sizes but if you don't like the output, then that doesn't matter much.
Your best bet might be a 35 APO for when IQ really matters, and the 26/28/40 for when you want to keep things compact. Otherwise, you might just have to live with the size of the 35 f/1.8S.
p.1 #10 · Is a compact, not-so-fast but high image quality, wide autofocus lens possible?
As all the others have stated, there is no AF + small 28mm or 35mm prime for Z. I can personally recommend the [manual focus] VZ Apo 35, and probably soon will join the ranks of those recommending the VZ Apo 28mm. I have had the Z 28/2.8 for about 2.5 years now, and for me, it has too many optical shortcomings to use for "serious" photography. I'd sooner take an ancient Nikon AiS-era manual focus lens than the Z 28mm. The Z 28/2.8 is acceptable for non-critical snaps of the kids playing or family barbeques, or if the photographer is looking for a certain character in the rendering.
Leica actually has an AF 28mm, but it's permanently stuck to a Leica Q3 camera.
