Is there a 35GM little brother?
p.4 #1Is there a 35GM little brother?
tuxounet wrote:
Hi,
Thanks again for all your advice—it’s really helpful (though sometimes it confuses me
).
After comparing the Viltrox EVO and the Sigma a bit, I don’t really see any advantage for the Viltrox in terms of weight or size.
I did another test of the 35mm f/2.8 ZA, and I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Test photo: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369841078/in/album-72177720334507289/
Zoom in on the right and left edges: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369692391/in/album-72177720334507289/
Is it off-center?
It does appear somewhat decentered…softer with reduced contrast on the right side. I don’t have extensive enough experience evaluating centeredness to know if it’s within acceptability limits. I think this would probably annoy me, but maybe not in actual practical use. I’m really interested to see what others think.
Hi,
Thanks again for all your advice—it’s really helpful (though sometimes it confuses me
).After comparing the Viltrox EVO and the Sigma a bit, I don’t really see any advantage for the Viltrox in terms of weight or size.
I did another test of the 35mm f/2.8 ZA, and I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Test photo: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369841078/in/album-72177720334507289/
Zoom in on the right and left edges: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369692391/in/album-72177720334507289/
Is it off-center?
It does appear somewhat decentered…softer with reduced contrast on the right side. I don’t have extensive enough experience evaluating centeredness to know if it’s within acceptability limits. I think this would probably annoy me, but maybe not in actual practical use. I’m really interested to see what others think.
Jul 02, 2026 at 03:44 AM
p.4 #2Is there a 35GM little brother?
If you paid full price for that 35/2.8 you should, in my opinion, get a correctly put together lens.
Jul 02, 2026 at 07:53 AM
p.4 #3Is there a 35GM little brother?
tuxounet wrote:
Hi,
Thanks again for all your advice—it’s really helpful (though sometimes it confuses me).
After comparing the Viltrox EVO and the Sigma a bit, I don’t really see any advantage for the Viltrox in terms of weight or size.
I did another test of the 35mm f/2.8 ZA, and I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Test photo: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369841078/in/album-72177720334507289/
Zoom in on the right and left edges: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369692391/in/album-72177720334507289/
Is it off-center?
It appears to be very slightly de-centered. But to my eye it also seems not perfectly focused… Even so, it’s pretty marginal here at f4. Try a similar image at 2.8, 4 and 5.6 and really try to nail center focus. Reality for me is if it’s visible at f2.8 — which it often won’t be due to DoF and/or edge falloff, and not visible at f5.6 due to the increased DoF, it probably won’t matter much for most images; and with a frame at f4 you can ascertain whether the amount of its presence is going to be acceptable there for your needs.
Caveat comment few will like, but IMHO with today’s sensors and AF capabilities, it’s really hard for manual focusing to compete. IOW, I suspect many of your manually focused images will be mis-focused by more than the slight amount this lens is de-centered — unless perhaps you’re taking the time to use magnified MF view for every frame…
Hi,
Thanks again for all your advice—it’s really helpful (though sometimes it confuses me
).After comparing the Viltrox EVO and the Sigma a bit, I don’t really see any advantage for the Viltrox in terms of weight or size.
I did another test of the 35mm f/2.8 ZA, and I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Test photo: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369841078/in/album-72177720334507289/
Zoom in on the right and left edges: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369692391/in/album-72177720334507289/
Is it off-center?
It appears to be very slightly de-centered. But to my eye it also seems not perfectly focused… Even so, it’s pretty marginal here at f4. Try a similar image at 2.8, 4 and 5.6 and really try to nail center focus. Reality for me is if it’s visible at f2.8 — which it often won’t be due to DoF and/or edge falloff, and not visible at f5.6 due to the increased DoF, it probably won’t matter much for most images; and with a frame at f4 you can ascertain whether the amount of its presence is going to be acceptable there for your needs.
Caveat comment few will like, but IMHO with today’s sensors and AF capabilities, it’s really hard for manual focusing to compete. IOW, I suspect many of your manually focused images will be mis-focused by more than the slight amount this lens is de-centered — unless perhaps you’re taking the time to use magnified MF view for every frame…
Jul 02, 2026 at 08:04 AM
p.4 #4Is there a 35GM little brother?
Jack Flesher wrote:
Thanks again for all your advice—it’s really helpful (though sometimes it confuses me).
After comparing the Viltrox EVO and the Sigma a bit, I don’t really see any advantage for the Viltrox in terms of weight or size.
I did another test of the 35mm f/2.8 ZA, and I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Test photo: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369841078/in/album-72177720334507289/
Zoom in on the right and left edges: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369692391/in/album-72177720334507289/
Is it off-center?It appears to be very slightly de-centered. But to my eye it also seems not perfectly focused… Even so, it’s pretty marginal here at f4. Try a similar image at 2.8, 4 and 5.6 and really try to nail center focus. Reality for me is if it’s visible at f2.8 — which it often won’t be due to DoF and/or edge falloff, and not visible at f5.6 due to the increased DoF, it probably won’t matter much for most images; and with a frame at f4 you can ascertain whether the amount of its presence is going to be...Show more →
Focus is perfect on the center. Crop of the focus point : https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55370184511/in/dateposted-public/
I did those tests :
- Same results at F8 (other point of view) : https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55370380374/in/album-72177720334507289/
- Worst at F2.8 : https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369308897/in/dateposted-public/
What is strange is that it start abruptly to become fuzzy and it it not only the extrem corners but also the full right quarter of the image width…
Edited on Jul 02, 2026 at 09:08 AM · View previous versions
tuxounet wrote
Hi,Thanks again for all your advice—it’s really helpful (though sometimes it confuses me
).After comparing the Viltrox EVO and the Sigma a bit, I don’t really see any advantage for the Viltrox in terms of weight or size.
I did another test of the 35mm f/2.8 ZA, and I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Test photo: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369841078/in/album-72177720334507289/
Zoom in on the right and left edges: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369692391/in/album-72177720334507289/
Is it off-center?
Focus is perfect on the center. Crop of the focus point : https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55370184511/in/dateposted-public/
I did those tests :
- Same results at F8 (other point of view) : https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55370380374/in/album-72177720334507289/
- Worst at F2.8 : https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369308897/in/dateposted-public/
What is strange is that it start abruptly to become fuzzy and it it not only the extrem corners but also the full right quarter of the image width…
Edited on Jul 02, 2026 at 09:08 AM · View previous versions
Jul 02, 2026 at 08:12 AM
p.4 #5Is there a 35GM little brother?
tuxounet wrote:
Thanks again for all your advice—it’s really helpful (though sometimes it confuses me).
After comparing the Viltrox EVO and the Sigma a bit, I don’t really see any advantage for the Viltrox in terms of weight or size.
I did another test of the 35mm f/2.8 ZA, and I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Test photo: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369841078/in/album-72177720334507289/
Zoom in on the right and left edges: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369692391/in/album-72177720334507289/
Is it off-center?It appears to be very slightly de-centered. But to my eye it also seems not perfectly focused… Even so, it’s pretty marginal here at f4. Try a similar image at 2.8, 4 and 5.6 and really try to nail center focus. Reality for me is if it’s visible at f2.8 — which it often won’t be due to DoF and/or edge falloff, and not visible at f5.6 due to the increased DoF, it probably won’t matter much for most images; and with a frame at f4 you can ascertain whether the amount of its presence is going to be acceptable there for your needs.
Caveat comment few will like, but IMHO with today’s sensors and AF capabilities, it’s really hard for manual focusing to compete. IOW, I suspect many of your manually focused images will be mis-focused by more than the slight amount this lens is de-centered — unless perhaps you’re taking the time to use magnified MF view for every frame…Focus is perfect on the center. Crop of the focus point : https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55370184511/in/dateposted-public/
I did those tests :
- Same results at F8 (other point of view) : https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55370380374/in/album-72177720334507289/
- Worst at F2.8.
What is strange is that it start abruptly to become fuzzy and it it not only the extrem corners but also the full right quarter of the image width…
Okay, center is sharp per the crop. But going by your edge crops, neither is crisp. The left is a bit better than the right, so that would indicate some slight de-centering, but to my eyes it’s an insignificant difference. It appears the lens itself isn’t as good as the center at f4 per the crops, and the slight de-center accentuates that a bit on the right side, but again I don’t see it as enough of a difference to worry about, especially if you’re happy with the edge on the left.
Furthermore and for whatever it’s worth to you at this point, I personally think the 35 EVO I had for a short while was superior wide open at f1.8 to what this is showing at f4 here. My .02 only…
Jack Flesher wrote
tuxounet wrote
Hi,Thanks again for all your advice—it’s really helpful (though sometimes it confuses me
).After comparing the Viltrox EVO and the Sigma a bit, I don’t really see any advantage for the Viltrox in terms of weight or size.
I did another test of the 35mm f/2.8 ZA, and I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Test photo: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369841078/in/album-72177720334507289/
Zoom in on the right and left edges: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369692391/in/album-72177720334507289/
Is it off-center?
Caveat comment few will like, but IMHO with today’s sensors and AF capabilities, it’s really hard for manual focusing to compete. IOW, I suspect many of your manually focused images will be mis-focused by more than the slight amount this lens is de-centered — unless perhaps you’re taking the time to use magnified MF view for every frame…
I did those tests :
- Same results at F8 (other point of view) : https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55370380374/in/album-72177720334507289/
- Worst at F2.8.
What is strange is that it start abruptly to become fuzzy and it it not only the extrem corners but also the full right quarter of the image width…
Okay, center is sharp per the crop. But going by your edge crops, neither is crisp. The left is a bit better than the right, so that would indicate some slight de-centering, but to my eyes it’s an insignificant difference. It appears the lens itself isn’t as good as the center at f4 per the crops, and the slight de-center accentuates that a bit on the right side, but again I don’t see it as enough of a difference to worry about, especially if you’re happy with the edge on the left.
Furthermore and for whatever it’s worth to you at this point, I personally think the 35 EVO I had for a short while was superior wide open at f1.8 to what this is showing at f4 here. My .02 only…
Jul 02, 2026 at 08:48 AM
p.4 #6Is there a 35GM little brother?
Jack Flesher wrote:
Thanks again for all your advice—it’s really helpful (though sometimes it confuses me).
After comparing the Viltrox EVO and the Sigma a bit, I don’t really see any advantage for the Viltrox in terms of weight or size.
I did another test of the 35mm f/2.8 ZA, and I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Test photo: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369841078/in/album-72177720334507289/
Zoom in on the right and left edges: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369692391/in/album-72177720334507289/
Is it off-center?It appears to be very slightly de-centered. But to my eye it also seems not perfectly focused… Even so, it’s pretty marginal here at f4. Try a similar image at 2.8, 4 and 5.6 and really try to nail center focus. Reality for me is if it’s visible at f2.8 — which it often won’t be due to DoF and/or edge falloff, and not visible at f5.6 due to the increased DoF, it probably won’t matter much for most images; and with a frame at f4 you can ascertain whether the amount of its presence is going to be acceptable there for your needs.
Caveat comment few will like, but IMHO with today’s sensors and AF capabilities, it’s really hard for manual focusing to compete. IOW, I suspect many of your manually focused images will be mis-focused by more than the slight amount this lens is de-centered — unless perhaps you’re taking the time to use magnified MF view for every frame…Focus is perfect on the center. Crop of the focus point : https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55370184511/in/dateposted-public/
I did those tests :
- Same results at F8 (other point of view) : https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55370380374/in/album-72177720334507289/
- Worst at F2.8.
What is strange is that it start abruptly to become fuzzy and it it not only the extrem corners but also the full right quarter of the image width…Okay, center is sharp per the crop. But going by your edge crops, neither is crisp. The left is a bit better than the right, so that would indicate some slight de-centering, but to my eyes it’s an insignificant difference. It appears the lens itself isn’t as good as the center at f4 per the crops, and the slight de-center accentuates that a bit on the right side, but again I don’t see it as enough of a difference to worry about, especially if you’re happy with the edge on the left.
Furthermore and for whatever it’s worth to...Show more →
Thanks for your answer. The i35 and the EVO are very similar regarding size/weight (but not price). I might prefer the Sigma design/build. But yeah, I also want to see it in person…
tuxounet wrote
Jack Flesher wrote
tuxounet wrote
Hi,Thanks again for all your advice—it’s really helpful (though sometimes it confuses me
).After comparing the Viltrox EVO and the Sigma a bit, I don’t really see any advantage for the Viltrox in terms of weight or size.
I did another test of the 35mm f/2.8 ZA, and I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Test photo: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369841078/in/album-72177720334507289/
Zoom in on the right and left edges: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369692391/in/album-72177720334507289/
Is it off-center?
Caveat comment few will like, but IMHO with today’s sensors and AF capabilities, it’s really hard for manual focusing to compete. IOW, I suspect many of your manually focused images will be mis-focused by more than the slight amount this lens is de-centered — unless perhaps you’re taking the time to use magnified MF view for every frame…
I did those tests :
- Same results at F8 (other point of view) : https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55370380374/in/album-72177720334507289/
- Worst at F2.8.
What is strange is that it start abruptly to become fuzzy and it it not only the extrem corners but also the full right quarter of the image width…
Furthermore and for whatever it’s worth to...Show more →
Thanks for your answer. The i35 and the EVO are very similar regarding size/weight (but not price). I might prefer the Sigma design/build. But yeah, I also want to see it in person…
Jul 02, 2026 at 09:23 AM
p.4 #7Is there a 35GM little brother?
tuxounet wrote:
Thanks again for all your advice—it’s really helpful (though sometimes it confuses me).
After comparing the Viltrox EVO and the Sigma a bit, I don’t really see any advantage for the Viltrox in terms of weight or size.
I did another test of the 35mm f/2.8 ZA, and I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Test photo: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369841078/in/album-72177720334507289/
Zoom in on the right and left edges: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369692391/in/album-72177720334507289/
Is it off-center?It appears to be very slightly de-centered. But to my eye it also seems not perfectly focused… Even so, it’s pretty marginal here at f4. Try a similar image at 2.8, 4 and 5.6 and really try to nail center focus. Reality for me is if it’s visible at f2.8 — which it often won’t be due to DoF and/or edge falloff, and not visible at f5.6 due to the increased DoF, it probably won’t matter much for most images; and with a frame at f4 you can ascertain whether the amount of its presence is going to be acceptable there for your needs.
Caveat comment few will like, but IMHO with today’s sensors and AF capabilities, it’s really hard for manual focusing to compete. IOW, I suspect many of your manually focused images will be mis-focused by more than the slight amount this lens is de-centered — unless perhaps you’re taking the time to use magnified MF view for every frame…Focus is perfect on the center. Crop of the focus point : https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55370184511/in/dateposted-public/
I did those tests :
- Same results at F8 (other point of view) : https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55370380374/in/album-72177720334507289/
- Worst at F2.8.
What is strange is that it start abruptly to become fuzzy and it it not only the extrem corners but also the full right quarter of the image width…Okay, center is sharp per the crop. But going by your edge crops, neither is crisp. The left is a bit better than the right, so that would indicate some slight de-centering, but to my eyes it’s an insignificant difference. It appears the lens itself isn’t as good as the center at f4 per the crops, and the slight de-center accentuates that a bit on the right side, but again I don’t see it as enough of a difference to worry about, especially if you’re happy with the edge on the left.
Furthermore and for whatever it’s worth to you at this point, I personally think the 35 EVO I had for a short while was superior wide open at f1.8 to what this is showing at f4 here. My .02 only…Thanks for your answer. The i35 and the EVO are very similar regarding size/weight (but not price). I might prefer the Sigma design/build. But yeah, I also want to see it in person…
Again, FWIW, I feel the build quality of the EVO is every bit as good as a Sony G lens. YMMV
Jack Flesher wrote
tuxounet wrote
Jack Flesher wrote
tuxounet wrote
Hi,Thanks again for all your advice—it’s really helpful (though sometimes it confuses me
).After comparing the Viltrox EVO and the Sigma a bit, I don’t really see any advantage for the Viltrox in terms of weight or size.
I did another test of the 35mm f/2.8 ZA, and I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Test photo: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369841078/in/album-72177720334507289/
Zoom in on the right and left edges: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369692391/in/album-72177720334507289/
Is it off-center?
Caveat comment few will like, but IMHO with today’s sensors and AF capabilities, it’s really hard for manual focusing to compete. IOW, I suspect many of your manually focused images will be mis-focused by more than the slight amount this lens is de-centered — unless perhaps you’re taking the time to use magnified MF view for every frame…
I did those tests :
- Same results at F8 (other point of view) : https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55370380374/in/album-72177720334507289/
- Worst at F2.8.
What is strange is that it start abruptly to become fuzzy and it it not only the extrem corners but also the full right quarter of the image width…
Furthermore and for whatever it’s worth to you at this point, I personally think the 35 EVO I had for a short while was superior wide open at f1.8 to what this is showing at f4 here. My .02 only…
Again, FWIW, I feel the build quality of the EVO is every bit as good as a Sony G lens. YMMV
Jul 02, 2026 at 09:32 AM
p.4 #8Is there a 35GM little brother?
Jack Flesher wrote:
Thanks again for all your advice—it’s really helpful (though sometimes it confuses me).
After comparing the Viltrox EVO and the Sigma a bit, I don’t really see any advantage for the Viltrox in terms of weight or size.
I did another test of the 35mm f/2.8 ZA, and I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Test photo: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369841078/in/album-72177720334507289/
Zoom in on the right and left edges: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369692391/in/album-72177720334507289/
Is it off-center?It appears to be very slightly de-centered. But to my eye it also seems not perfectly focused… Even so, it’s pretty marginal here at f4. Try a similar image at 2.8, 4 and 5.6 and really try to nail center focus. Reality for me is if it’s visible at f2.8 — which it often won’t be due to DoF and/or edge falloff, and not visible at f5.6 due to the increased DoF, it probably won’t matter much for most images; and with a frame at f4 you can ascertain whether the amount of its presence is going to be acceptable there for your needs.
Caveat comment few will like, but IMHO with today’s sensors and AF capabilities, it’s really hard for manual focusing to compete. IOW, I suspect many of your manually focused images will be mis-focused by more than the slight amount this lens is de-centered — unless perhaps you’re taking the time to use magnified MF view for every frame…Focus is perfect on the center. Crop of the focus point : https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55370184511/in/dateposted-public/
I did those tests :
- Same results at F8 (other point of view) : https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55370380374/in/album-72177720334507289/
- Worst at F2.8.
What is strange is that it start abruptly to become fuzzy and it it not only the extrem corners but also the full right quarter of the image width…Okay, center is sharp per the crop. But going by your edge crops, neither is crisp. The left is a bit better than the right, so that would indicate some slight de-centering, but to my eyes it’s an insignificant difference. It appears the lens itself isn’t as good as the center at f4 per the crops, and the slight de-center accentuates that a bit on the right side, but again I don’t see it as enough of a difference to worry about, especially if you’re happy with the edge on the left.
Furthermore and for whatever it’s worth to you at this point, I personally think the 35 EVO I had for a short while was superior wide open at f1.8 to what this is showing at f4 here. My .02 only…Thanks for your answer. The i35 and the EVO are very similar regarding size/weight (but not price). I might prefer the Sigma design/build. But yeah, I also want to see it in person…Again, FWIW, I feel the build quality of the EVO is every bit as good as a Sony G lens. YMMV
It is on my test list 🫡
tuxounet wrote
Jack Flesher wrote
tuxounet wrote
Jack Flesher wrote
tuxounet wrote
Hi,Thanks again for all your advice—it’s really helpful (though sometimes it confuses me
).After comparing the Viltrox EVO and the Sigma a bit, I don’t really see any advantage for the Viltrox in terms of weight or size.
I did another test of the 35mm f/2.8 ZA, and I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Test photo: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369841078/in/album-72177720334507289/
Zoom in on the right and left edges: https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55369692391/in/album-72177720334507289/
Is it off-center?
Caveat comment few will like, but IMHO with today’s sensors and AF capabilities, it’s really hard for manual focusing to compete. IOW, I suspect many of your manually focused images will be mis-focused by more than the slight amount this lens is de-centered — unless perhaps you’re taking the time to use magnified MF view for every frame…
I did those tests :
- Same results at F8 (other point of view) : https://www.flickr.com/photos/157813725@N07/55370380374/in/album-72177720334507289/
- Worst at F2.8.
What is strange is that it start abruptly to become fuzzy and it it not only the extrem corners but also the full right quarter of the image width…
Furthermore and for whatever it’s worth to you at this point, I personally think the 35 EVO I had for a short while was superior wide open at f1.8 to what this is showing at f4 here. My .02 only…
It is on my test list 🫡
Jul 03, 2026 at 02:09 AM
p.4 #9Is there a 35GM little brother?
Ttartisan 40mm is tiny, has an aperture ring, metal and has a lot of character. It's like $150. It was measured on here to actually be a 37mm f 1.85. Worth a look for how cheap it is.
Jul 03, 2026 at 08:02 AM
p.4 #10Is there a 35GM little brother?
Looks like the EVO 35mm is about as good as you are going to get if you want f2.0 or better. Dustin Abbott for example is quite effusive https://dustinabbott.net/2026/04/viltrox-af-35mm-f1-8-ii-evo-e-mount-review/ and I usually find his reviews reliable. Might add it to my own wish list to investigate further ...
Jul 03, 2026 at 10:10 AM
|
p.4 #11Is there a 35GM little brother?
Puggedup wrote:
Ttartisan 40mm is tiny, has an aperture ring, metal and has a lot of character. It's like $150. It was measured on here to actually be a 37mm f 1.85. Worth a look for how cheap it is.
@Puggedup@ Where was it measured? I missed that.
I'm not sure anyone is looking for a lens with sketchy AF and a lot of character if looking for a mini 35GM. I sold my 40/2 as I got tired of the AF and rendering of the bokeh (outside center of image, see https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1700698/15#16959319).
Ttartisan 40mm is tiny, has an aperture ring, metal and has a lot of character. It's like $150. It was measured on here to actually be a 37mm f 1.85. Worth a look for how cheap it is.
@Puggedup@ Where was it measured? I missed that.
I'm not sure anyone is looking for a lens with sketchy AF and a lot of character if looking for a mini 35GM. I sold my 40/2 as I got tired of the AF and rendering of the bokeh (outside center of image, see https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1700698/15#16959319).
Jul 03, 2026 at 02:21 PM
p.4 #12Is there a 35GM little brother?
Sony 35 1.8 (SEL35F18F). I really quite enjoy this lens. I find myself picking up a camera again, because it's easy to grab and go. Yes, it has bad fringing, but it cleans up well in LR (tho not completely). Does great for B&W too. It's sharp and fast focusing. Holds up really well to cropping. I haven't tried many 35s, never really enjoyed the focal length much, but I think that's because when I was introduced to cameras, it was for portrait work with 85s and 135s.
I've heard some call it plastic-y. Idk, it feels quite solid to me. It's body is metal.
Some shots I managed to snag at the last second after a storm tonight. A7RV
F8 ISO 100. Went out to get this shot, then played around with my car.
F8, aberations cleaned up almost completely here, but I thought it looked great in B&W.
1.8, aberations were nasty, cleaned up fairly well. If you pixel peep you can see the magenta still. Pretty large crop.
I've heard some call it plastic-y. Idk, it feels quite solid to me. It's body is metal.
Some shots I managed to snag at the last second after a storm tonight. A7RV
F8 ISO 100. Went out to get this shot, then played around with my car.
F8, aberations cleaned up almost completely here, but I thought it looked great in B&W.
1.8, aberations were nasty, cleaned up fairly well. If you pixel peep you can see the magenta still. Pretty large crop.
Jul 03, 2026 at 08:27 PM
p.4 #13Is there a 35GM little brother?
Left field option for you, and sacrilegious if you are a pixel peeper, but if you are shooting on a high MP body like a A7CR or A7rV etc you could look at the APS-C lenses and shoot in crop mode. There's a Sony Sonnar T* E 24mm f/1.8 ZA Lens which is ø: 62.99 x L: 65.53 mm and 225g. Alternatively there is the Sony FF option of the Sony FE 24mm f/2.8 G Lens, which is tiny and could give you a nice range of 24-25mm with cropping.
Jul 03, 2026 at 11:25 PM
p.4 #14Is there a 35GM little brother?
Finding a "little" brother without sacrificing speed or AF (ie the Zony 35 2.8) has no clear answer.
The ones which may fit are:
1) Viltrox 35 1,8 EVO, for a Loxia-like rendering with high microcontrast.
2) Sigma 35 2.0 DG DN, slightly lighter & more compact with a smoother, more classical style rendering.
3) Samyang AF 35 1.8, quite sharp with good contrast, colors not ideal, the lightest of the three here, didn't like the missing diaphragm ring (though the focus ring can be set to act as an unmarked diaphragm).
When I find one at a good price, I might re-buy the Viltrox (first sample was slightly decentered so I sent it back) and sell the Sigma.
I'd avoid the Sony 35 1.8.
The ones which may fit are:
1) Viltrox 35 1,8 EVO, for a Loxia-like rendering with high microcontrast.
2) Sigma 35 2.0 DG DN, slightly lighter & more compact with a smoother, more classical style rendering.
3) Samyang AF 35 1.8, quite sharp with good contrast, colors not ideal, the lightest of the three here, didn't like the missing diaphragm ring (though the focus ring can be set to act as an unmarked diaphragm).
When I find one at a good price, I might re-buy the Viltrox (first sample was slightly decentered so I sent it back) and sell the Sigma.
I'd avoid the Sony 35 1.8.
Jul 04, 2026 at 02:27 AM
p.4 #15Is there a 35GM little brother?
G, my money would be on the Sigma 35/2 contemporary. I would probably have picked one up if I didn't get such a sweet deal on the 40/2.5 last week. Now finding one in stock is another issue...
https://www.snapsbyfox.com/blog/sigma-35mm-f2-dg-dn-contemporary-review-sony
https://www.cameralabs.com/sigma-35mm-f2-dg-dn-review/
https://www.snapsbyfox.com/blog/sigma-35mm-f2-dg-dn-contemporary-review-sony
https://www.cameralabs.com/sigma-35mm-f2-dg-dn-review/
Jul 04, 2026 at 10:24 AM
p.4 #16Is there a 35GM little brother?
tuxounet wrote:
Hello,
I imagine this question has already been asked, but my research hasn’t turned up much.
I am looking for a travel companion for my 35 mm GM. I love it, but I’d like a “discreet”/“compact” version. My ideal would be a Loxia 35 mm f/2 with autofocus (so… not a Loxia).
Therefore I am looking for:
- 35 mm focal length
- Form factor similar to a Loxia 35 mm
- Maximum aperture ≤ f/2
- Autofocus
- Aperture ring
- Size is more important than weight
- (the rendering characteristics of a Loxia)
Do you have any suggestions?
If you want a lens performing similar to the 35GM the Viltrox 35mm f1.8 ii EVO APO is the only option. It's longer than the Loxia so not perfect following your list. It is however more similar to the GM than other lenses mentioned in this thread.
I have owned and used the 35GM, the Sigma 35/2 contemporary, some other 35mm lenses and now the 35EVO.
GM vs EVO... there are some differences of course. The GM focuses a tad faster (no relevant difference for normal photography). They are both very sharp and both sometimes render background OOF a bit harsh. With the 35EVO you don't get the sometimes nasty CA from the 35GM.
Viltrox quality control is worse. Buy from places allowing you to easily return the lens if needed.
Also have a look at the Viltrox 35 EVO image thread.
Hello,
I imagine this question has already been asked, but my research hasn’t turned up much.
I am looking for a travel companion for my 35 mm GM. I love it, but I’d like a “discreet”/“compact” version. My ideal would be a Loxia 35 mm f/2 with autofocus (so… not a Loxia).
Therefore I am looking for:
- 35 mm focal length
- Form factor similar to a Loxia 35 mm
- Maximum aperture ≤ f/2
- Autofocus
- Aperture ring
- Size is more important than weight
- (the rendering characteristics of a Loxia)
Do you have any suggestions?
If you want a lens performing similar to the 35GM the Viltrox 35mm f1.8 ii EVO APO is the only option. It's longer than the Loxia so not perfect following your list. It is however more similar to the GM than other lenses mentioned in this thread.
I have owned and used the 35GM, the Sigma 35/2 contemporary, some other 35mm lenses and now the 35EVO.
GM vs EVO... there are some differences of course. The GM focuses a tad faster (no relevant difference for normal photography). They are both very sharp and both sometimes render background OOF a bit harsh. With the 35EVO you don't get the sometimes nasty CA from the 35GM.
Viltrox quality control is worse. Buy from places allowing you to easily return the lens if needed.
Also have a look at the Viltrox 35 EVO image thread.
Jul 04, 2026 at 02:25 PM
p.4 #17Is there a 35GM little brother?
Jonas B wrote:
I imagine this question has already been asked, but my research hasn’t turned up much.
I am looking for a travel companion for my 35 mm GM. I love it, but I’d like a “discreet”/“compact” version. My ideal would be a Loxia 35 mm f/2 with autofocus (so… not a Loxia).
Therefore I am looking for:
- 35 mm focal length
- Form factor similar to a Loxia 35 mm
- Maximum aperture ≤ f/2
- Autofocus
- Aperture ring
- Size is more important than weight
- (the rendering characteristics of a Loxia)
Do you have any suggestions?If you want a lens performing similar to the 35GM the Viltrox 35mm f1.8 ii EVO APO is the only option. It's longer than the Loxia so not perfect following your list. It is however more similar to the GM than other lenses mentioned in this thread.
I have owned and used the 35GM, the Sigma 35/2 contemporary, some other 35mm lenses and now the 35EVO.
GM vs EVO... there are some differences of course. The GM focuses a tad faster (no relevant difference for normal photography). They are both very sharp and both sometimes render background OOF a bit harsh....Show more →
Interesting. I have a 35GM but I have never even seen a Viltrox 35mm f/1.8 II EVO in real life, and I have only used a Sigma 35mm f/2 Contemporary once very briefly. I have always thought the 35GM produced good bokeh compared with other 35mm lenses, with the exception of 35mm f/1.2 options (and even then I don't think the difference is huge, although I do think it is there), and I have never seen the 35GM produce CA which I would call anything like nasty. Looking around the internet, my take is that the Sigma 35mm f/2 Contemporary is the closest thing available at the moment to a mini-35GM, at least based on image quality and the look and feel of the lens (I don't have the personal experience with relevant lenses to comment on AF). The Viltrox 35mm f/1.8 II EVO seems to have its positive aspects, notably sharpness and CA control, but at the expense of nervous/rough bokeh in some situations and an image which is slightly different somehow from the 35GM or the Sigma (I am finding it hard to describe the difference, but I feel like the Viltrox images are fine for landscapes and still life images but less good for people photos). The Viltrox is also a little larger and heavier than the the Sigma and many of the other 35mm f/2 or f/1.8 options. At least so far, my conclusion has been that, as much as I hate loCA in images, the Viltrox 35mm f/1.8 II EVO is not a mini-35GM and is not the lens for me. I do not have the direct experience with the lenses you do, though. Do you have any example images you are willing to post which show the differences? I do sometimes think about adding a smaller, lighter 35mm to my kit, so I would be keen to see the differences.
Edited on Jul 04, 2026 at 11:54 PM · View previous versions
tuxounet wrote
Hello,I imagine this question has already been asked, but my research hasn’t turned up much.
I am looking for a travel companion for my 35 mm GM. I love it, but I’d like a “discreet”/“compact” version. My ideal would be a Loxia 35 mm f/2 with autofocus (so… not a Loxia).
Therefore I am looking for:
- 35 mm focal length
- Form factor similar to a Loxia 35 mm
- Maximum aperture ≤ f/2
- Autofocus
- Aperture ring
- Size is more important than weight
- (the rendering characteristics of a Loxia)
Do you have any suggestions?
I have owned and used the 35GM, the Sigma 35/2 contemporary, some other 35mm lenses and now the 35EVO.
GM vs EVO... there are some differences of course. The GM focuses a tad faster (no relevant difference for normal photography). They are both very sharp and both sometimes render background OOF a bit harsh....Show more →
Interesting. I have a 35GM but I have never even seen a Viltrox 35mm f/1.8 II EVO in real life, and I have only used a Sigma 35mm f/2 Contemporary once very briefly. I have always thought the 35GM produced good bokeh compared with other 35mm lenses, with the exception of 35mm f/1.2 options (and even then I don't think the difference is huge, although I do think it is there), and I have never seen the 35GM produce CA which I would call anything like nasty. Looking around the internet, my take is that the Sigma 35mm f/2 Contemporary is the closest thing available at the moment to a mini-35GM, at least based on image quality and the look and feel of the lens (I don't have the personal experience with relevant lenses to comment on AF). The Viltrox 35mm f/1.8 II EVO seems to have its positive aspects, notably sharpness and CA control, but at the expense of nervous/rough bokeh in some situations and an image which is slightly different somehow from the 35GM or the Sigma (I am finding it hard to describe the difference, but I feel like the Viltrox images are fine for landscapes and still life images but less good for people photos). The Viltrox is also a little larger and heavier than the the Sigma and many of the other 35mm f/2 or f/1.8 options. At least so far, my conclusion has been that, as much as I hate loCA in images, the Viltrox 35mm f/1.8 II EVO is not a mini-35GM and is not the lens for me. I do not have the direct experience with the lenses you do, though. Do you have any example images you are willing to post which show the differences? I do sometimes think about adding a smaller, lighter 35mm to my kit, so I would be keen to see the differences.
Edited on Jul 04, 2026 at 11:54 PM · View previous versions
Jul 04, 2026 at 06:08 PM
p.4 #18Is there a 35GM little brother?
I agonized over the Sigma 35 F2 for quite a while, thinking I'd have a trio of 24 F2, 35 F2 and 90 F2.8 as a travel kit. I read Fred's review thread pretty closely. That trio is kind of heavy and big for travel, and all use different filters, but they're well made. Another problem for me, is 24 is pushing the wide end for me, so I went with a Thypoch 28 1.4, Sony 40 2.5, and Sigma 90. Definitely smaller and share some filters. I'm surprised how much I like the 28, but it is manual focus. The 40 and 90 are fine, but don't have any distinctive look (like the 28), just sharp optics.
Jul 04, 2026 at 08:07 PM
p.4 #19Is there a 35GM little brother?
tuxounet wrote:
Hello,
I imagine this question has already been asked, but my research hasn’t turned up much.
I am looking for a travel companion for my 35 mm GM. I love it, but I’d like a “discreet”/“compact” version. My ideal would be a Loxia 35 mm f/2 with autofocus (so… not a Loxia).
Therefore I am looking for:
- 35 mm focal length
- Form factor similar to a Loxia 35 mm
- Maximum aperture ≤ f/2
- Autofocus
- Aperture ring
- Size is more important than weight
- (the rendering characteristics of a Loxia)
Do you have any suggestions?
Jonas B wrote:
If you want a lens performing similar to the 35GM the Viltrox 35mm f1.8 ii EVO APO is the only option. It's longer than the Loxia so not perfect following your list. It is however more similar to the GM than other lenses mentioned in this thread.
I have owned and used the 35GM, the Sigma 35/2 contemporary, some other 35mm lenses and now the 35EVO.
GM vs EVO... there are some differences of course. The GM focuses a tad faster (no relevant difference for normal photography). They are both very sharp and both sometimes render background OOF a bit harsh....Show more →
JD07 wrote:
Interesting. I have a 35GM but I have never even seen a Viltrox 35mm f/1.8 II EVO in real life, and I have only used a Sigma 35mm f/2 Contemporary once very briefly. I have always thought the 35GM produced good bokeh compared with other 35mm lenses, with the exception of 35mm f/1.2 options (and even then I don't think the difference is huge, although I do think it is there), and I have never seen the 35GM produce CA which I would call anything like nasty. Looking around the internet, my take is that the Sigma 35mm f/2 Contemporary...Show more →
Good bokeh, good for people shots or for still life, never seen any nasty LoCA... all that is possible as we are different persons interesting in different things. Psychology is also powerful so sometimes we have to agree about disagreeing.
Size and weight.
The 35EVO is indeed a bit larger, is it 17mm longer?, than the Sigma. The weight... 355g or 325g (the heavy Sigma hood not included) isn't that much of a difference. Here in Sweden the Sigma is close to twice the price.
LoCA:
When the 35GM was released I tried it and reported back here. I found LoCA (not nasty) in several images with high contrasting background areas and nasty bokeh in rippling water and unfortunate sitauations without water but high contrasts and chrome situations.
Lenstip LoCA test is here:
https://www.lenstip.com/598.5-Lens_review-Sony_FE_35_mm_f_1.4_GM_Chromatic_and_spherical_aberration.html
DPR field report has a sample image showing LoCA I think is nasty:
image
Look around the image and find LoCA all over it. This may be a situation some never find themselves in but I do.
People:
Too sharp perhaps. But so is the 35GM. I mainly shoot cityscapes and similar. Below is a duplicate post, an image of my mother I posted in the 35EVO image threadtwo weeks ago:
===============================================
Here is a snap of my mother taken this week. She is 91 and at hospital recovering after surgery. She just made a joke about the hospital food.
Viltrox 35 EVO, f2.8
===============================================
I don't think the image above would look very different from the same image taken with the 35GM.
I guess our different takes on the 35GM both are valid. We see what we see and that in turn makes us happy or unhappy. I sold the 35GM and I know the buyer is very happy with the lens.
Hello,
I imagine this question has already been asked, but my research hasn’t turned up much.
I am looking for a travel companion for my 35 mm GM. I love it, but I’d like a “discreet”/“compact” version. My ideal would be a Loxia 35 mm f/2 with autofocus (so… not a Loxia).
Therefore I am looking for:
- 35 mm focal length
- Form factor similar to a Loxia 35 mm
- Maximum aperture ≤ f/2
- Autofocus
- Aperture ring
- Size is more important than weight
- (the rendering characteristics of a Loxia)
Do you have any suggestions?
Jonas B wrote:
If you want a lens performing similar to the 35GM the Viltrox 35mm f1.8 ii EVO APO is the only option. It's longer than the Loxia so not perfect following your list. It is however more similar to the GM than other lenses mentioned in this thread.
I have owned and used the 35GM, the Sigma 35/2 contemporary, some other 35mm lenses and now the 35EVO.
GM vs EVO... there are some differences of course. The GM focuses a tad faster (no relevant difference for normal photography). They are both very sharp and both sometimes render background OOF a bit harsh....Show more →
JD07 wrote:
Interesting. I have a 35GM but I have never even seen a Viltrox 35mm f/1.8 II EVO in real life, and I have only used a Sigma 35mm f/2 Contemporary once very briefly. I have always thought the 35GM produced good bokeh compared with other 35mm lenses, with the exception of 35mm f/1.2 options (and even then I don't think the difference is huge, although I do think it is there), and I have never seen the 35GM produce CA which I would call anything like nasty. Looking around the internet, my take is that the Sigma 35mm f/2 Contemporary...Show more →
Good bokeh, good for people shots or for still life, never seen any nasty LoCA... all that is possible as we are different persons interesting in different things. Psychology is also powerful so sometimes we have to agree about disagreeing.
Size and weight.
The 35EVO is indeed a bit larger, is it 17mm longer?, than the Sigma. The weight... 355g or 325g (the heavy Sigma hood not included) isn't that much of a difference. Here in Sweden the Sigma is close to twice the price.
LoCA:
When the 35GM was released I tried it and reported back here. I found LoCA (not nasty) in several images with high contrasting background areas and nasty bokeh in rippling water and unfortunate sitauations without water but high contrasts and chrome situations.
Lenstip LoCA test is here:
https://www.lenstip.com/598.5-Lens_review-Sony_FE_35_mm_f_1.4_GM_Chromatic_and_spherical_aberration.html
DPR field report has a sample image showing LoCA I think is nasty:
image
Look around the image and find LoCA all over it. This may be a situation some never find themselves in but I do.
People:
Too sharp perhaps. But so is the 35GM. I mainly shoot cityscapes and similar. Below is a duplicate post, an image of my mother I posted in the 35EVO image threadtwo weeks ago:
===============================================
Here is a snap of my mother taken this week. She is 91 and at hospital recovering after surgery. She just made a joke about the hospital food.
Viltrox 35 EVO, f2.8
===============================================
I don't think the image above would look very different from the same image taken with the 35GM.
I guess our different takes on the 35GM both are valid. We see what we see and that in turn makes us happy or unhappy. I sold the 35GM and I know the buyer is very happy with the lens.
Jul 05, 2026 at 01:48 AM
p.4 #20Is there a 35GM little brother?
For alternatives to the 35 GM, my recommendation at this point is the Sony 28-50/4-5.6 or the Viltrox 40/2.5. Both are 167g and ensure a light and compact shooting experience around town. The Siggy 45C is a top performer optically, but is incrementally heavier (220g), a longer FL, and suffers inconsistent AF.
Jul 05, 2026 at 01:17 PM