Any recommendations for a vintage 35mm full-frame lens for Sony?
Really useful comparison thank you, Jonas. Those pen lenses do look super compact but even that 35/1.8 MD doesn't look too bad.
I appreciate I could be wrong you know about vintage lenses and modern lenses when you stop them down as I have not done extensive testing. But with the mir 24h there's no ambiguity, you can see the difference without any edits. It's just I don't like it long distance. It's too messy.
I'm looking at my nikon 35/1.4 ais vs distagon 35/1.4 zm at f8. And there's just some funk everywhere you look closely on mine while the distagon is defined everywhere, no mistakes, no glitching. I can reduce clarity, texture, contrast, negative dehaze (probably the most helpful), reduce sharpness but it's not the same. It's funkless.
Perhaps the distagon isn't the right surrogate for the CV 35/1.4 classic, even when stopped down and longer distance, I'm not sure.
I don't recall seeing the tta 40/2, or the sigma 35/2, or the x100vi with the same kind of glitches I see with the older lenses. If I did I'd probably have returned them . But maybe the CV classic has them stopped down too.
That funk does help sell the image as being more authentic but maybe that's placebo or my editing skills or I don't know, an excuse to go down another rabbit hole.
I wish I knew the terms and could identify it with confidence etc, but I don't and can't so don't take this as anything more than just chat. They're just missing some funk that glimmer glass doesn't really make up for.
I really like the look of the CV classic and I'm going to pick one up on sale but I don't think it's going to be as good for this as an actual vintage lens. Maybe if you're going for a leica vintage, which maybe is more clean stopped down? I'm not sure.
Any recommendations for a vintage 35mm full-frame lens for Sony?
Really useful comparison thank you, Jonas. Those pen lenses do look super compact but even that 35/1.8 MD doesn't look too bad.
I appreciate I could be wrong you know about vintage lenses and modern lenses when you stop them down as I have not done extensive testing. But with the mir 24h there's no ambiguity, you can see the difference without any edits. It's just I don't like it long distance. It's too messy.
I'm looking at my nikon 35/1.4 ais vs distagon 35/1.4 zm at f8. And there's just some funk everywhere you look closely on mine while the distagon is defined everywhere, no mistakes, no glitching. I can reduce clarity, texture, contrast, negative dehaze (probably the most helpful), reduce sharpness but it's not the same. It's funkless.
Perhaps the distagon isn't the right surrogate for the CV 35/1.4 classic, even when stopped down and longer distance, I'm not sure.
I don't recall seeing the tta 40/2, or the sigma 35/2, or the x100vi with the same kind of glitches I see with the older lenses. If I did I'd probably have returned them . But maybe the CV classic has them stopped down too.
That funk does help sell the image as being more authentic but maybe that's placebo or my editing skills or I don't know, an excuse to go down another rabbit hole.
I wish I knew the terms and could identify it with confidence etc, but I don't and can't so don't take this as anything more than just chat. They're just missing some funk that glimmer glass doesn't really make up for.
Feb 21, 2026 at 09:49 AM
Previous versions of Yogifi's message #16990794 « Any recommendations for a vintage 35mm full-frame lens for Sony? »
. But maybe the CV classic has them stopped down too.