RoamingScott wrote: pete478888 wrote: RoamingScott wrote: Jman13 wrote:
Thanks for the review, Scott - I've been eyeing either this lens or maybe taking a look at the Aurora 35/1.4 (since I, like you, like the 85/1.4 so much) - I know you have both: which do you prefer overall? I know you mention it carves its own niche in the 35mm space, but if you only had one to reach for?
That's a question I've been grappling with since getting both. The Viltrox is definitely the sharper lens, no question, but in general I prefer the bokeh of the Aurora. I put them through the same AF tests and they basically came out equal, but with the Aurora not having that slight pause I describe in the EVO review.
That said, the EVO is the more comfortable lens on the Zf, and thusly, I suspect, the more comfortable lens on all of the non-Z8/Z9 bodies.
Probably worth starting with the Viltrox since it's $150 less and see how you get on with it, assuming you are ok with the bokeh. I tried to get lots of different distances as examples. It's really only a mess directly behind the focal plane (similar to my thoughts about the 85 EVO, though in general I just liked that bokeh less).
Thanks for your review Scott.
How would you compare it to the Nikon 24-120s @35mm@@?
The Nikon will have smoother bokeh at F4, both are bitingly sharp, neither is a bad choice. Not sure it's a relevant comparison unless you don't need anything faster than F4.
The US price is very reasonable, especially with coupons. B&H $314 (that's 267 Euros) Although price in Europe is all over the place. The price does include Taxes in Europe.
Viltrox Europe/Germany 459 Euros, Viltrox Spain 349 Euros, Rollei in Germany 386 Euros after 10% rebate .
RoamingScott wrote: pete478888 wrote: RoamingScott wrote: Jman13 wrote:
Thanks for the review, Scott - I've been eyeing either this lens or maybe taking a look at the Aurora 35/1.4 (since I, like you, like the 85/1.4 so much) - I know you have both: which do you prefer overall? I know you mention it carves its own niche in the 35mm space, but if you only had one to reach for?
That's a question I've been grappling with since getting both. The Viltrox is definitely the sharper lens, no question, but in general I prefer the bokeh of the Aurora. I put them through the same AF tests and they basically came out equal, but with the Aurora not having that slight pause I describe in the EVO review.
That said, the EVO is the more comfortable lens on the Zf, and thusly, I suspect, the more comfortable lens on all of the non-Z8/Z9 bodies.
Probably worth starting with the Viltrox since it's $150 less and see how you get on with it, assuming you are ok with the bokeh. I tried to get lots of different distances as examples. It's really only a mess directly behind the focal plane (similar to my thoughts about the 85 EVO, though in general I just liked that bokeh less).
Thanks for your review Scott.
How would you compare it to the Nikon 24-120s @35mm@@?
The Nikon will have smoother bokeh at F4, both are bitingly sharp, neither is a bad choice. Not sure it's a relevant comparison unless you don't need anything faster than F4.
The US price is very reasonable, especially with coupons. The price in Europe is all over the place. The price does include Taxes in Europe.
Viltrox Europe/Germany 459 Euros, Viltrox Spain 349 Euros, Rollei in Germany 386 Euros after 10% rebate .
RoamingScott wrote: pete478888 wrote: RoamingScott wrote: Jman13 wrote:
Thanks for the review, Scott - I've been eyeing either this lens or maybe taking a look at the Aurora 35/1.4 (since I, like you, like the 85/1.4 so much) - I know you have both: which do you prefer overall? I know you mention it carves its own niche in the 35mm space, but if you only had one to reach for?
That's a question I've been grappling with since getting both. The Viltrox is definitely the sharper lens, no question, but in general I prefer the bokeh of the Aurora. I put them through the same AF tests and they basically came out equal, but with the Aurora not having that slight pause I describe in the EVO review.
That said, the EVO is the more comfortable lens on the Zf, and thusly, I suspect, the more comfortable lens on all of the non-Z8/Z9 bodies.
Probably worth starting with the Viltrox since it's $150 less and see how you get on with it, assuming you are ok with the bokeh. I tried to get lots of different distances as examples. It's really only a mess directly behind the focal plane (similar to my thoughts about the 85 EVO, though in general I just liked that bokeh less).
Thanks for your review Scott.
How would you compare it to the Nikon 24-120s @35mm@@?
The Nikon will have smoother bokeh at F4, both are bitingly sharp, neither is a bad choice. Not sure it's a relevant comparison unless you don't need anything faster than F4.
The US price is very reasonable, especially with coupons. The price in Europe is all over the place. It includes Taxes in Europe.
Viltrox Europe/Germany 459 Euros, Viltrox Spain 349 Euros, Rollei in Germany 386 Euros after 10% rebate .
Apr 20, 2026 at 09:28 AM
Previous versions of pete478888's message #17024042 « Viltrox EVO 35mm / 55mm f1.8 »
