35mm 1.8 OSS Test

Started Jan 18, 2013 | Discussions thread
halbraun Regular Member • Posts: 278
Re: 35mm 1.8 OSS Test

OK.. someone help me out here.. first post, Matt Durr's evaluation of the 35mm 1.8.. great lens, some problems focusing on moving subjects, but overall evaluated as a great "walk around lens" (paraphrasing) and the people cheer...

Then this test.. "that's horrible" (again paraphrasing) and the people boo.. hiss...

Ok.. Can it be both? Are the manufacturing techniques so uncontrolled that you can get such a wide variance?

Is the truth in the middle? It's a good lens that is a little expensive? Or it is a sucky lens that is ridiculously expensive? Or it is a great lens that is actually pretty cheap?

I mean.. the 35 1.8 for $400 or the Sigma 30 2.8 for $100.. if they are that close, I can do a lot with $300!

Any help would be appreciated.. I have to make a call re. the Sony or the Sigma


FYI.. this shot was taken today (pretty cloudy) with the 35, hand held in the cold.. I was about 2 meters away from the Rockster... aperture priority at 1.8, auto focus, auto everything else.. and while I am not much of a peeper.. it looks pretty sharp to me..

I am within the 30 days to return the Sony and keep the Sigma 30 2.8 I bought in the B and H deal with the 19mm..  but have to make up my mind by Sunday.. and the Sigma wont be here until late Tuesday..

 halbraun's gear list:halbraun's gear list
Sony Alpha 7 Sony a6000 Sony E 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 PZ OSS Sony FE 35mm F2.8 Sony FE 55mm F1.8 +1 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow