The Missing Goldilock 35mm

JackyNg · Mar 3, 2016

FE 35 f/2.8 = slow

FE 35 f/1.4 = HUGE.

Loxia 35 f/2 = manual only.

The most perfect Goldilock lens would have been something like the new tamron 35 f/1.8 VC.......

Zeiss, please please please give us a Batis 35 f/2 or 1.8 that weigh about 300gram-ish and autofocuses. Or Sony (SUPER UNLIKELY). Or Tamron. Or Sigma. I don't even care who is the manufacturer or the prize, just give me that one single piece of missing puzzle that would

"MAKE MIRRORLESS GREAT AGAIN" #notrumpintended

Vincent DP · Mar 3, 2016

Amen.

Maybe a Canon EF 35mm f/2 + adapter? But it would only allow basic AF mode.

Sean_Jayhawk · Mar 3, 2016

I have the Voigtlander Nokton 35/1.2 II, but I think it weighs too much. At least it's not giant like the native 35/1.4. I also do not like manual focus for dynamic scenes. But there is no lens that appeals to me, so I'd love to see a good 35/1.8 emerge with AF. In the meantime, I go for the FE 28 nearly every time I think of shooting my 35/1.2.

MrT-Man · Mar 3, 2016

JackyNg said:
FE 35 f/2.8 = slow

FE 35 f/1.4 = HUGE.

Loxia 35 f/2 = manual only.

The most perfect Goldilock lens would have been something like the new tamron 35 f/1.8 VC.......

Zeiss, please please please give us a Batis 35 f/2 or 1.8 that weigh about 300gram-ish and autofocuses. Or Sony (SUPER UNLIKELY). Or Tamron. Or Sigma. I don't even care who is the manufacturer or the prize, just give me that one single piece of missing puzzle that would

"MAKE MIRRORLESS GREAT AGAIN" #notrumpintended

The 35/1.4 really isn't as big/heavy as you'd think.

But that said, I agree, I'd like to see a Batis 35, with the crispness and edge-to-edge performance of the 25. I do like the 1.4, but I consider it to be more of a specialty environmental portrait lens.

Alpha Photo · Mar 3, 2016

MrT-Man said:
The 35/1.4 really isn't as big/heavy as you'd think.

I agree, I held one in my hands at the Sony store and was quite surprised. Not that much bigger or heavier than the Batis lenses (which I also tried in the store). I am serisously considering getting one in addition to my beloved 35/2.8

Why only one lens, if one can have two for different purposes with different specs?

Snikt228 · Mar 3, 2016

JackyNg said:
FE 35 f/2.8 = slow

FE 35 f/1.4 = HUGE.

Loxia 35 f/2 = manual only.

The most perfect Goldilock lens would have been something like the new tamron 35 f/1.8 VC.......

Zeiss, please please please give us a Batis 35 f/2 or 1.8 that weigh about 300gram-ish and autofocuses. Or Sony (SUPER UNLIKELY). Or Tamron. Or Sigma. I don't even care who is the manufacturer or the prize, just give me that one single piece of missing puzzle that would

"MAKE MIRRORLESS GREAT AGAIN" #notrumpintended

I too was kind of waiting for something like that, but ended up getting the FE 35 F1.4. I imagine with Sony making the RX1 I don't know if a 35 F2 will ever come. Tamron's "new chapter" was some regular DSLR lenses, so I wouldn't expect any mirrorless from them for a long time.

That being said I really don't think the 1.4 is overly big and heavy, it's just just a bit larger/heavier than the 16-35, which isn't too bad. For normal shooting it feels nicely balanced and easy to use.

sebbe · Mar 3, 2016

I miss a native 35/2 too, but a year ago I was missing a lot more lenses. and they even brought a camera last year no one expected.

It's a new system, started in 2013. I'm sure you will be pleased in a year or two, because a light 35 with at least f2 is a standard.

--
flickr

Franka T.L. · Mar 3, 2016

OK, OK, I certainly agree a native FE 35mm with proper AF ( and if possible OSS ) would be welcomed, but seriously isn;t it about time we tell the indies like Sigma and Tamron to put some love to the mirrorless using consumers.

biza43 · Mar 3, 2016

An AF 35 f2 lens would fit in size somewhere between the Loxia 35 and the Zony 35. I know the Loxia is MF, but it is really a good little lens.

I would also like a 35 f2 with AF. For those who can not wait, why not shoot with a 28 f2 and crop? You actually get rid of the poorer performing regions of the lens...

JackyNg · Mar 3, 2016

I do have the 35 f/1.4 and I treasure its impressive ability to draw and render so well for environmental portraits <3 its awesome for event and on-location portraits.

But I just wish I have something of a smaller form factor when I am travelling...

JackyNg · Mar 3, 2016

Alpha Photo said:
Member said:

The 35/1.4 really isn't as big/heavy as you'd think.

Click to expand...

I agree, I held one in my hands at the Sony store and was quite surprised. Not that much bigger or heavier than the Batis lenses (which I also tried in the store). I am serisously considering getting one in addition to my beloved 35/2.8

Why only one lens, if one can have two for different purposes with different specs?

Because $ that's why D:

DP13Photo · Mar 3, 2016

JackyNg said:
FE 35 f/2.8 = slow

FE 35 f/1.4 = HUGE.

Loxia 35 f/2 = manual only.

The most perfect Goldilock lens would have been something like the new tamron 35 f/1.8 VC.......

Zeiss, please please please give us a Batis 35 f/2 or 1.8 that weigh about 300gram-ish and autofocuses. Or Sony (SUPER UNLIKELY). Or Tamron. Or Sigma. I don't even care who is the manufacturer or the prize, just give me that one single piece of missing puzzle that would

"MAKE MIRRORLESS GREAT AGAIN" #notrumpintended

I like my Canon 35/2 IS... just right size and it brings IS to my A7.

JackyNg · Mar 3, 2016

biza43 said:
An AF 35 f2 lens would fit in size somewhere between the Loxia 35 and the Zony 35. I know the Loxia is MF, but it is really a good little lens.

I would also like a 35 f2 with AF. For those who can not wait, why not shoot with a 28 f2 and crop? You actually get rid of the poorer performing regions of the lens...

--
www.paulobizarro.com
http://blog.paulobizarro.com/

Well.. I will bear with the DSLR sized 35 f/1.4 for the moment as I simply couldn't get enough of its gorgeous bokeh. It makes subject isolation (3D-pop + shallow DOF) during busy events so much easier and gives the finished work a more "professional look". (clients tend to equate shallow DOF with things only achievable with professional camera, subconsciously)

A middle ground 35 f/2 in a compact form factor with decent OOF rendering and okay sharpness is something I am willing to trade some DOF control for. I won't even insist on Zeiss sharpness as long as it is not extremely soft wide open.

28 f/2 sound like the perfect solution on paper, but cropping also means an increase of depth of field (less bokeh, almost same as 35 f/2.8) and the rendering of out of focus area for 28 f/2 simply can't hold a candle to the buttery smooth rendering of 35 f/1.4...

JackyNg · Mar 3, 2016

Snikt228 said:
JackyNg said:

FE 35 f/2.8 = slow

FE 35 f/1.4 = HUGE.

Loxia 35 f/2 = manual only.

The most perfect Goldilock lens would have been something like the new tamron 35 f/1.8 VC.......

Zeiss, please please please give us a Batis 35 f/2 or 1.8 that weigh about 300gram-ish and autofocuses. Or Sony (SUPER UNLIKELY). Or Tamron. Or Sigma. I don't even care who is the manufacturer or the prize, just give me that one single piece of missing puzzle that would

"MAKE MIRRORLESS GREAT AGAIN" #notrumpintended

Click to expand...

I too was kind of waiting for something like that, but ended up getting the FE 35 F1.4. I imagine with Sony making the RX1 I don't know if a 35 F2 will ever come. Tamron's "new chapter" was some regular DSLR lenses, so I wouldn't expect any mirrorless from them for a long time.

That being said I really don't think the 1.4 is overly big and heavy, it's just just a bit larger/heavier than the 16-35, which isn't too bad. For normal shooting it feels nicely balanced and easy to use.

I guess you are right on the Sony front. In fact, if Zeiss plays by Sony's rules due to their partnership, this goldilock 35 f/2 sounds like a super remote dream.... Why cannibalises RX1rII sales eh?

Perhaps in 2017 Sigma will have the guts to enter FE market and deliver our salvation... Wishful thinking

JackyNg · Mar 3, 2016

KwhyChang said:
JackyNg said:

FE 35 f/2.8 = slow

FE 35 f/1.4 = HUGE.

Loxia 35 f/2 = manual only.

The most perfect Goldilock lens would have been something like the new tamron 35 f/1.8 VC.......

Zeiss, please please please give us a Batis 35 f/2 or 1.8 that weigh about 300gram-ish and autofocuses. Or Sony (SUPER UNLIKELY). Or Tamron. Or Sigma. I don't even care who is the manufacturer or the prize, just give me that one single piece of missing puzzle that would

"MAKE MIRRORLESS GREAT AGAIN" #notrumpintended

Click to expand...

I like my Canon 35/2 IS... just right size and it brings IS to my A7.

--
Dave

Hi Dave,

Does the Canon 35 f/2 IS autofocuses quickly with your adapter?

Baimei · Mar 3, 2016

The lens on my RX1R is exactly right for me, the 35/2. I will hold onto mine until they make an interchangeable version.

Rick

Robgo2 · Mar 3, 2016

biza43 said:
An AF 35 f2 lens would fit in size somewhere between the Loxia 35 and the Zony 35. I know the Loxia is MF, but it is really a good little lens.

I would also like a 35 f2 with AF. For those who can not wait, why not shoot with a 28 f2 and crop? You actually get rid of the poorer performing regions of the lens...

sportyaccordy · Mar 3, 2016

A 35 & 50 F/2 at less than 300-400g with AF for $500 would be nice. Or a 42/1.4 at $600-700 to split the difference. Either way Sony has a huge hole in the FE lens lineup.

drmarkf · Mar 3, 2016

Robgo2 said:
The Loxia 35 is a wonderful lens that is just the right size. Many potential users are put off by the fact that it is manual focus, but I think that for some, this is because they have a false impression that MF is a slow, cumbersome process. That may have been true in the past, but it no longer is, given the MF focusing aids that are available on A7 series cameras, i.e. peaking and magnification. Although I would not choose an MF lens for sports or action shooting, it can work wonderfully on the street or even with small children. You merely need to get used to the modern enhanced MF technique and learn to think ahead.

Rob

^^^ what this fine gentleman said ;-)

sportyaccordy · Mar 3, 2016

Robgo2 said:
biza43 said:

An AF 35 f2 lens would fit in size somewhere between the Loxia 35 and the Zony 35. I know the Loxia is MF, but it is really a good little lens.

I would also like a 35 f2 with AF. For those who can not wait, why not shoot with a 28 f2 and crop? You actually get rid of the poorer performing regions of the lens...

Click to expand...

The Missing Goldilock 35mm

Well-known member

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Alpha Photo

Guest

Senior Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Well-known member

Well-known member

Veteran Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Keyboard shortcuts