Have Sony missed a trick with the FE 35/1.8?

With the announcement of the 20/1.8 G, I can't help but think that Sony have missed a trick with the FE 35/1.8.

I know people have been crying out for a 35/1.8, but personally I'd have paid that little bit more to have the aperture ring of the 20/24/85, along with the marginally higher build quality.

Only a small nit pick, but I'd think a few would be in the same boat - especially those switching lenses, and not having to ask the "does this lens have an aperture ring?" question.

That being said, it may suggest a 35/1.4 GM is on the cards at some point..

noggin2k1 said:

With the announcement of the 20/1.8 G, I can't help but think that Sony have missed a trick with the FE 35/1.8.

I know people have been crying out for a 35/1.8, but personally I'd have paid that little bit more to have the aperture ring of the 20/24/85, along with the marginally higher build quality.

Only a small nit pick, but I'd think a few would be in the same boat - especially those switching lenses, and not having to ask the "does this lens have an aperture ring?" question.

That being said, it may suggest a 35/1.4 GM is on the cards at some point..

Click to expand...

I'm so used to change apperture on right thumb, that I feel ring on lens almost redundant.

But of course, of you used to it, another control mechanism is handy. I will probably try it on upcoming Viltrox 23mm for the first time.

noggin2k1 said:

With the announcement of the 20/1.8 G, I can't help but think that Sony have missed a trick with the FE 35/1.8.

Click to expand...

Actually not - price point, demand, size - spot on marketing wise.

Sony seems to cover different price segments (1.4/35, 1.8/35 and 2.8/35) and to fill in the holes in the lens lines based on expected demand.

Guess each lens line will be pretty well filled in time - some holes in the lens line is needed to keep users longing for something new.

noggin2k1 said:

I know people have been crying out for a 35/1.8, but personally I'd have paid that little bit more to have the aperture ring of the 20/24/85, along with the marginally higher build quality.

Click to expand...

My ideal lens collection would differ - guess we all have personal preferences. However got the 1.8/35mm lens and while not a G or GM lens it is a pretty good lens for the money.

noggin2k1 said:

Only a small nit pick, but I'd think a few would be in the same boat - especially those switching lenses, and not having to ask the "does this lens have an aperture ring?" question.

That being said, it may suggest a 35/1.4 GM is on the cards at some point..

Click to expand...

Guess the GM line will be quite complete in a while - but seems there is no need for Sony to hurry when we see the competing lens lines at the moment...

The new 20mm G is nice and look similar to the GM 24. But I was thinking the opposite: maybe Sony missed the opportunity to remain consistent and yet again introduced a new lens style line up? There were G lenses already starting with the 70-200mm f4 and the 90mm macro, different look and no aperture ring. Will they make a 90mm II with aperture ring and textured paint instead of shiny finish? I am super happy with the 35mm f1.8 matching the 55mm both in size and feel.

Sony has quite a few styles as they find their way.

- Some based on their Zeiss ZA heritage like the 55/1.8 and the bigger ones like the 35/1.4 or 50/1.4.

- Then there are the one like the 28/2.8, 85/1.8, and 35/1.8 that look like the earlier small Zeiss but definitely trying to be less expensive.

-Then there are the white barreled zooms

- Finally the latest appear to be mostly based on the new GM primes and shorter zooms of the 24/1.4, 85/1.4, 135/1.4. 100/1.?, 16-35/2.8, 24-70/2.8, 24-105/4, and the 12-24/4

The new 20/1.8 falls in to the last group.

There are other random ones like the 90/2.8 Macro which is more old style Sony. Maybe trying to still look like older Zeiss based A mount lenses.

Personally I like aperture rings so the new GM style is good with me. But the older ZA based one is good as well. The whites are not a problem either IMHO.

Each person has a different preference so hard for them to design a lens for everyone.

I prefer the 35mm the way it is and the one thing I don’t like about my 24mm GM is the aperture ring. If they must add something, I much prefer Canon’s RF control ring which is customizable.

For me a lens having an aperture ring is always a negative and something that makes me not want to buy it.

noggin2k1 said:

With the announcement of the 20/1.8 G, I can't help but think that Sony have missed a trick with the FE 35/1.8.

I know people have been crying out for a 35/1.8, but personally I'd have paid that little bit more to have the aperture ring of the 20/24/85, along with the marginally higher build quality.

Only a small nit pick, but I'd think a few would be in the same boat - especially those switching lenses, and not having to ask the "does this lens have an aperture ring?" question.

That being said, it may suggest a 35/1.4 GM is on the cards at some point..

Click to expand...

I put a piece of tape on the aperture ring on my 24GM and 85GM.

Interesting that there doesn't appear to be a lot of aperture ring love here, apart from me.

I personally think the ZA lineup is dead. My guess is everything released now will be;

• FE: 'value' line up
• G: Pro features with average aperture
• GM: Pro features with fast aperture

My guess is for primes, we may see FE & GM at the same focal length, but likely only G (ie, not another 20mm).

So I'm hopeful of a 35/1.4 GM (with aperture ring), still!

nk4002r said:

The new 20mm G is nice and look similar to the GM 24. But I was thinking the opposite: maybe Sony missed the opportunity to remain consistent and yet again introduced a new lens style line up? There were G lenses already starting with the 70-200mm f4 and the 90mm macro, different look and no aperture ring. Will they make a 90mm II with aperture ring and textured paint instead of shiny finish? I am super happy with the 35mm f1.8 matching the 55mm both in size and feel.

Click to expand...

The Sony FE 28-135 F4 G OSS came out a year before the 2.8/90 and included an aperture ring. The only prior Sony Alpha with an aperture ring was the Sony 135 F2.8 T4.5 STF inherited from Minolta, and its aperture ring operates in the opposite direction like pre Alpha Minolta lenses.

noggin2k1 said:

With the announcement of the 20/1.8 G, I can't help but think that Sony have missed a trick with the FE 35/1.8.

I know people have been crying out for a 35/1.8, but personally I'd have paid that little bit more to have the aperture ring of the 20/24/85, along with the marginally higher build quality.

Only a small nit pick, but I'd think a few would be in the same boat - especially those switching lenses, and not having to ask the "does this lens have an aperture ring?" question.

That being said, it may suggest a 35/1.4 GM is on the cards at some point..

Click to expand...

You can ignore a built in feature but you can't use it in case it's not there

People not in need of an aperture ring can simply tape it or set it to A and they are done.

Having the possibility to see the aperture with one view on the camera and not being forced to look at any kind of display is priceless IMHO.

The 35 f/1.8 is an utterly boring lens for me - I am fully aware that others will view the situation differently. My reasoning is:

1. The 35 mm f/1.8 is neither fast nor ultra compact
2. No aperture ring
3. No distance scale
4. No DOF scale
5. not the sharpest lens around
6. not very fast

I'd rather prefer a GM 35 f/1.2 with comparable small and lightweight design and we might see that in the near future ;-)

The G 20 f/1.8 looks like an interesting offer with all things being perfectly balanced - CUDOS Sony - you learn fast and the fine tuning is close to perfection.

Don't forget - in shrinking market the enthusiasts become more and more important - not loosing some potential buyers is key - that's why Sony incorporates useful features not to exclude potential customers.

I'd have loved to change my Loxia 35 to a 35 f/1.8 but I won't buy any non aperture lens in case a lens with an aperture ring is available - even in case I have to trade in AF.

--
_____________________________________
A7R IV - one camera to rule them all
ISO 9000 definition of quality: 'Degree to which a set of inherent characteristic fulfills requirements'
I am the classic “Windows by Day, Mac by Night user'
“The horizon of many people is a circle with zero radius which they call their point of view.” Albert Einstein
"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move." Douglas Adams

I am personally holding out for a 40mm f1.4 GM, would accept it sized right between the 24 and 85! That would be a perfect replacement of both the 35 and 50 Zeiss lenses without duplicating focal length.

Fair point, the 28-135mm is G, but it is a little unusual as a power zoom cine lens. There the aperture ring makes sense. Up until the 20mm, that lens was an exception in having this feature.

Take a look at the Fuji and Olympus line up, both are coherent and follow a single design and look branding. While the Sony line up is excellent and the best offering in my opinion, the overall perception in market is greatly hurt by their various styling and branding efforts.

The NEX/E/FE combined with Standard/Zeiss/G/GM line up appears to cause plenty of confusion in customers and camera sales persons alike. My local camera store can't seem to arrange them in order of focal length, they are trying to group them by visual cues - shiny lenses together.

noggin2k1 said:

Interesting that there doesn't appear to be a lot of aperture ring love here, apart from me.

Click to expand...

I personally enjoy having an aperture ring. But I guess I am old. The FA 50/1.4 and 35/1.4 also have aperture rings. I know listening to reviewers some love them and some don't. Interestingly enough the video centric users seam to also want them but only if they are de-clickable.

noggin2k1 said:

I personally think the ZA lineup is dead. My guess is everything released now will be;

• FE: 'value' line up
• G: Pro features with average aperture
• GM: Pro features with fast aperture

My guess is for primes, we may see FE & GM at the same focal length, but likely only G (ie, not another 20mm).

So I'm hopeful of a 35/1.4 GM (with aperture ring), still!

Click to expand...

If Sony did come out with a 35/1.4 GM I would definitely consider it but would really like to see a 40mm f/1.4 or if they came out with a great 28mm that would be interesting because a 20/28/40 is such a nice spacing IMHO, similar to the 18/25/40 spacing of the Batis family.

noggin2k1 said:

With the announcement of the 20/1.8 G, I can't help but think that Sony have missed a trick with the FE 35/1.8.

I know people have been crying out for a 35/1.8, but personally I'd have paid that little bit more to have the aperture ring of the 20/24/85, along with the marginally higher build quality.

Click to expand...

If you shoot lots of video, yes this aperture ring is handy, otherwise not that useful to persons like me (as so far I don't shoot video).

noggin2k1 said:

Only a small nit pick, but I'd think a few would be in the same boat - especially those switching lenses, and not having to ask the "does this lens have an aperture ring?" question.

That being said, it may suggest a 35/1.4 GM is on the cards at some point..

Click to expand...

If Sony ever did 35 GM it should be 35/1.2 GM. F1.4 will miss boat again as Sigma (Canon and Nikon are also planning) already have 35/1.2 lenses. Similarly if Sony ever did 85 GM mark II that should go to 85/1.2 GM as Canon did.

Currently I have Sigma 35/1.4 Art for portrait that eventually will be replaced by 35/1.2 Art. For landscape/cityscape and also portrait, I now have Voigtlander FE 40/1.2 Nokton that is one-stop faster than 35/1.8 and believe also sharper, much more pleasing sunstar and better micro-contrast.

--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/55485085@N04/albums

nk4002r said:

I am personally holding out for a 40mm f1.4 GM, would accept it sized right between the 24 and 85! That would be a perfect replacement of both the 35 and 50 Zeiss lenses without duplicating focal length.

Click to expand...

Exactly my thought, I am doing exactly that on my Nikon system, replacing both Sigma 35 and 50 Art with a Sigma 40 F1.4 Art. would love to have a 35/40 GM for my Sony system.

PWPhotography said:

PWPhotography said:

That being said, it may suggest a 35/1.4 GM is on the cards at some point..

Click to expand...

If Sony ever did 35 GM it should be 35/1.2 GM. F1.4 will miss boat again as Sigma (Canon and Nikon are also planning) already have 35/1.2 lenses. Similarly if Sony ever did 85 GM mark II that should go to 85/1.2 GM as Canon did.

Click to expand...

My thoughts are actually the opposite.

Looking at Canon & Nikon FF MILC bodies, Sony has a big size advantage. You also look at lenses like the 24GM and new 20G, and see they've got a real skillset for outstanding yet compact glass.

A compact 35/1.4GM would be massively attractive in my books.

noggin2k1 said:

With the announcement of the 20/1.8 G, I can't help but think that Sony have missed a trick with the FE 35/1.8.

I know people have been crying out for a 35/1.8, but personally I'd have paid that little bit more to have the aperture ring of the 20/24/85, along with the marginally higher build quality.

Only a small nit pick, but I'd think a few would be in the same boat - especially those switching lenses, and not having to ask the "does this lens have an aperture ring?" question.

That being said, it may suggest a 35/1.4 GM is on the cards at some point..

Click to expand...

Did they miss the trick?

That sound a bit exagerated to me.

That said I like the aperture ring, I like control consistency between my lenses, thus I would have appreciated an aperture ring...

lélé said:

noggin2k1 said:

With the announcement of the 20/1.8 G, I can't help but think that Sony have missed a trick with the FE 35/1.8.

I know people have been crying out for a 35/1.8, but personally I'd have paid that little bit more to have the aperture ring of the 20/24/85, along with the marginally higher build quality.

Only a small nit pick, but I'd think a few would be in the same boat - especially those switching lenses, and not having to ask the "does this lens have an aperture ring?" question.

That being said, it may suggest a 35/1.4 GM is on the cards at some point..

Click to expand...

Did they miss the trick?

That sound a bit exagerated to me.

That said I like the aperture ring, I like control consistency between my lenses, thus I would have appreciated an aperture ring...

Click to expand...

I agree that having the aperture ring, if you like that approach (and I do) would have been nice. I might decide at this point to sell my 35/1.8 since I do already own the 35/1.4 ZA that does have an aperture ring. So all of my Sony ZA and GM that I own have aperture rings at 24/1.4, 35/1.4, 50/1.4, 85/1.4, and 135/1.8 so if I add the 20 it will as well. I love ergonomic consistency in a lens family for sure.

I had bought the 35/1.8 and 55/1.8 for a small travel kit but its not got as much use as I had hoped.

lélé said:

noggin2k1 said:

With the announcement of the 20/1.8 G, I can't help but think that Sony have missed a trick with the FE 35/1.8.

I know people have been crying out for a 35/1.8, but personally I'd have paid that little bit more to have the aperture ring of the 20/24/85, along with the marginally higher build quality.

Only a small nit pick, but I'd think a few would be in the same boat - especially those switching lenses, and not having to ask the "does this lens have an aperture ring?" question.

That being said, it may suggest a 35/1.4 GM is on the cards at some point..

Click to expand...

Did they miss the trick?

That sound a bit exagerated to me.

That said I like the aperture ring, I like control consistency between my lenses, thus I would have appreciated an aperture ring...

Click to expand...

I don't think it's an exaggeration - simply that they could have made a lil more out of us all by adding an aperture ring.

Although I'd still prefer a 35/1.4 GM in line with the 24mm..

noggin2k1 said:

lélé said:

noggin2k1 said:

With the announcement of the 20/1.8 G, I can't help but think that Sony have missed a trick with the FE 35/1.8.

I know people have been crying out for a 35/1.8, but personally I'd have paid that little bit more to have the aperture ring of the 20/24/85, along with the marginally higher build quality.

Only a small nit pick, but I'd think a few would be in the same boat - especially those switching lenses, and not having to ask the "does this lens have an aperture ring?" question.

That being said, it may suggest a 35/1.4 GM is on the cards at some point..

Click to expand...

Did they miss the trick?

That sound a bit exagerated to me.

That said I like the aperture ring, I like control consistency between my lenses, thus I would have appreciated an aperture ring...

Click to expand...

I don't think it's an exaggeration - simply that they could have made a lil more out of us all by adding an aperture ring.

Click to expand...

That would be the 1.4/35mm GM lens - at two to three times the price.

Guess Sony is filling in the holes in three segments - ordinary, G and GM. Leaving some desireable lenses for the future is a good marketing strategy.

In my case the 1.8/35 was a perfect gap-filler (want light weight and compact above all, a reasonable price is ok, do not need the very best)...

Could easily get the GM line, but no thanks - bulk and weight. Good to see Sony also catering to the middle class photographers... :-D

noggin2k1 said:

Although I'd still prefer a 35/1.4 GM in line with the 24mm..

Click to expand...

R