35-70 vs 32-64 for landscape/walkaround

Hoa Pham · Dec 26, 2022

I have the 50R camera and 23, 50, 32-64, and 100-200 lenses. My backup system is Sony 7r4, 16-35 GM and 100-400 GM.

With the 35-70 current sale, I tempt to pick it up for its lightweight and small size.

When I go out shooting landscape, I normally bring 32-64 and Sony 16-35, and leave 23 home. I hate to bring both 23 and 32-64 since they are both heavy.

If i buy the 35-70 then I think I may bring the 23 or Sony 16-35 and 35-70. The 35-70 is not wide enough for landscape. My only concern is the sharpness/rendering of the 35-70. Will it be as good as the 32-64. When I shoot landscape I use tripod most of the time.

When travel in city like Tokyo, I will use the 50, or the 35-70 if it's capable. If shoot at night, I may use Sony 16-35 GM.

Any comments or advice are welcome. Thanks.

JimKasson · Dec 26, 2022

Hoa Pham said:
If i buy the 35-70 then I think I may bring the 23 or Sony 16-35 and 35-70. The 35-70 is not wide enough for landscape. My only concern is the sharpness/rendering of the 35-70. Will it be as good as the 32-64.

GF 35-70 and 32-64, foliage, on axis - the last word

I set up on one of my usual foliage test scenes, shown here with the 35-70 at 35 mm wide open. I set up the GFX 100S as follows: RRS 4-series Versa legs Arca-Swiss C1 2-second self timer ES ISO 100 AF-S for three shots, picking the best sharpness in post; this calibrates

blog.kasson.com

GF 35-70 and 32-64, foliage, corner - the last word

In the previous post, I compared the Fuji 35-70 GF against the 32-64 GF using foliage as the subject. I looked at the center of the images there; now I'll look at the corner performance. I set up the GFX 100S as follows: RRS 4-series Versa legs Arca-Swiss C1 2-second self timer ES ISO

blog.kasson.com

tdl53 · Dec 26, 2022

I have the 32-64 and the 35-70. In my very limited pixel-peeping, the longer the focal length, the less the 35-70 will keep up with the 32-64 in corner resolution. At 35mm they are quite close. But I wouldn't hesitate to go with the 35-70 if "walk-around" was the most important part.

debo · Dec 26, 2022

Have both. I end up carrying the 35-70 and 50 in a small bag with either the 50R or the 100S. Amazing travel kit.

The 32-64 is better for me as it's f/4 and the family portraits come out better. But it's heavy and bulky...... 35-70 has won

kristian1 · Dec 27, 2022

tdl53 said:
I have the 32-64 and the 35-70. In my very limited pixel-peeping, the longer the focal length, the less the 35-70 will keep up with the 32-64 in corner resolution. At 35mm they are quite close. But I wouldn't hesitate to go with the 35-70 if "walk-around" was the most important part.

Thats interesting , with my copies at landscape distances 35-70 was sharper stopped down (f8) because of field curvature of 32-64.

Kristian

kristian1 · Dec 27, 2022

Hoa Pham said:
I have the 50R camera and 23, 50, 32-64, and 100-200 lenses. My backup system is Sony 7r4, 16-35 GM and 100-400 GM.

With the 35-70 current sale, I tempt to pick it up for its lightweight and small size.

When I go out shooting landscape, I normally bring 32-64 and Sony 16-35, and leave 23 home. I hate to bring both 23 and 32-64 since they are both heavy.

If i buy the 35-70 then I think I may bring the 23 or Sony 16-35 and 35-70. The 35-70 is not wide enough for landscape. My only concern is the sharpness/rendering of the 35-70. Will it be as good as the 32-64. When I shoot landscape I use tripod most of the time.

When travel in city like Tokyo, I will use the 50, or the 35-70 if it's capable. If shoot at night, I may use Sony 16-35 GM.

Any comments or advice are welcome. Thanks.

35-70 lens is better then you would expect it to be , it is very capable little lens, here I did a bit testing:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/66591349

--
https://www.kristiansekulic.com
https://www.instagram.com/kristiansekulic

tjkoko · Dec 27, 2022

I own a GFX 50R along with the GF23, GF45 and soon the GF110. And I'm on the fence as to the GF35-70 for walkaround.

yogi4fitness · Dec 27, 2022

The 35-70 has become my fav walk around lens (GF45 before that) because its a very capable lens, lightweight and versatile. It's sharp even wide open at both ands and renders beautifully. At $500 it's a steal.

debo · Dec 27, 2022

yogi4fitness said:
The 35-70 has become my fav walk around lens (GF45 before that) because its a very capable lens, lightweight and versatile. It's sharp even wide open at both ands and renders beautifully. At $500 it's a steal.

Couldn't agree more, and I bought it at near MSRP

Before the 35-70, I used to struggle with the weight of the kit for my casual trips and hikes, and often used to carry the body with a 50mm alone. Now I can pair it with a compact prime for travel kit in a small 5L bag. An APSC or FF kit would give me a little more reach with those size and weight constraints!

For me, and my use cases, the 35-70 has been a must buy even at MSRP. The only issue is to now explain why I have all these other GF lenses when I can get by with the 35-70

yogi4fitness · Dec 27, 2022

debo said:
For me, and my use cases, the 35-70 has been a must buy even at MSRP. The only issue is to now explain why I have all these other GF lenses when I can get by with the 35-70

Thanks heavens we only have to explain it to our wives, and they dont know, and they arent on here

…at least mine isnt and if she were, these would be my famous last words

highdesertmesa · Dec 27, 2022

The reason I got rid of the 35-70 and won't buy another one: frame edge IQ at 35mm. Since I often shoot compositions with a narrow strip of land at the bottom of my frame (sky being the main subject), IQ at the far edges of the frame is important to me. It would probably be fine if I were mostly shooting traditional landscapes where this is a non-issue.

But this probably wouldn't make me choose the 32-64 over the zoom. I'd rather use the 30 prime.

bobby350z · Dec 27, 2022

highdesertmesa said:
The reason I got rid of the 35-70 and won't buy another one: frame edge IQ at 35mm. Since I often shoot compositions with a narrow strip of land at the bottom of my frame (sky being the main subject), IQ at the far edges of the frame is important to me. It would probably be fine if I were mostly shooting traditional landscapes where this is a non-issue.

But this probably wouldn't make me choose the 32-64 over the zoom. I'd rather use the 30 prime.

Is there that much difference at f8/f11 on the edges of the frame?

highdesertmesa · Dec 27, 2022

bobby350z said:
highdesertmesa said:

The reason I got rid of the 35-70 and won't buy another one: frame edge IQ at 35mm. Since I often shoot compositions with a narrow strip of land at the bottom of my frame (sky being the main subject), IQ at the far edges of the frame is important to me. It would probably be fine if I were mostly shooting traditional landscapes where this is a non-issue.

But this probably wouldn't make me choose the 32-64 over the zoom. I'd rather use the 30 prime.

Click to expand...

Is there that much difference at f8/f11 on the edges of the frame?

I don't have a direct comparison, but I can show you two horizontal shots with 1:1 magnification of the center frame edge. My 30 prime wide open out-resolved my 35-70 stopped down.

1:1 magnification screenshot of the GF 35-70 at 35mm and f/7.1 – bottom center, long side of frame

1:1 magnification screenshot of the GF 30 at f/3.5 – bottom center, long side of frame

bobby350z · Dec 27, 2022

highdesertmesa said:
bobby350z said:

highdesertmesa said:

The reason I got rid of the 35-70 and won't buy another one: frame edge IQ at 35mm. Since I often shoot compositions with a narrow strip of land at the bottom of my frame (sky being the main subject), IQ at the far edges of the frame is important to me. It would probably be fine if I were mostly shooting traditional landscapes where this is a non-issue.

But this probably wouldn't make me choose the 32-64 over the zoom. I'd rather use the 30 prime.

Click to expand...

Is there that much difference at f8/f11 on the edges of the frame?

Click to expand...

I don't have a direct comparison, but I can show you two horizontal shots with 1:1 magnification of the center frame edge. My 30 prime wide open out-resolved my 35-70 stopped down.

1:1 magnification screenshot of the GF 35-70 at 35mm and f/7.1 – bottom center, long side of frame

1:1 magnification screenshot of the GF 30 at f/3.5 – bottom center, long side of frame

The top shot from the 35-70mm looks bad. Is the lens from the early batch? When we have no rain I will try to do some side by side with 45-100mm or the 50mm TSE.

highdesertmesa · Dec 27, 2022

bobby350z said:
highdesertmesa said:

bobby350z said:

highdesertmesa said:

The reason I got rid of the 35-70 and won't buy another one: frame edge IQ at 35mm. Since I often shoot compositions with a narrow strip of land at the bottom of my frame (sky being the main subject), IQ at the far edges of the frame is important to me. It would probably be fine if I were mostly shooting traditional landscapes where this is a non-issue.

But this probably wouldn't make me choose the 32-64 over the zoom. I'd rather use the 30 prime.

Click to expand...

Is there that much difference at f8/f11 on the edges of the frame?

Click to expand...

I don't have a direct comparison, but I can show you two horizontal shots with 1:1 magnification of the center frame edge. My 30 prime wide open out-resolved my 35-70 stopped down.

Click to expand...

The top shot from the 35-70mm looks bad. Is the lens from the early batch? When we have no rain I will try to do some side by side with 45-100mm or the 50mm TSE.

Yes, it was an early copy. Were the early copies completely fubar or was it just the focus issue at 70mm near MFD?

There's also quite a bit of distortion correction going on with the 35-70 at 35mm compared to the 30 prime.

Monochrome49 · Dec 28, 2022

Testing my copies of the two zooms on landscape subjects I found the 32-64 resolved better across the frame through f8 and the 35-70 better in the corners from f11 on. If you need to carry your kit any distance to your subject, the smaller zoom’s lighter weight makes a big difference.

Einst Stein · Dec 30, 2022

I was watching this issue for a while. I was considering 32-64, 35-70, and 45-100. Walk-around is an important consideration, but after trying the IQ, IQ wins.

My decision is to use Cintax 645 45mm f2.8 as the walk-around lens. It is not apple to apple comparing the zooms, but I found with the high MPs, it is easy to justify the extension to cover 70mm or even 99mm.

I have also thought about Contax 645 35mm f3.5, it is close to 45mm, and somewhat better due to the wider coverage, but overall 45mm is much more balance in terms of walk-around. 45mm has more limited coverage, but it turns out to be an advantage, though unwillingly in the subconscious, it actually forced better composition, I am sure a lot of you know .why.

tjkoko · Dec 30, 2022

I just got a GF35-70mm brand new from B&H at half price, for $500.

--
I still use my trusty but not dusty Leica DLux4.
Tia and thanks much for your patience,
...and the Dlux4 never ever let me down.
.....tjkoko

Forum GAS · Dec 30, 2022

I don’t own either, but you might consider getting the 20-35 and selling the 32-64. Maybe add the 63 or 35-70 for the midrange. Then, you don’t really need the Sony unless you want to go beyond 200mm. Or use the 50 for the middle

Chunidam · Dec 31, 2022

Cld also sell the 23 as well if did this. The 20-35 is a gorgeous lens and wonderful for landscapes.

35-70 vs 32-64 for landscape/walkaround

Member

Community Leader

Well-known member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

New member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Active member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts