Your f/1.4 35mm AF Preferences

Started 2 months ago | Polls
thiefofpresence
thiefofpresence Contributing Member • Posts: 678
Your f/1.4 35mm AF Preferences

For this lens role, I am wondering what people have and are happy with. If you aren't happy with what you have, vote for what you want instead (your "preference").

Personally I think I will be happy with 90% of the AF keeper rate of the presumed Sony native reference performance. Learning that this is not realistic from the 3rd parties would be valuable (if not sad) to learn.

Am particularly interested in the "native" sigma (which for all intents and purposes embeds the MC11 in the lens) versus the "adapted" sigma. If one or the other side wins that, that would be interesting experiences to learn about.

The Samyang/Rokinon experiences (on "both sides") would also be valuable.

 thiefofpresence's gear list:thiefofpresence's gear list
Sony a7 III Sony a6400 Voigtlander 21mm F4 Color Skopar Pancake II Voigtlander 40mm F1.4 Nokton Classic Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM Art +6 more
POLL
Sony Distagon 1.4/35
43.5% 30  votes
Sigma 1.4/35 Art for Sony
14.5% 10  votes
Samyang/Rokinon AF 35 f/1.4
27.5% 19  votes
SIgma 1.4/35 Art for Canon EF (+MC11)
2.9% 2  votes
SIgma 1.4/35 Art for Canon EF (+MB4)
1.4% 1  vote
Other adaptation strategy (please comment to describe)
10.1% 7  votes
  Show results
thiefofpresence
OP thiefofpresence Contributing Member • Posts: 678
Re: Your f/1.4 35mm AF Preferences

thiefofpresence wrote:

For this lens role, I am wondering what people have and are happy with. If you aren't happy with what you have, vote for what you want instead (your "preference").

Personally I think I will be happy with 90% of the AF keeper rate of the presumed Sony native reference performance. Learning that this is not realistic from the 3rd parties would be valuable (if not sad) to learn.

Am particularly interested in the "native" sigma (which for all intents and purposes embeds the MC11 in the lens) versus the "adapted" sigma. If one or the other side wins that, that would be interesting experiences to learn about.

The Samyang/Rokinon experiences (on "both sides") would also be valuable.

Meant to include the option:

"Left the f/1.4 family of options because of weight/price/quality and am happier with a smaller max aperture 35mm lens (please indicate in a comments)

-- hide signature --

https://www.instagram.com/thiefofpresence
Sony A7iii | Zeiss Batis 2/25; Sony FE 1.8/85 | Sony FE 4/24-105 G OSS; Sony FE 4/70-200 G OSS; Sigma 150-600 (+MC-11)

 thiefofpresence's gear list:thiefofpresence's gear list
Sony a7 III Sony a6400 Voigtlander 21mm F4 Color Skopar Pancake II Voigtlander 40mm F1.4 Nokton Classic Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM Art +6 more
noggin2k1
noggin2k1 Senior Member • Posts: 2,339
Re: Your f/1.4 35mm AF Preferences

Tried everything 35mm the FE has to offer - ended up compromising and going for the Batis 40/2, and I couldn't be happier.

 noggin2k1's gear list:noggin2k1's gear list
Sony a9 Fujifilm X-T3 Zeiss Batis 85mm F1.8 Sony FE 24-70mm F2.8 GM Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS +4 more
techjedi
techjedi Senior Member • Posts: 3,548
Re: Your f/1.4 35mm AF Preferences

thiefofpresence wrote:

For this lens role, I am wondering what people have and are happy with. If you aren't happy with what you have, vote for what you want instead (your "preference").

Personally I think I will be happy with 90% of the AF keeper rate of the presumed Sony native reference performance. Learning that this is not realistic from the 3rd parties would be valuable (if not sad) to learn.

Am particularly interested in the "native" sigma (which for all intents and purposes embeds the MC11 in the lens) versus the "adapted" sigma. If one or the other side wins that, that would be interesting experiences to learn about.

The Samyang/Rokinon experiences (on "both sides") would also be valuable.

I voted for the FE Sony Zeiss because I have a great copy and love the results. As a result, I have never tried any of the others so I don't know if I would "prefer" them.

 techjedi's gear list:techjedi's gear list
Sony a7R III Sony FE 70-200 F4 Sony FE 90mm F2.8 macro Sony RX100 Sony a6500 +17 more
mferencz Contributing Member • Posts: 718
Re: Your f/1.4 35mm AF Preferences

If you need it now, i'm thinking the Sigma Art, but surely Sony has it on their roadmap and more than likely the 24GM will be used as a design reference.

jandu
jandu Regular Member • Posts: 331
Re: Your f/1.4 35mm AF Preferences

ZM 35 f1.4 with TAP

Jacques Cornell
Jacques Cornell Forum Pro • Posts: 11,281
Rokinon 34/1.4 NEEDS firmware version 4

Good optical & AF performance from my Rokinon 35/1.4. However, had to update lens firmware to version 4 (released this month) to get it to work on my a7III. It worked fine with lens firmware version 2 on my a7RII and a7RIII, but made my a7III totally spazz out.  Now that I've updated to lens firmware version 4, it seems to work fine on all three of my Sonys.

Lots of folks on the sonyalpharumors site reported various issues with various Sony bodies using lens firmware versions 2 and 3.

-- hide signature --

"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
http://jacquescornell.photography
http://happening.photos

 Jacques Cornell's gear list:Jacques Cornell's gear list
Sony a7R II Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Sony a7R III Panasonic Lumix DC-GX9 +42 more
Jacques Cornell
Jacques Cornell Forum Pro • Posts: 11,281
I'd prefer a 35/1.8
2

thiefofpresence wrote:

thiefofpresence wrote:

For this lens role, I am wondering what people have and are happy with. If you aren't happy with what you have, vote for what you want instead (your "preference").

Personally I think I will be happy with 90% of the AF keeper rate of the presumed Sony native reference performance. Learning that this is not realistic from the 3rd parties would be valuable (if not sad) to learn.

Am particularly interested in the "native" sigma (which for all intents and purposes embeds the MC11 in the lens) versus the "adapted" sigma. If one or the other side wins that, that would be interesting experiences to learn about.

The Samyang/Rokinon experiences (on "both sides") would also be valuable.

Meant to include the option:

"Left the f/1.4 family of options because of weight/price/quality and am happier with a smaller max aperture 35mm lens (please indicate in a comments)

Yeah, well, I'd love to replace my Rokinon 35/1.4 with a 35/1.8 for reasons of weight and size, but nobody makes one. Aaaaaarrrrrgh!

-- hide signature --

"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
http://jacquescornell.photography
http://happening.photos

 Jacques Cornell's gear list:Jacques Cornell's gear list
Sony a7R II Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Sony a7R III Panasonic Lumix DC-GX9 +42 more
Jeff2013
Jeff2013 Senior Member • Posts: 2,710
Re: Your f/1.4 35mm AF Preferences

If you can obtain a positive "outlier" Sony 35mm f1.4 lens copy, it would be good.  I first purchased this lens when it was released five or six years ago and went through three of them without a lot of success.  I kept using an adapted Sigma 35mm ART, as it was sharper off-center.  I then went to the Canon 35mm f1.4 II, which was excellent, and the best of the bunch.

Tiring of adapted lens focusing challenges on AF-C, I acquired the Samyang FE 35mm f1.4 when it was released.  I was amazed at how close it was to the Canon lens, so I sold the Canon lens.  I am mostly happy with the Samyang lens, although, it is possible to acquire mediocre copies of this lens as well, from what I have read.

I recently acquired the Sigma 40mm f1.4 ART and it is  absolutely stunning... blows all the 35mm f1.4 lenses out of the water for sharpness at f1.4; so, I now just use the Samyang for travel where I need a light weight kit.

The Sony FE 35mm f1.4 was one of their first FE lenses.  It would be great if the Sony engineers that designed the recent (stunning) GM24mm and GM135mm lenses would design a revised Version II model, although I expect that an FE 35mm f1.8 will be next on their agenda based upon apparent demand.

-- hide signature --
 Jeff2013's gear list:Jeff2013's gear list
Sony RX1R II Sony a9 Sony a7R III Sony FE 55mm F1.8 Sony FE 90mm F2.8 macro +16 more
aSevenArr
aSevenArr Senior Member • Posts: 1,489
Re: Your f/1.4 35mm AF Preferences
1

thiefofpresence wrote:

For this lens role, I am wondering what people have and are happy with. If you aren't happy with what you have, vote for what you want instead (your "preference").

Personally I think I will be happy with 90% of the AF keeper rate of the presumed Sony native reference performance. Learning that this is not realistic from the 3rd parties would be valuable (if not sad) to learn.

Am particularly interested in the "native" sigma (which for all intents and purposes embeds the MC11 in the lens) versus the "adapted" sigma. If one or the other side wins that, that would be interesting experiences to learn about.

The Samyang/Rokinon experiences (on "both sides") would also be valuable.

Most people are naturally going to vote for whatever it was that they decided to buy. I doubt that anybody will own more than one 35mm prime.

Anyway, in my own case I have a Sony Zeiss f1.4 "Distagon" and I really love that lens despite the bad threads that seem to periodically pop up on it.

In my experience it has very good sharpness and gorgeous (Zeiss T*) contrasty color and rendering with some smooth buttery bokeh.

It's really great for WA portraits I have found - but I love to take it on vacation and use it in low light.

It's a great lens IMHO but a few people claim to have returned several 'totally unacceptable' copies of it (which to me is seems a bit weird and I think that it might just possibly be explained as them having some 'unrealistic expectations' at the micro pixel level).

I've long believed that you can find 'issue' with any lens if you pixel peep deep enough. WA glass is especially susceptible to unrealistic expectations.

 aSevenArr's gear list:aSevenArr's gear list
Sony RX100 IV Sony a7R Sony a9 Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS Sony FE 35mm F2.8 +13 more
Alantkh Regular Member • Posts: 307
Re: Your f/1.4 35mm AF Preferences

aSevenArr wrote:

thiefofpresence wrote:

For this lens role, I am wondering what people have and are happy with. If you aren't happy with what you have, vote for what you want instead (your "preference").

Personally I think I will be happy with 90% of the AF keeper rate of the presumed Sony native reference performance. Learning that this is not realistic from the 3rd parties would be valuable (if not sad) to learn.

Am particularly interested in the "native" sigma (which for all intents and purposes embeds the MC11 in the lens) versus the "adapted" sigma. If one or the other side wins that, that would be interesting experiences to learn about.

The Samyang/Rokinon experiences (on "both sides") would also be valuable.

Most people are naturally going to vote for whatever it was that they decided to buy. I doubt that anybody will own more than one 35mm prime.

Anyway, in my own case I have a Sony Zeiss f1.4 "Distagon" and I really love that lens despite the bad threads that seem to periodically pop up on it.

In my experience it has very good sharpness and gorgeous (Zeiss T*) contrasty color and rendering with some smooth buttery bokeh.

It's really great for WA portraits I have found - but I love to take it on vacation and use it in low light.

It's a great lens IMHO but a few people claim to have returned several 'totally unacceptable' copies of it (which to me is seems a bit weird and I think that it might just possibly be explained as them having some 'unrealistic expectations' at the micro pixel level).

I've long believed that you can find 'issue' with any lens if you pixel peep deep enough. WA glass is especially susceptible to unrealistic expectations.

I owned all the sigma 35mm, sony 35mm, sigma 40mm....

reason is that they all have some issues.... I am not really satisfied with any of them.

sony has bad loca.

sigma 35mm has bad bokeh.

sigma 40mm is heavy and bad transitional bokeh. Af seems slower in indoor lighting.

sharpness wise the 40mm is much better but all three have acceptable sharpness.

aSevenArr
aSevenArr Senior Member • Posts: 1,489
Re: Your f/1.4 35mm AF Preferences
2

Alantkh wrote:

aSevenArr wrote:

thiefofpresence wrote:

For this lens role, I am wondering what people have and are happy with. If you aren't happy with what you have, vote for what you want instead (your "preference").

Personally I think I will be happy with 90% of the AF keeper rate of the presumed Sony native reference performance. Learning that this is not realistic from the 3rd parties would be valuable (if not sad) to learn.

Am particularly interested in the "native" sigma (which for all intents and purposes embeds the MC11 in the lens) versus the "adapted" sigma. If one or the other side wins that, that would be interesting experiences to learn about.

The Samyang/Rokinon experiences (on "both sides") would also be valuable.

Most people are naturally going to vote for whatever it was that they decided to buy. I doubt that anybody will own more than one 35mm prime.

Anyway, in my own case I have a Sony Zeiss f1.4 "Distagon" and I really love that lens despite the bad threads that seem to periodically pop up on it.

In my experience it has very good sharpness and gorgeous (Zeiss T*) contrasty color and rendering with some smooth buttery bokeh.

It's really great for WA portraits I have found - but I love to take it on vacation and use it in low light.

It's a great lens IMHO but a few people claim to have returned several 'totally unacceptable' copies of it (which to me is seems a bit weird and I think that it might just possibly be explained as them having some 'unrealistic expectations' at the micro pixel level).

I've long believed that you can find 'issue' with any lens if you pixel peep deep enough. WA glass is especially susceptible to unrealistic expectations.

I owned all the sigma 35mm, sony 35mm, sigma 40mm....

reason is that they all have some issues.... I am not really satisfied with any of them.

sony has bad loca.

sigma 35mm has bad bokeh.

sigma 40mm is heavy and bad transitional bokeh. Af seems slower in indoor lighting.

sharpness wise the 40mm is much better but all three have acceptable sharpness.

I remember reading a Zeiss publication that specifically mentioned that because a WA lenses tend to capture a lot more of a scene (naturally because it is WA) users often expect far more from it than might be reasonably possible.

(simply because they want to be able to zoom in and see everything in the scene in great detail, this happens far less with long lenses which actually makes a lot of sense to me).

This can lead us users to have some unrealistic expectations.

I try not to pixel peep. My images are meant to be viewed in their entirety.

 aSevenArr's gear list:aSevenArr's gear list
Sony RX100 IV Sony a7R Sony a9 Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS Sony FE 35mm F2.8 +13 more
Alantkh Regular Member • Posts: 307
Re: Your f/1.4 35mm AF Preferences
1

aSevenArr wrote:

Alantkh wrote:

aSevenArr wrote:

thiefofpresence wrote:

For this lens role, I am wondering what people have and are happy with. If you aren't happy with what you have, vote for what you want instead (your "preference").

Personally I think I will be happy with 90% of the AF keeper rate of the presumed Sony native reference performance. Learning that this is not realistic from the 3rd parties would be valuable (if not sad) to learn.

Am particularly interested in the "native" sigma (which for all intents and purposes embeds the MC11 in the lens) versus the "adapted" sigma. If one or the other side wins that, that would be interesting experiences to learn about.

The Samyang/Rokinon experiences (on "both sides") would also be valuable.

Most people are naturally going to vote for whatever it was that they decided to buy. I doubt that anybody will own more than one 35mm prime.

Anyway, in my own case I have a Sony Zeiss f1.4 "Distagon" and I really love that lens despite the bad threads that seem to periodically pop up on it.

In my experience it has very good sharpness and gorgeous (Zeiss T*) contrasty color and rendering with some smooth buttery bokeh.

It's really great for WA portraits I have found - but I love to take it on vacation and use it in low light.

It's a great lens IMHO but a few people claim to have returned several 'totally unacceptable' copies of it (which to me is seems a bit weird and I think that it might just possibly be explained as them having some 'unrealistic expectations' at the micro pixel level).

I've long believed that you can find 'issue' with any lens if you pixel peep deep enough. WA glass is especially susceptible to unrealistic expectations.

I owned all the sigma 35mm, sony 35mm, sigma 40mm....

reason is that they all have some issues.... I am not really satisfied with any of them.

sony has bad loca.

sigma 35mm has bad bokeh.

sigma 40mm is heavy and bad transitional bokeh. Af seems slower in indoor lighting.

sharpness wise the 40mm is much better but all three have acceptable sharpness.

I remember reading a Zeiss publication that specifically mentioned that because a WA lenses tend to capture a lot more of a scene (naturally because it is WA) users often expect far more from it than might be reasonably possible.

(simply because they want to be able to zoom in and see everything in the scene in great detail, this happens far less with long lenses which actually makes a lot of sense to me).

This can lead us users to have some unrealistic expectations.

I try not to pixel peep. My images are meant to be viewed in their entirety.

But the loca issue with zeiss by far is the most obvious without pixel peeping. You can see the fringing even on some web size pics....

honestly all the talk about sharpness, u can’t tell without zooming in 100 percent. But stuff like loca, double lining transitional bokeh, onion ring in the big bokeh are all very onbious without pixel peeping.

with a little sharpening , it is even harder to tell the difference, but bad bokeh, heavy loca is hard to fix post processing.

af accuracy is also Super impt but hard to evaluate objectively... need to use for loooong time. My initial impression is my 40mm sigma seems to struggle more in indoor lighting vs the zeiss. But I did not own them side by side for Long periods of time so it’s hard to say. Could also be handholding issues with the heavier lens, or some compatibility issue with Sony steadyshot. It seems my hit rate dropped indoors esp on moving subjects.

aSevenArr
aSevenArr Senior Member • Posts: 1,489
Re: Your f/1.4 35mm AF Preferences

Alantkh wrote:

aSevenArr wrote:

Alantkh wrote:

aSevenArr wrote:

thiefofpresence wrote:

For this lens role, I am wondering what people have and are happy with. If you aren't happy with what you have, vote for what you want instead (your "preference").

Personally I think I will be happy with 90% of the AF keeper rate of the presumed Sony native reference performance. Learning that this is not realistic from the 3rd parties would be valuable (if not sad) to learn.

Am particularly interested in the "native" sigma (which for all intents and purposes embeds the MC11 in the lens) versus the "adapted" sigma. If one or the other side wins that, that would be interesting experiences to learn about.

The Samyang/Rokinon experiences (on "both sides") would also be valuable.

Most people are naturally going to vote for whatever it was that they decided to buy. I doubt that anybody will own more than one 35mm prime.

Anyway, in my own case I have a Sony Zeiss f1.4 "Distagon" and I really love that lens despite the bad threads that seem to periodically pop up on it.

In my experience it has very good sharpness and gorgeous (Zeiss T*) contrasty color and rendering with some smooth buttery bokeh.

It's really great for WA portraits I have found - but I love to take it on vacation and use it in low light.

It's a great lens IMHO but a few people claim to have returned several 'totally unacceptable' copies of it (which to me is seems a bit weird and I think that it might just possibly be explained as them having some 'unrealistic expectations' at the micro pixel level).

I've long believed that you can find 'issue' with any lens if you pixel peep deep enough. WA glass is especially susceptible to unrealistic expectations.

I owned all the sigma 35mm, sony 35mm, sigma 40mm....

reason is that they all have some issues.... I am not really satisfied with any of them.

sony has bad loca.

sigma 35mm has bad bokeh.

sigma 40mm is heavy and bad transitional bokeh. Af seems slower in indoor lighting.

sharpness wise the 40mm is much better but all three have acceptable sharpness.

I remember reading a Zeiss publication that specifically mentioned that because a WA lenses tend to capture a lot more of a scene (naturally because it is WA) users often expect far more from it than might be reasonably possible.

(simply because they want to be able to zoom in and see everything in the scene in great detail, this happens far less with long lenses which actually makes a lot of sense to me).

This can lead us users to have some unrealistic expectations.

I try not to pixel peep. My images are meant to be viewed in their entirety.

But the loca issue with zeiss by far is the most obvious without pixel peeping. You can see the fringing even on some web size pics....

honestly all the talk about sharpness, u can’t tell without zooming in 100 percent. But stuff like loca, double lining transitional bokeh, onion ring in the big bokeh are all very onbious without pixel peeping.

with a little sharpening , it is even harder to tell the difference, but bad bokeh, heavy loca is hard to fix post processing.

af accuracy is also Super impt but hard to evaluate objectively... need to use for loooong time. My initial impression is my 40mm sigma seems to struggle more in indoor lighting vs the zeiss. But I did not own them side by side for Long periods of time so it’s hard to say. Could also be handholding issues with the heavier lens, or some compatibility issue with Sony steadyshot. It seems my hit rate dropped indoors esp on moving subjects.

I do not have these issues with my Sony Zeiss f1.4 35mm Distagon, it give me gorgeous tack sharp results and lovely smooth bokeh. There is a tiny amount of CA that is easily corrected.

Much like those reported by Ken here: https://kenrockwell.com/sony/zeiss/35mm-f14.htm

 aSevenArr's gear list:aSevenArr's gear list
Sony RX100 IV Sony a7R Sony a9 Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS Sony FE 35mm F2.8 +13 more
thiefofpresence
OP thiefofpresence Contributing Member • Posts: 678
Maybe Samyang AF 1.8/45 is an option

Jacques Cornell wrote:

thiefofpresence wrote:

thiefofpresence wrote:

For this lens role, I am wondering what people have and are happy with. If you aren't happy with what you have, vote for what you want instead (your "preference").

Personally I think I will be happy with 90% of the AF keeper rate of the presumed Sony native reference performance. Learning that this is not realistic from the 3rd parties would be valuable (if not sad) to learn.

Am particularly interested in the "native" sigma (which for all intents and purposes embeds the MC11 in the lens) versus the "adapted" sigma. If one or the other side wins that, that would be interesting experiences to learn about.

The Samyang/Rokinon experiences (on "both sides") would also be valuable.

Meant to include the option:

"Left the f/1.4 family of options because of weight/price/quality and am happier with a smaller max aperture 35mm lens (please indicate in a comments)

Yeah, well, I'd love to replace my Rokinon 35/1.4 with a 35/1.8 for reasons of weight and size, but nobody makes one. Aaaaaarrrrrgh!

I have noticed the incoming Samyang/Rokinon 1.8/45, and while I have preferred 35s (when available...) a 45 is just the right side of fifty, quite near that elusive 40mm normal that would geometrically fit quite nicely between my 24 and 85

It comes out almost exactly that 45 is twice the AOV of 85, and 25 is twice the AOV of 45, but sometimes a picture is work a thousand words:

-- hide signature --

https://www.instagram.com/thiefofpresence
Sony A7iii | Zeiss Batis 2/25; Sony FE 1.8/85 | Sony FE 4/24-105 G OSS; Sony FE 4/70-200 G OSS; Sigma 150-600 (+MC-11)

 thiefofpresence's gear list:thiefofpresence's gear list
Sony a7 III Sony a6400 Voigtlander 21mm F4 Color Skopar Pancake II Voigtlander 40mm F1.4 Nokton Classic Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM Art +6 more
Jacques Cornell
Jacques Cornell Forum Pro • Posts: 11,281
Re: Maybe Samyang AF 1.8/45 is an option

thiefofpresence wrote:

Jacques Cornell wrote:

thiefofpresence wrote:

thiefofpresence wrote:

For this lens role, I am wondering what people have and are happy with. If you aren't happy with what you have, vote for what you want instead (your "preference").

Personally I think I will be happy with 90% of the AF keeper rate of the presumed Sony native reference performance. Learning that this is not realistic from the 3rd parties would be valuable (if not sad) to learn.

Am particularly interested in the "native" sigma (which for all intents and purposes embeds the MC11 in the lens) versus the "adapted" sigma. If one or the other side wins that, that would be interesting experiences to learn about.

The Samyang/Rokinon experiences (on "both sides") would also be valuable.

Meant to include the option:

"Left the f/1.4 family of options because of weight/price/quality and am happier with a smaller max aperture 35mm lens (please indicate in a comments)

Yeah, well, I'd love to replace my Rokinon 35/1.4 with a 35/1.8 for reasons of weight and size, but nobody makes one. Aaaaaarrrrrgh!

I have noticed the incoming Samyang/Rokinon 1.8/45, and while I have preferred 35s (when available...) a 45 is just the right side of fifty, quite near that elusive 40mm normal that would geometrically fit quite nicely between my 24 and 85

It comes out almost exactly that 45 is twice the AOV of 85, and 25 is twice the AOV of 45, but sometimes a picture is work a thousand words:

I could go for a compact 40/1.8 - I love my pancake Panasonic 20/1.7 on my GX8 & GX9 - but 45mm is just longer than I want. My prime trifecta is 24/35/85.

-- hide signature --

"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
http://jacquescornell.photography
http://happening.photos

 Jacques Cornell's gear list:Jacques Cornell's gear list
Sony a7R II Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Sony a7R III Panasonic Lumix DC-GX9 +42 more
Alantkh Regular Member • Posts: 307
Re: Your f/1.4 35mm AF Preferences

aSevenArr wrote:

Alantkh wrote:

But the loca issue with zeiss by far is the most obvious without pixel peeping. You can see the fringing even on some web size pics....

honestly all the talk about sharpness, u can’t tell without zooming in 100 percent. But stuff like loca, double lining transitional bokeh, onion ring in the big bokeh are all very onbious without pixel peeping.

with a little sharpening , it is even harder to tell the difference, but bad bokeh, heavy loca is hard to fix post processing.

af accuracy is also Super impt but hard to evaluate objectively... need to use for loooong time. My initial impression is my 40mm sigma seems to struggle more in indoor lighting vs the zeiss. But I did not own them side by side for Long periods of time so it’s hard to say. Could also be handholding issues with the heavier lens, or some compatibility issue with Sony steadyshot. It seems my hit rate dropped indoors esp on moving subjects.

I do not have these issues with my Sony Zeiss f1.4 35mm Distagon, it give me gorgeous tack sharp results and lovely smooth bokeh. There is a tiny amount of CA that is easily corrected.

Much like those reported by Ken here: https://kenrockwell.com/sony/zeiss/35mm-f14.htm

errr.... plenty of fringing at the samples in ken's review. Example below. This is not even a high contrast subject, it is so much worse with dark on bright transition.

https://kenrockwell.com/sony/zeiss/35mm-f14/sample-images/DSC02643.JPG

Actually Ken's review states "this Zeiss lens doesn't use such technology and has a boatload of spherochromatism"

That is actually the Longitudinal Chromatic Aberration (LoCA) I was talking about. It is horrendous in Ken's sample as well. Unless your lens is different from almost every other sony 35mm f1.4 I have seen....

https://kenrockwell.com/sony/zeiss/35mm-f14/sample-images/DSC02686.JPG

Alantkh Regular Member • Posts: 307
Re: Maybe Samyang AF 1.8/45 is an option

Jacques Cornell wrote:

I could go for a compact 40/1.8 - I love my pancake Panasonic 20/1.7 on my GX8 & GX9 - but 45mm is just longer than I want. My prime trifecta is 24/35/85.

Isn't there already the Batis 40mm f2?

thiefofpresence
OP thiefofpresence Contributing Member • Posts: 678
Re: Maybe Samyang AF 1.8/45 is an option
1

Alantkh wrote:

Jacques Cornell wrote:

I could go for a compact 40/1.8 - I love my pancake Panasonic 20/1.7 on my GX8 & GX9 - but 45mm is just longer than I want. My prime trifecta is 24/35/85.

Isn't there already the Batis 40mm f2?

The samyang compact series (35/2.8, 24/2.8 and now 45/1.8) are noticbly more compact than Batis series.

I love my Batis 2/25, but frankly I don't know if I want to go down the Batis system route.

And I would like my normal lens to be compact and stealthy (with punch to spare under the hood)

I thought I heard some complaints about Batis 2/40 and wonder if it has been worked out in firmware yet. And in addition to size, there is the purchase $ize

-- hide signature --

https://www.instagram.com/thiefofpresence
Sony A7iii | Zeiss Batis 2/25; Sony FE 1.8/85 | Sony FE 4/24-105 G OSS; Sony FE 4/70-200 G OSS; Sigma 150-600 (+MC-11)

 thiefofpresence's gear list:thiefofpresence's gear list
Sony a7 III Sony a6400 Voigtlander 21mm F4 Color Skopar Pancake II Voigtlander 40mm F1.4 Nokton Classic Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM Art +6 more
Jacques Cornell
Jacques Cornell Forum Pro • Posts: 11,281
Re: Maybe Samyang AF 1.8/45 is an option

Alantkh wrote:

Jacques Cornell wrote:

I could go for a compact 40/1.8 - I love my pancake Panasonic 20/1.7 on my GX8 & GX9 - but 45mm is just longer than I want. My prime trifecta is 24/35/85.

Isn't there already the Batis 40mm f2?

Yes, that's a possibility. In fact, I was checking it out earlier today. But, it's bigger and costlier than I'd prefer. A Sony 35/1.8 (and a 24/1.8) to match their 85/1.8 would be perfect. The 85/1.8 is my Goldilocks reference in terms of size, weight, performance and cost. A great value, good performance, and easy to carry all day. And, it's got that barrel button.

Been looking at the Batis 25/2, as well. But, given the small cost difference, I'll probably eventually go for Sony's 24/1.4 GM because I'm pretty sure Sony isn't going to cannibalize those sales with a 24/1.8, and because the 24/1.4 is reasonably small & light.

-- hide signature --

"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
http://jacquescornell.photography
http://happening.photos

 Jacques Cornell's gear list:Jacques Cornell's gear list
Sony a7R II Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Sony a7R III Panasonic Lumix DC-GX9 +42 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads