just ordered one from popflash. he has 6 left.
Unfortunately, despite their good looks, Loxia have not been worth their tag or their price.
I really wanted believe that but am very disappointed.
What started out as a fun project of mounting a Yashica Electro 35 45/1.7 for the E mount, got me to the Yashinon 35/1.8. A planar clone (6/4), unfortunately was made with a ghastly 2 bladed diaphram. The lens is so impressive on the A7r (not the s!) that I am rebuilding it with a 5 bladed diaphram. Trying to put a new diaphram in a lens isn't trivial and is the most challenging I have ever done. It is all worth it because the lens is that good.
It is far easier for me to push the buy button on the Loxia. I won't do it because these aren't worth having.
Vivek, I beg to differ. I won a Loxia 50 and really enjoy that lens. Not flawless, but what lens is, short of Otus 55 or Summicron 50 APO maybe. But, as an all-round take-anywhere, shoot-anything, it is a gem.
Yeah I'm gonna have to agree that the Loxia's are probably worth it considering they're improved ZM lenses. The ZM 50 Planar may still be my favorite 50 that I've owned and I even have the newest 50 Lux ASPH FLE.
Are there some tests on the 35mm that we can see. The lens sounds like a good shoe in for a small 35mm lens.
The opinions on Loxia are like interest rates in Switzerland and Russia. I think they are over priced &^%$*&.
Price is subjective of course. Not happy its 1350 dollars either but if its good than folks will overlook costs versus quality sometimes. Otus lenses are a clear case of that when these new Sigma Art lenses are just a shade behind them. That's big money but we always have to remember this some folks money is not the issue at all. They also keep the industry rolling too.
I understand that Guy. Given that these are tweaked range finder lenses with no range finder coupling to worry about, I would expect to cost a lot less than the RF lenses.
The 35/2 corners are still disappointing. It may be better than the ZM biogon but it is not ready for prime time, at any price, it looks like.
Well if they don't perform than I understand the cost versus value scenerio
I may hold out for the 28 f2 myself. I really like to hear delivery dates on a lot of stuff right now so I can plan. The Sigma 50 Art for Sony came out before I expected it too and I went and bought a ZA 50 1.4 to hold me over. I'm in mental debate if I should switch. I would like a razor in that focal wide open
I will be buying the Sony 28/2 just as an encouragement to make their own lenses and not any of the Zeiss labelled stuff.
1 Member(s) liked this post
I would be very interested to see some good independent results on this lens.
I'm a bit off Sony 'Zeiss' or Zeiss products as I feel I was really burned by the FE 35/2.8.
I'm hoping the 35/1.4 will be as good as the FE 55/1.8.
I paid top dollar to have one of the first FE 35/2.8's and sold it for half that 6 months later as I was so completely unimpressed and wanted some money towards the Leica 35/2 I bought as a replacement.
Priolite Ambassador | Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
http://www.iiinelsonimages.com1 Member(s) liked this post
It is easy to call the Loxia overpriced, and I'd love to do that like many of you. But, for me to be able to do that, I need to find a better lens at the same price, or a similar lens that is cheaper. I am therefore all ears for your enlightened suggestions. Please note that I had a FE 55 and it was really not to my taste. Yes, it was very sharp at all times, but its lack of colour differentiation robbed it of appeal in my case, and I tried 3 to avoid the proverbial "bad copy".
I too will wait for the FE 28 or the FE35/1.4 as I think the loxia is expensive option of a manual focus lens. I agree the FE35 was very expensive on release (when I bought mine) and I agree it lacks any special 'wow' factor but on the other hand it is very small and incredibly light and now that they can be picked up used for a reasonable price make for a very small package. I also find it's IQ to be very good at all apertures. My favourite 35mm lens for the way it renders is the CV 35/1.2 v2 which unfortunately makes for the total opposite to a small light weight package
Cam the 50 ZA 1.4 is more like that with a nice look to it. It's very much like a shortened 85 1.4 style lens. I liked the 55 1.8 a lot it was very sharp but I thought it was a little sterile looking. The Sigma Art might be as well, have not shot that yet but reports are its Otus like wide open. Sometimes in the longer focal length like 50 and 85 its nice to have a 1.4 lens that shows character from 1.4 to 2.8 than turns into a razor from F4 on. Many Leica summilux glass was like that especially like the R 35, 50 and 80 . Now the 80 was more dream like and wide open had a lot of aberrations wide open. More modern lenses are corrected better and some like the 55 1.8 may take it over the top a little as far as look. But having a 1 two 2 punch in a lens that can do both is fun to have. The ZA 50 is like that
I was shooting the other night in a very dark and was amazed at how fast the 55/1.8 focused on the A7s (sadly, faster than I could manually @f/1 on my MM in most situations ). What I didn't like, however, was the flat plane of focus which seemed to suck the life out of the pics. I honestly hadn't realised how reliant I was on not just the focus but also the draw of the lens.
The Sigma sounds like it might just be the ticket! Because it will still autofocus on the A7 bodies, non? (With the right adaptor, of course…)
Yes this very much is a 2 edge sword. If you go for brilliant 1.4 sharpness sometimes the look is just not there. Case in point the Leica Summarits lenses you buy all three focal lengths and outside the FOV each lens look identical to the other 2. That's how they where designed to be general purpose glass. The 55 1.8 resembles that type of design to be very good and sharp. That sometimes takes out the look , draw and character out of a lens sometimes. As a general rule as glass in the modern age is being developed engineers try to wipe out those aberrations as they don't show well in MTF charts. That's bad for marketing and digital we are all pixel peeping like crazy. You know you read the forums and the obsession for ultimate quality. I'm guilty myself but does pin lens designers into a corner as its harder to get a modern two punch lens.
Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.
www.guymancusophotography.com2 Member(s) liked this post
Thank you, again, Guy… You pretty much nailed the reason the Summarits never appealed to me, sigh. And why the 55/1.8, though stunningly sharp, leaves me somewhat cold.
I know I can use my older glass in manual focus, but I'd very much prefer to have fast AF with character on this cam…
Guy, would you please hurry up and buy this lens so we can see it on the Sony? Pretty please?
Go to a dark bar, order some drinks, and take not so stellar shots (pixel peeping be damned). I swear I'll pick up the tab! (For the drinks, not the glass )
Lol I am thinking about it.
Believe me its not to take anything away from the 55 as it is brilliant for the money too. It's very very sharp and many folks love that but sometimes it will look clinical especially with hard light.
(The A7s is my first "big boy" camera that isn't an RF so this is all so new to me!)
I can tell you I am in love with the 35 now. Selling a 55 FE while I wait for the backordered 50 loxia.
A few samples from the 35
More at Photo Gallery | The zeissimages Free Online Photo Gallery
If you want a manual focus 50 with character, how about old M glass? Not cheap, but also holds its value. Extra bonus - close focus is over 3 feet!
Version 1 50 Lux "focused" on cup handle at f/1.4 (50% crop):
And its 1960s design is a perfect match for the Sony!
It *does* take a nice portrait, and it *is* sharp past f/4....
1 Member(s) liked this post
Well, not exactly, mine was a cusp lens from 1962 but it looks and draws (almost) the same. What you say is true, though! It was my very first Leica lens and made me fall in love with RF photography… It's only failing, imo, was the near-focus distance which will be magically fixed by my VME adaptor on the Sony
Off to give it a try.
I'm REALLY not trying to hijack this thread, but the sun just came in through the window and...
Another wide open with the V1 Lux - full frame this time - some contrast and shadows
OK, back to FE now...
Last edited by MGrayson; 26th December 2014 at 04:45.
I'm picking up a members 35FE to hold me over until the 28 F2 comes out. I'm pretty well set right now which has takin a long time to do. This 35 loxia looks very interesting and I'll have to see after awhile if it is working out. I don't like the high price though.
I had a 35 Loxia in my hand and found it handles great. Also nice that turning the focus wheel can automatically start magnification.
On the other side I enjoy having AF in the FE35mm.
For now I will stay with the 35FE, even though I would enjoy f2.0.
Also the comparisons on some review the Loxia looked nicer IMO.
I just received a 35 Loxia from LensRentals. Did some quick comparisons with my 35 FE. Boring bookcase stuff so far.
The Loxia handles wonderfully. Great focus ring, zooms in automatically just like I think it should, aperture ring you can switch on/off, a real lens hood.*
Not sure if it is this copy or not, but it is not significantly better than my FE. The center and right sides are marginally better. But the left side is worse, and doesn't get better as you stop down. Probably decentered a bit.
If I could find one that was more even across the field I might get one because I really like how it handles. But I was hoping for better IQ. I will play with it for the week and give some updates. Hopefully I end up feeling the same way JT does.
*I must admit functionally I haven't run into any problems with the FE's lens hood. It's just, odd.
My 35Loxia - compared to the FE35 - seems to have slightly softer outer corners at f2.8. The color of the Loxia is a little warmer.
I really do like the handling of the Loxia, smooth focusing, nice to control f-stop at the lens but have the f-stop in the viewfinder (except I dislike the f-stop direction is opposite of Leica M lenses). Size wise well balanced.
Also there is a rubber sealing between lens and body.
First impressions (and reason to buy the lens besides the faster f-stop) is the images are more "organic" while the images from the 35FE look more "technical".
I cant judge if the price is appropriate or not, but its a nice lens and IMO f2.0 is a good compromise between speed and lens-size/weight.
I try to post some images as soon as I have something I feel is worth posting.
2 Member(s) liked this post
You might see some of the film heritage in the Loxias - nee ZMs. It's why I use film era Contax lenses, for the organic draw style. But for my stuff I see very good results from the FE55 (and RX1 is similar for me), soft and delicate, and its versatility is great for varying work.
There is now talk of 'an announcement' in the next few weeks - I can't get my head around how good all the better lenses are going to work on a high Mp sensor body. It's already close to medium format for many uses, get ready for ultra reality now.
In case of 35mm it was difference since the Loxia has a 1 f-stop speed advantage over the FE35 and also the Leica M 35mm lenses don't work as well on the Sony A7II as 50mm and longer.
Which announcement are you expecting?
When I honed in on the A7II as the camera to return to photography with, the Loxias were my target lenses. Truth be told, if they were available in the shop at the time of camera purchase I would have bought them untested.
However in hindsight I'm quite glad I didn't, it would have been a huge mistake irrespective of optical rendition or resolution.
I jumped into this system totally blind, I just wanted quality files like I had with the a900, something relatively small and light and some good Zeiss optics I had come to appreciate (and hate) in the alpha line.
After using the FE35 2.8 for the past couple of days, I think I actually made the best decision for me, I'm more than happy with it across the frame, I love it's up close and personal rendition when shooting people, the fact it just autofocuses perfectly once I get to grips with the AF on this Camera body. It's small, very light, colour and contrast is excellent and that strange hood, while unusual has been practically flawless in execution.
I haven't shot the FE55 1.8 much yet, though I will say my immediate reaction was the searing sharpness and pop that I saw in the first few images floored me totally. It kind of reminded me of the FA135 Zeiss I loved but without the dreamy backgrounds.
I'm done with all that manual focus/aperture stuff, my eyesight has finally said enough is enough even with the focus zooming .. I really couldn't be bothered.
Unless you're into landscape or architecture which may demand perfect corners, the FE for my money is a perfect little gem.
A7II, FE 35, 55 C/Y 18, 28, 85, 100, 28-85
Could the owners of the Loxia please clarify one thing about the lens: Do aperture blades actually close down as you turn the aperture ring? or the lens stays open until the moment one presses the shutter button (and it is only then that the aperture momentarily closes, as in AF lenses)?
I somehow couldn't understand this from the available lens description.
I have been using the Loxia 35 on my A7s and A7 for the last month regularly, and am very impressed at the ease of use, with automatic enlargement of the view when one turns the finely damped focus ring. This is a very nice replacement for my M9 and 35 Summicron.
Sony A7MII, A7s, Loxia 21, 35, 50mm
1 Member(s) liked this post
So am i to understand this correctly, the FE35/2.8 is sharper to the corners then the Loxia 35? Is this true for both up close and at distant?
Do I have this backwards? The Luxia is sharper in the corners?
I may just wait for the new 35 1.4. If the Loxia is just marginally better than 35 FE than maybe getting a look lens of the 35 1.4 might be a better option at least I can get a wide open look and stop down look . Yea bigger and more expensive but I'm going to hold out for it.
Viktor's Loxia 35mm review is very good as he compares it to different lenses incl FE 35mm, CV35mm, zm 35mm f2, g35mm:
Zeiss Loxia Biogon 35/2 Review by Viktor Pavlovic
On his ZM 35mm 1.4 review he has also some comparisons to Loxia 35mm:
Zeiss Distagon 35mm f/1.4 ZM Review by Viktor Pavlovic
1 Member(s) liked this post