Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

[RVB]

Sony is also living proof that high quality lenses do not have to be large. Take a look at lenscore.org, they test all lenses on same custom-made 200 MP digital back. The score of (rather moderately-prized in comparison to Leica) FE55 and FE 35 beats handily a pile of Leica lenses, there is in fact only 3 or so Leica lenses that rate better than those 2.


IMO this is kind of a child of "benchmark age". To get positive reviews etc. lenses need to be ultrasharp and well corrected from wide open even in the corners. This leads to increasing size. As the Zeiss Otus is sometimes referred as "medium format lens that uses FF size sweet spot to get superb performance".

Big portion of so called high quality Leica small/fast lenses have corner performance that really is nothing to write home about.


IMO Sony is on this road though the speed could be faster. Zeiss is making Loxias with heavy ZM heritage. The problem is that the 35 and 50 Loxia have quite hard time beating the "Sony Zeiss" offering despite pile of R&D put into them on top of ZM line. Below 35 mm the ZM-heritage only makes things even harder for UWA Loxias to perform well due to increasing ray angle issues.

Interesting site and having looked at the scores its even more impressive what Leica achieved with the 300gram Cron 50mm APO ,even if its a stop slower than the superb Otus glass.

 

[iiiNelson]

No, I'm not equating optical quality of the product based on the mass/size, but it's apparently the way things are heading. If I should guess, it's done because it's the easiest way to achieve ultimate quality, and everybody except Leica seem to be going in that direction, in spite of camera bodies getting smaller, at least compared to what they were 5-10 years ago. Leica is the living proof that high quality lenses don't need to be large.

This is not an anti-Sony argument. All high quality, large aperture lenses for the 35mm format (again, except Leica) seem to grow larger, regardless of brand, even those that are only f/1.8, like the new Nikkor primes, 20/28/35/50/85. It's a paradox, since cameras are usable at much higher ISO than before, which means that the market for f/1.4 lenses should be diminishing. Apparently, it's not.

For me, a complete setup of moderately sized f/2.0 lenses that are sharp across the frame from f/2 to f/11 is much more interesting. The Zeiss ZF/ZE range offers that, as do Leica with the Summicrons. Nikon isn't too far off with the above mentioned primes, although they are a bit larger and with a distinct feel of plastic. They are quite lightweight though.

Sony could have done something like this too. As soon as they knew that the A7 would become reality, they could have made a phone call to Zeiss, asking them to design FE mount versions with AF of an assortment of ZM lenses, modified to suit the sensor, the mount etc. They could have had something like 15/2.8, 21/2.8, 28/2.8, 35/2.0, 50/2.0 and 85/4.0 within months, or at least a year. I can assure you they would have grabbed my attention. But they didn't.

Apples and oranges comparison. Leica can keep lenses small because they are all MF without the exotic supersonic wave motor or image stabilization. Look at the Noctilux. It's significantly larger than the other M lenses and the same can be said of the CV Nokton 35 II. The 55 FE isn't much larger than the 50 Lux FLE. The 35/2.8FE isn't much larger than the 35 Cron ASPH. When you build for speed you get much larger sound. When you build for excellent corners you either software correct or build a larger lens that doesn't exhibit as much falloff.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Apples and oranges comparison. Leica can keep lenses small because they are all MF without the exotic supersonic wave motor or image stabilization. Look at the Noctilux. It's significantly larger than the other M lenses and the same can be said of the CV Nokton 35 II. The 55 FE isn't much larger than the 50 Lux FLE. The 35/2.8FE isn't much larger than the 35 Cron ASPH. When you build for speed you get much larger sound. When you build for excellent corners you either software correct or build a larger lens that doesn't exhibit as much falloff.

Exactly! Let's agree to agree for once

 

[jfirneno]

They could have had something like 15/2.8, 21/2.8, 28/2.8, 35/2.0, 50/2.0 and 85/4.0 within months, or at least a year. I can assure you they would have grabbed my attention. But they didn't.

Somehow it's a little hard to imagine you endorsing anything Sony does. I think they're your favorite target. But at least you're concerned!

 

[iiiNelson]

Exactly! Let's agree to agree for once

Sure... I'm drinking... I'd agree to a lot.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Somehow it's a little hard to imagine you endorsing anything Sony does. I think they're your favorite target. But at least you're concerned!

Sony is my favourite target because I fear that their current policies don't lead anywhere. It's very important for the camera/photography industry that they succeed and help keep the market thriving. There are few enough manufacturers as it is, particularly of 35mm format cameras.

I've always seen the basic idea of the A7 as good, but I've also pointed out the weak points that have kept me from buying one. When it comes to lenses, it's very important to remember that:

- Most photographers don't own any A-mount lenses.
- Most photographers don't own any M-mount lenses.
- Most photographers use native mount AF lenses only.

The most important reason to buy a lightweight, compact camera body is to save weight and space. If a sensible selection of good quality, compact, lightweight lenses isn't available, buying that compact body doesn't make any sense for most photographers. With the combined resources of Sony and Zeiss and Zeiss' extensive catalogue of high quality glass, including the above mentioned M-mount lenses, I find it surprising that they didn't set out to launch the basics of such a selection from the outset. As it has been until now, the A7 models have been nice choices mostly for those with A- and M-mount lenses, which again is a small part of the camera market. Too small probably, to keep this system alive.

Leica obviously wouldn't sell a single M-mount camera without their extensive range of compact primes. Even Nikon, with their larger camera bodies, have showed recently that this is important also for them and their customers by launching 5 relatively compact f/1.8 primes. So why shouldn't this be important to Sony then? I do assume that they want as many users for their cameras as possible.

 

[iiiNelson]

You also seem to forget MOST photographer rely on zooms and not primes. The A7r was marketed for the discerning hobbyist and/or pro while the original A7 was supposed to be the all around camera for soccer moms to pros. The lenses are coming and when they do I'm sure plenty will still complain. LOL

 

[dandrewk]

Sony is my favourite target because I fear that their current policies don't lead anywhere. It's very important for the camera/photography industry that they succeed and help keep the market thriving. There are few enough manufacturers as it is, particularly of 35mm format cameras.

I've always seen the basic idea of the A7 as good, but I've also pointed out the weak points that have kept me from buying one. When it comes to lenses, it's very important to remember that:

- Most photographers don't own any A-mount lenses.
- Most photographers don't own any M-mount lenses.
- Most photographers use native mount AF lenses only.

The most important reason to buy a lightweight, compact camera body is to save weight and space. If a sensible selection of good quality, compact, lightweight lenses isn't available, buying that compact body doesn't make any sense for most photographers. With the combined resources of Sony and Zeiss and Zeiss' extensive catalogue of high quality glass, including the above mentioned M-mount lenses, I find it surprising that they didn't set out to launch the basics of such a selection from the outset. As it has been until now, the A7 models have been nice choices mostly for those with A- and M-mount lenses, which again is a small part of the camera market. Too small probably, to keep this system alive.

Leica obviously wouldn't sell a single M-mount camera without their extensive range of compact primes. Even Nikon, with their larger camera bodies, have showed recently that this is important also for them and their customers by launching 5 relatively compact f/1.8 primes. So why shouldn't this be important to Sony then? I do assume that they want as many users for their cameras as possible.

You also seem to forget Sony is going to want to maximize revenue/profits from the FF mirrorless cameras ASAP, to recoup R&D and prove viability of the platform going forward.

They don't do this by designing and building nothing but slow, cheaper lenses with little or no profit margin. The best thing is to go for the big bang bucks first and then cover the remaining market as time and budget permits.

Sony has never made a big deal over the size of their mirrorless cameras. And they have made ZERO statements about their native lenses being small. So all this stuff about "too big" is based on personal preference and false assumptions, not unfulfilled promises.

 

[Vivek]

The lenses are coming and when they do I'm sure plenty will still complain. LOL

The day (real users) stop complaining would either make ( because they found lenses acceptable) or break (because may be many are driven away by Sony fans who would accept anything that sony throw at them).

I am going to mount a Nikonos lens on my A7 cams soon when the adapter arrives.

It is a result of yet another system abandoned by Nikon. :chug:

 

[docmoore]

I am going to mount a Nikonos lens on my A7 cams soon when the adapter arrives.

It is a result of yet another system abandoned by Nikon. :chug:

Actually,

The system was not abandoned by Nikon ... it was abandoned by users.

Hard to fault them for dropping system that was not profitable.

Bob

 

[Vivek]

Actually,

The system was not abandoned by Nikon ... it was abandoned by users.

Hard to fault them for dropping system that was not profitable.

Bob

If that was the case then that isn' t far off from Sony or any other company's view either.

 

[iiiNelson]

I don't think everyone who likes what they are putting out can be classified as a Sony fan. I think they may legitimately desire exactly what they are releasing (in my case a fast 35 with some character or the 55FE.) Some like the 35/2.8, some would love slow yet small primes. I have no use or desire for the sort personally but that doesn't mean thatI don't hope they make them for those that do.

I think that's the disconnect. Some only look at their own desires and feel those are the only ones that ever need to be filled. Some just continue to complain even when they've never owned a Sony camera.

 

[dandrewk]

If that was the case then that isn' t far off from Sony or any other company's view either.

... or Microsoft, or Sony, or General Motors, or Samsung, or Koninklijke Philips N.V., or every other successful enterprise. In fact, it's the most basic human (or any other species) needs - survival. Maslow was right.

 

[Tim]

I'm not convinced that small lenses can't or arn't being made for the FE mount.

We are starting to see them now. Look at the 35mm Loxia, its essentially a ZM Biogon like beast corrected for the A7 sensors and its hardly any bigger than many M-Mount 35mms. Look at the Mk III Zeiss 15mm. A tiny bit larger than its two predecessors again just a corrected design for the A7 sensor. A deception is the A7's shallow sensor to flange distance. The camera is already very thin, we have to allow for some extra size in the lens tube anyway. Maybe this is why Alpha lenses seen so long.

Even the new FE 28mm is not all that big IMHO. Perhaps Sony are not as good as others jamming AF motors in their lenses to a small size.
For someone like me who tends to only tote 1-2-3 lenses, a small body with maybe one big lens is still overall a much smaller lighter kit over a DSLR system.

Sony is my favorite target because I fear that their current policies don't lead anywhere.

IMHO this may be a good thing, look at Nikon, Canon and all the rest churning out the same shaped thing over and over for decades.
Every now and then I like to take the road less traveled or not plan a day, lets just go where the day takes us. Perhaps this philosophy is good for Sony (or Us). Experiment a little, maybe something better will come out of it. I bought in knowing it was risk to my money but then I don't have to make a living from it so I am free to experiment.

IMHO all electronic and optic designs are compromises. One thing WE have to to is adapt ourselves to those compromises. We can whine all we like but they make and offer it, we buy or not.

In the end if it don't suit you buy something that does. Simple :clap:

 

[jfirneno]

Sony is my favourite target because I fear that their current policies don't lead anywhere. It's very important for the camera/photography industry that they succeed and help keep the market thriving. There are few enough manufacturers as it is, particularly of 35mm format cameras.

I've always seen the basic idea of the A7 as good, but I've also pointed out the weak points that have kept me from buying one. When it comes to lenses, it's very important to remember that:

- Most photographers don't own any A-mount lenses.
- Most photographers don't own any M-mount lenses.
- Most photographers use native mount AF lenses only.

The most important reason to buy a lightweight, compact camera body is to save weight and space. If a sensible selection of good quality, compact, lightweight lenses isn't available, buying that compact body doesn't make any sense for most photographers. With the combined resources of Sony and Zeiss and Zeiss' extensive catalogue of high quality glass, including the above mentioned M-mount lenses, I find it surprising that they didn't set out to launch the basics of such a selection from the outset. As it has been until now, the A7 models have been nice choices mostly for those with A- and M-mount lenses, which again is a small part of the camera market. Too small probably, to keep this system alive.

Leica obviously wouldn't sell a single M-mount camera without their extensive range of compact primes. Even Nikon, with their larger camera bodies, have showed recently that this is important also for them and their customers by launching 5 relatively compact f/1.8 primes. So why shouldn't this be important to Sony then? I do assume that they want as many users for their cameras as possible.

Jorgen:
I fear you are too wise for Sony to ever do the right thing. And what you forget is that Sony is working from a very limited budget. I think that their lens selection is based on market research to select lenses that they believe will sell enough copies to make a profit. I also believe they are doing their best to provide decent quality lenses. If they fail to make a success of it you will be right. If they succeed then you happen not to be the market they were after. But you are concerned or you wouldn't be checking this forum, so they must be doing something right!

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

You also seem to forget MOST photographer rely on zooms and not primes. The A7r was marketed for the discerning hobbyist and/or pro while the original A7 was supposed to be the all around camera for soccer moms to pros. The lenses are coming and when they do I'm sure plenty will still complain. LOL

Soccer moms use Digital Rebel with 18-55 and 50-200mm zooms. Period. That kit costs half the price of any A7 body only. This is the challenge for all manufacturers of mirrorless cameras; how to make them cheap and attractive enough for soccer moms and Uncle Bob.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

You also seem to forget MOST photographer rely on zooms and not primes. The A7r was marketed for the discerning hobbyist and/or pro while the original A7 was supposed to be the all around camera for soccer moms to pros. The lenses are coming and when they do I'm sure plenty will still complain. LOL

Yes, most photographers use zooms, but if you're going to carry more than 2 kilograms of camera and zooms around (A7 II with 16-35 + 70-200 + 55mm is 2,300 grams), 2-300 grams of weight saving on the body doesn't really matter much, particularly not if one needs a bag full of batteries to keep the show going. The only way to save weight on the zooms is to reduce the size of the sensor and the aperture.

If people complain or not is not the problem. The question is if people buy. A complaining customers is a positive. That means he cares enough to spend time complaining. Sony's challenge is those who ignore them.

 

[iiiNelson]

Soccer moms use Digital Rebel with 18-55 and 50-200mm zooms. Period. That kit costs half the price of any A7 body only. This is the challenge for all manufacturers of mirrorless cameras; how to make them cheap and attractive enough for soccer moms and Uncle Bob.

Digital Rebels!?! Nah most "soccer moms" in my area use 5Dmk3's and or the like with a long zoom so they don't even need to stand or get closer... Only the "best" for their kids.

 

[iiiNelson]

Yes, most photographers use zooms, but if you're going to carry more than 2 kilograms of camera and zooms around (A7 II with 16-35 + 70-200 + 55mm is 2,300 grams), 2-300 grams of weight saving on the body doesn't really matter much, particularly not if one needs a bag full of batteries to keep the show going. The only way to save weight on the zooms is to reduce the size of the sensor and the aperture.

If people complain or not is not the problem. The question is if people buy. A complaining customers is a positive. That means he cares enough to spend time complaining. Sony's challenge is those who ignore them.

I don't know how you shoot but I use a grip on each camera and it lasts me a day but I'm not a machine gunner. Whether you know it or not My A7's have traveled across 4 continents just fine in my Tamrac on my back with an assortment of much heavier C/Y, Leica, and a few FE lenses at any given time.

Tell me what an equivalent Nikon kit will weigh with both the D810 and a D750 though... Let me guess... It's still heavier and requires a larger bag. I don't own the revised A7 either.

 

[Vivek]

Sony's challenge is those who ignore them.

That goes for every brand/product.