The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Who knows. Image quality wise I still rank the 35 Distagon above the 28. I think DXO does as well despite the sharpness. Goes to show the 28 is great for the price. The 35 is that exponential cost for that extra 5-10% of performance.
 

CharlesK

New member
Who knows. Image quality wise I still rank the 35 Distagon above the 28. I think DXO does as well despite the sharpness. Goes to show the 28 is great for the price. The 35 is that exponential cost for that extra 5-10% of performance.
I have the Loxia 35/50, FE 35/1.4 and FE 28/2. The FE 28 is a very nice lens, but I would not compare it to the FE 35/1.4 in terms of "overall" IQ. Sharpness evaluation is an excellent comparison starting point, but the "feel" of the FE 35/1.4 is very unique.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Charles maybe one of the few that have both the Loxia 35 and the new 1.4. You have any thoughts between them.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Guy I think it's safe to say that if you can live with the size of the Distagon you won't really want for another 35 that's been released to date. If size is a concern then the Loxia is the next best 35mm option. The more I use the Distagon the more I'm blown away by it. Seriously I have zero regrets and I've teetered with options on every other focal length. This is the 35 I've imagined but wasn't created yet.
 

CharlesK

New member
Charles maybe one of the few that have both the Loxia 35 and the new 1.4. You have any thoughts between them.
Hi Guy,
The Loxia 35/2 is an excellent lens. Ergonomics I really love, as the MF is activated with a touch of the focus with all the Exif data intact. The IQ is very Zeiss and works brilliantly on all of the A7s, A7r Mod and A7II. Great lens and a must have if you have converted to Sony A7's :)

The FE 35/1.4 is another league IMO. Wide open for portraits it is superb, and just stopping it down a touch you can decide whether you wish to grab more DOF. The lens is longer marginally than what I would like, but it is one of the first lenses I now take with me. The weight and diameter are not an issue, as I have the 50 Nocti f/1.0 and 75 Lux. Of course you have AF and a f stop ring which for composing shots is a wonderful addition. I often flip between AF and MF, the dampened action with the FE 35/1.4 is very good for MF now. For landscapes/seascapes it is very rich in tonality and colours with excellent sharpness.

Of course the FE 55 can be sharper at f/5.6, but I really don't think you can compare the overall IQ just based on sharpness.

For landscapes/seascapes the Loxia 50 I prefer over the FE 55 again for the overall tonality and richness in colours. Yet for close portraits the FE 55 @ f/1.8 is an amazing lens too.

Truth is we now have too many choices!!!
 
Last edited:

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Yea I came real close to the 1.4 but decided last minute to go with the Loxia 35mm F2. I really like it a lot but I got that little devil in my ear. Lol

I'm just going to have to rent it and see the diffrence. The Loxia 50mm is going nowhere love it.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
I'm just waiting for you to break down and get it... It's inevitable. I'll even go out on a limb and co-sign something Steve Huff said. This is the best 35mm lens I've used on any 35mm system.

Yes it's on the large side. No it's not the absolutely sharpest by clinical standards. No it's not the lightest. Yes it is the best rendering one IMO that I've used though on any 35mm system to date. That includes M mount lenses and DSLR lenses.
 
Last edited:

tn1krr

New member
The problem with their sharpness score comes from the fact that it is also a combined score (different apertures, different position in the frames and for zooms different focal length). What is exactly a score of 23 or 29 mpix ? They don't disclose exactly how this is calculate. So depending on how they combine the results they could advantage a lens over another. This us why I prefer to look at the field maps. Often, looking at the fieldmap, i don't understand how they rate one lens above the other. For instance, they gave the 28mm F2 a better score for sharpness, but it has soft corners at a lot of apertures. If I remember, you have to stop down to F8 if you want a little uniformity on the whole frame.

Yes, there are some surprising results at times; could be due to samples variations ?
I actually did more research on this and one can pretty nicely draw the relative perceptual megapixels from dxomark Sharpness --> Profiles that shows "Acutance profile use case..." Looks to me the perceptual megapixel score on "main page" only seems to come from the peak center sharpness from the sharpest aperture of the lens. When analyzed this way I could pretty easily see the difference between APO, Makro Planar 100 and why FE 55 scores quite much better than the Makro Planar, it just has higher peak sharpness on center on its sharpest aperture.

So I'm now only looking at "Profiles" in the dxo sharpness from now on. It seems to visualize diffference much better than the all green field maps.
 

uhoh7

New member
"Sharpness on the FE 16-35mm f4 is homogenous at 35mm f4, but it’s nowhere near as sharp as the FE 35mm f1.4"

Well I can certainly see how this lens would be attractive to native shooters, considering the context. I'm no fan of DXO either, after falling for their sensor tests for a while, but they do imply it's maybe the best 35 on the A7 series.

I still cringe at the size and weight, and I would like to see some straight up comparisons at 5.6 with all the 35 options. I suspect the old 35/2.8 may be close at 5.6.

I looked at quite a few images from the new lens on Flickr, and it seems very nice. :) But the Loxia sure is looking cute and clean in comparison: Meaning simply the form factor. Even the Canon EF 35/1.4 is 50 grams lighter!

A7II plus this is getting really near the 6D and EF 35/1.4, which is ridiculous to me.

Meanwhile Leica may have a small body in the works, which would be nice, since I find the M9 also too big. All inspires me to mount the little CV 35/1.4 on my A7.mod and shoot some :)
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Owning the 35/2.8 in the past and owning the 35/1.4 now I can say they aren't anywhere in the same league. Outside of them both being 35mm lenses they're barely even playing the same game. So while stoping down may bring the sharpness closer the rendering will still favor the Distagon IMO. The Loxia surpasses the 35/2.8 as well. The Distagon surpasses the Loxia IMO and the opinion of many that own both.

No it's not the lens for everyone due to size but for those that can look past that you'll buy a truly remarkable lens.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Maybe but you were going to wind up trying it anyway. Thankfully it's the closest thing I've found to a keeper FE lens. The Loxia lenses (especially the 50mm) are great too though but I think the Distagon has the magic you wanted in a 35mm. Would've likes it better at $2-400 less but I can't argue with the results.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Yea the 50 is the gem. I most likely will get the 35 1.4 at some point . Might have go to NY next week so I can give the two loxia lenses are run for there money. I'm going to hold onto the 16-35 until they announce a super wide. It's just too good on the very wide end. The 85 Batis is top on the next to get
 

ohnri

New member
How does the 35 f/1.4 FE compare with the RX1 ?

I have felt that my RX1 is the best 35mm that I have ever used.

I only have an A7 but I am waiting for the A9(?) before I commit to any camera body upgrade. My camera fund was recently depleted by getting a Samsung NX1 with a couple of S lenses. It is a killer piece of gear but, beyond the S class, the lenses are lacking.

Thanks,

Bill
 
Top