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!

The FE 35mm F2.8 ZA...

tashley

Subscriber Member
Hmmm. Not as good as the RX-1 lens but it doesn't have the midfield weakness of that lens.

Possibly a little better at the edges than the Sigma 35mm ART on the D800, in terms of resolution, but even with shading corrections turned on in camera, there is still quite some colour shading going on, especially at F2.8

The lens is nowhere near as good at the edges as the 35 Lux FLE - you might argue that at a fraction of the price this is not surprising but then as an F2.8 lens, designed specifically for this camera, there might have been less of a difference.

Some inconsistent behaviours that might imply a mild focus shift and a mild field curvature working together to confuse me. Edges sharper at F2.8 and F4 than at F5.6.

Diffraction is from F5.6 onwards but appears to stay pretty constant from F5.6 thru F11.

F4 is the 'best' overall aperture from my limited tests so far.

Here's an F2.8 file shot using Shading Compensation, followed by the same file corrected in LR with flat field plugin from a calibration file shot at the same time:





In other words, the shading compensation is, as with the RX-1, partial only.

This is a very key lens for the A7R - as the first one available in FE mount, and at a relatively rich price, it is the single lens that most lays down Sony's intentions for the range and therefore for the entire A7 system. It is probably going to disappoint a fair number of people and might therefore raise questions over the entire system. But it is worth noting that it is tiny, light, has a great hood (more a shade really) and as I say above, seems to have better edges than the lens that many people think is best in this focal length for the Nikon D800E.

Oh, and 35mm? My a$$. You get maybe up to 5mm worse than that for your money - it seems closer to a 40mm...
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 7792

Guest
The series of these shots, including Lens Cast Calibration frames, is here.
I'm having trouble with the link. I get this message:

"Sorry, the page you were looking for cannot be found."

Joe
 
D

Deleted member 7792

Guest
I made another link Joe, and edited the one in the post above so it should now work...
Thanks Tim. The link works and I do appreciate your doing these tests and posting the images. You continue to be an excellent source of objective information regarding lens (and camera) performance.

Joe
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
Thanks Tim. The link works and I do appreciate your doing these tests and posting the images. You continue to be an excellent source of objective information regarding lens (and camera) performance.

Joe
Awww shucks! Blush. Thanks Joe...
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Thanks Tim. The link works and I do appreciate your doing these tests and posting the images. You continue to be an excellent source of objective information regarding lens (and camera) performance.

Joe
+1.

Thanks, Tim. :)

I am not being a sadist in reading something that reaffirms what I suspected with this lens. Honest! :angel:
 
Tim, thank you again for the testing. The Sony FE 35mm looks pretty decent. It would be nice if the edges were a little better, but probably pretty close to what I expected (not quiet as good as the 35mm on the RX1).

Maybe I will be luckier than you and get a better performing copy of the lens. :D
 

Knorp

Well-known member
Diffraction is from F5.6 onwards but appears to stay pretty constant from F5.6 thru F11.
Hi Tim,

This seems a bit of a disappointment to me as its 'safe' range is 2.8-4.0
Why is it that diffraction kicks in so early ? Is it the high MP count of the A7r ?

Kind regards.
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
Hi Tim,

This seems a bit of a disappointment to me as its 'safe' range is 2.8-4.0
Why is it that diffraction kicks in so early ? Is it the high MP count of the A7r ?

Kind regards.
Tough call. It surprises me that some of the Leica glass I tested seems quite happy to f11 - diffraction has started at f5.6 or so but it doesn't really matter until past f11. My brain for optics isn't large enough to understand why the 35 f2.8 seems to take a bigger and maybe earlier hit especially at the edges, which start to slacken from f5.6 on some subjects.

I am going to shoot the lens on a lot more 'real world' subjects this weekend but initially it strikes me as having been designed with fixed and not 'healthy' aims in mind, and consequently to have all sorts of odd and slightly unnatural feeling behaviours going on just under the surface. One correspondent has emailed me to say that it has worse shading at f8 than at 5.6 for example. I'll do my best to test but we may have to wait for the big guns to review it if we're to know what the science is behind all this...
 
Last edited:

W.Utsch

Member
Yes made the tests myself, the Sonnar 2.0 in the RX1 is a little better than the ZE and the FOV of the RX1 is a little larger. Color shading is for me a non issue with the ZE, which is still a very good lens - better than my Leica Cron 35/2 asph. 1.Gen.
It is strange though, that a 35 is not a 35 ???
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
Shot RAW and then composited as Adobe RGB pegs.

In-camera shading compensation applies to RAW files as well as jpegs, but distortion corrections are applied only to jpegs, just like in the RX-1.
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
Here is a series of focus shift tests

From F2.8 to F8 at about a 3 metre distance using a proper target. The DOF of the lens at this distance is great enough to hide any effect there might be so none is visible, but I am wondering whether the tendency of the edges to get softer as you stop from F4 downwards might have a focus shift and curved field of focus component that is only visible at greater distance. More testing needed!
 

W.Utsch

Member
Thanks for the tests, Tim!

I did similar tests, years ago, with the Leica M8 and M (coded) lenses.
With my mostly older to very old M lenses it does, even on the not FF M8, not look any better.

I do not see color shift problems, that would make problems in real live photography. The vignetting fully open with no corrections in camera looks a little heavy but nothing i would really complain about. On the RX1 it is better, but i alway have the corrections in camera on.

The question is: Is there a FF WA lens, that does not vignette wide open?? Maybe only a tilt/shift lens with very large image circle.

Regarding focus shift: I found FS with the M8 to be a real problem with some lenses (Noctilux!).
But with correct focusing on the A7r it should be no problem, as long as focus is measured with the F-stop in use. Or is the A7 AF always working fully open, i am not sure about this.
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
The A7R won't have problems with focus shift if you MF at the shooting aperture but it might (if it has any shift) if you focus wide open for less ambiguity and then stop down to shoot, or shoot an aperture bracketed series from the initial MF. In AF, it seems to focus at the shooting aperture (different IFRC from the RX1 which has variable behaviour I think).

As for the vignetting, I like a bit of it and it is entirely normal and natural especially at wider apertures. My concern is more for the colour shading not being fully corrected. I agree that it generally won't matter but I do dislike seeing odd colour shifts in the sky or on white backgrounds, if they are too noticeable!
 

W.Utsch

Member
Thanks Tim for the info about focussing.
I agree about your concern with color casts/shading. But i could not see this in real life so far (oc my experience with that lens and cam is still pretty basic)

Here a quick and dirty test out a window on a typical shi.. grey german winter day:


DSC04396.jpg by W.Utsch, on Flickr

A7R, Ef 35/2.8 @ F4.


DSC05107.jpg by W.Utsch, on Flickr

RX1, @ F4.0​

Taken just seconds apart. On both, in camera corrections on, RAW to LR5 to Flickr with no further PP (everything on default in LR). You can see full-size on Flickr.
Sorry for the banal subject - was just curious about the grey sky!
 

tashley

Subscriber Member
I think that with in-camera corrections turned on and at F4 you can generally rely, as in your shots here, for natural variations in the sky to hide colour shading well enough for it not to be bothersome.
 
Top