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 FE 35 F2.8 - mediocre?

dandrewk

New member
Again I apologize to the forum for being silly enough to being drawn into that one way "discussion".

Back on topic (again). I think the thread title is drawing a lot of discussion. The FE35 is a lot of things, not the least of which are issues with quality control. That's not unusual amongst lenses. But assuming you have a good copy (I'm betting that's the majority of them), I don't see how the lens could be called "mediocre". It's not outstanding, but still my favorite walk around lens. It has never disappointed me.
 

Ulfric Douglas

New member
Completely agree ;
...Getting a well made lens should NOT be akin to winning the lottery.
:lecture: and yet it IS, and it's not going to change since it seems based upon the (observed by deduction, not definite) practice of no-testing-at-all coming out of the factory.
I miss those oval golden stickers ...
When you know of a modern lens that almost every owner is happy with : that's luck, that is.
 

Slingers

Active member
I wonder why Zeiss never specified that a Sony Zeiss should have the certificate. I also found it interesting that with the FE 55 you get the pouch so it feels like Sony treats it as a more higher end lens. I had the FE 35 before I received the FE 55 and when the 55 came I thought its box was bigger and better packaged than the 35.
 

CharlesK

New member
I fully appreciate a lot of different perspectives, and I have been fortunate that my copy of the FE 35 is excellent.

Is it acceptable as a serious prime lens, on a FF A7r with 36MP?? IMO, no on the initial launch of a FF interchangeable lens designed system. The FE 55 is excellent, and this should have been a f/1.5 at least. But a f/2.8 for a major workhorse of a 35mm lens, should be f/2.0!!! I don't think most of would have minded a lens marginally larger, if it meant it formed the basis for a great lens.

Then the question of whether we as the consumer decide to use a smaller/slower MF 35mm lens via an adapter is our choice.

I really feel very frustrated waiting and hoping Sony will deliver some serious work horse FE primes! A 21/24/28 mm, a faster 35mm and 85/105 mm for portrait work. I think the FE 55 is excellent for now. Don't get me wrong, I love the A7r sensor/IQ, but I am having to use a select few expensive M/R lenses to fill in the gaps for now.

Sony may produce excellent sensors, and complex bodies, but they do need to follow through with a serious road map for FE prime lenses, and at least one serious FE zoom.
 

Tim

Active member
I've read this thread fully with great interest. As I look toward either a RX1 or A7 with 35 I am now wondering if the RX1 is the better choice. I may just stick to my DP2M. :D

May I suggest to anyone with poor output from the FE35, that they send it back for repair or adjustment rather than play a lotto game of hoping to buy or loan better example.
You won't know if the second, third lens etc is also dodgy or not and if you test two bad samples then have learnt nothing.

If the Sony tech's are fully informed of the fault and are challenged to make it work as best it should a further re-test should finally yield if the lens is a keeper or not.
Please of course let us know your findings.
If the fixed one comes out great then you'll know you have the best FE35 possible.
 

philip_pj

New member
Some more solid lens news would be very good. I'd like Sony to basically fill in what you might call the Leica M range - from 21mm to 100mm, approx. Leave the DSLR replacement lenses until later please.

There is a good chance this will happen - as they will soon have done the second stage of the three zooms after stage one of the FE35 and FE55. They will also be looking hard at what is selling from the start-up they have. Here is hoping.
 

ZoranC

New member
I've read this thread fully with great interest. As I look toward either a RX1 or A7 with 35 I am now wondering if the RX1 is the better choice.
Personally after my experiences with 35/2.8 I walked away with a feeling that if I want great performing 35mm FOV lens I should get an RX1.

May I suggest to anyone with poor output from the FE35, that they send it back for repair or adjustment rather than play a lotto game of hoping to buy or loan better example. ... If the Sony tech's are fully informed of the fault and are challenged to make it work as best it should a further re-test should finally yield if the lens is a keeper or not.
From what I have heard about Sony's service centers majority of them doesn't repair lens, they just replace them with copies that have been refurbished. So a) it is still likely you would be playing lottery, b) you would be getting refurbished lens when you purchased brand new one, I don't see why anyone would want to do that, c) you would be wasting your time and money to deal with something that is not your problem in the first place, I don't see why anyone would want to do that.
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
Well, I am so far quite happy with my copy of the FE 35/2.8.
I posted two images here http://www.getdpi.com/forum/585921-post217.html and here http://www.getdpi.com/forum/585931-post218.html.

According to Roger Cicala from lensrentals there are no perfect lenses, and no lens is as good off-axis as on-axis.
I don't have the know-how or proper tools to assess and actively correct any de-centering or other optical misalignments.

Roger Cicala however has lately made substantial investments in just such tools and written about them.
Starting at the newest article and going back in time, here they are:

LensRentals.com - Introducing the Optical Bench
LensRentals.com - OLAF’s Lens Art
LensRentals.com - I Sing of OLAF . . .
LensRentals.com - Roger’s New Toy Needs a Name

This last, oldest article is particularly enlightening about the effort it takes to actively adjust a de-centered lens.
In one of the articles Roger Cicala is also discussing his impression of how some manufacturers deal with this issue.
Maybe Roger should consider going into the business of adjusting lenses for a fee if a manufacturer can't get it right.

I certainly hope that over time manufacturers will improve their QA outcome.
But I would also welcome third party efforts to offer such services.
The latter service could be particularly useful when purchasing used and severely misaligned lenses.

I have bought quite a few used Leica lenses and am comfortable of budgeting a certain amount of money for CLA and repair.
1956 50/2 & 1959 90/2.8 after Repair & CLA - Leica User Forum

Of course, a new lens from the usual manufacturers should simply work according to specs.
But, apparently, life isn't always that easy. :eek:
 
Last edited:

fotografz

Well-known member
Personally after my experiences with 35/2.8 I walked away with a feeling that if I want great performing 35mm FOV lens I should get an RX1.


From what I have heard about Sony's service centers majority of them doesn't repair lens, they just replace them with copies that have been refurbished. So a) it is still likely you would be playing lottery, b) you would be getting refurbished lens when you purchased brand new one, I don't see why anyone would want to do that, c) you would be wasting your time and money to deal with something that is not your problem in the first place, I don't see why anyone would want to do that.

Well, comparing a fixed lens camera to an interchangeable one is … once again … comparing apples to oranges.

As far as how Sony service centers work, hear-say and rumors are one thing, facts are another.

I asked about Sony service on another thread … I'd tend to place credibility of our members above some vague sort of innuendo with zero proof.

http://www.getdpi.com/forum/sony/50719-sony-service-experiences.html

BTW, in context to this thread, I believe that swapping new items in need of repair for used ones is illegal. Easy enough to check since each lens has a serial number. I've not heard of one single incidence that backs up this assertion.


- Marc
 

biglouis

Well-known member
I find this thread interesting because I have been having bad thoughts about my FE 35/2.8 for some time.

I have been disappointed with the FE 35/2.8 not because of sharpness, or decentering, or any kind of pixel-peeping related stuff.

I've been disappointed because marvellously sharp, quick and compact as it is: it totally lacks character as far as I am concerned.

I thought it would be equally as good as the 35/2 on the RX1 and it is not. The 35/2 on the RX1 drew beautifully at all apertures. This does not. It draws sharp, colourful and clinical and as a recording tool it is first class. It just lacks any kind of 'artistic' feel, imho.

I am seriously thinking of selling it and obtaining a Leica 35/2 ASPH. Am I mad to think of forgoing the benefit of AF and in-body corrections to go with a (albeit excellent optically) manual lens?

LouisB
 

fotografz

Well-known member
I find this thread interesting because I have been having bad thoughts about my FE 35/2.8 for some time.

I have been disappointed with the FE 35/2.8 not because of sharpness, or decentering, or any kind of pixel-peeping related stuff.

I've been disappointed because marvellously sharp, quick and compact as it is: it totally lacks character as far as I am concerned.

I thought it would be equally as good as the 35/2 on the RX1 and it is not. The 35/2 on the RX1 drew beautifully at all apertures. This does not. It draws sharp, colourful and clinical and as a recording tool it is first class. It just lacks any kind of 'artistic' feel, imho.

I am seriously thinking of selling it and obtaining a Leica 35/2 ASPH. Am I mad to think of forgoing the benefit of AF and in-body corrections to go with a (albeit excellent optically) manual lens?

LouisB
That is a very legitimate observation IMHO.

Despite the Leica 35/1.4 ASPH being "publicly trashed" when used on this camera, I still use it because I prefer its character over anything from Zeiss, Sony, Nikon or Canon. I do not know how a Leica 35/2 ASPH would do, since there seems to be issues with many W/A M lenses, but it'd be worth a try.

I simply place the FE35//2.8 in the category of being a very good general lens for AF walk-about, semi-no brainer family stuff, and obligatory vacation pics that otherwise would be taken on a cell phone :rolleyes: If it had been bigger, I would not have even given it a second thought.

- Marc
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
One reason I went with the Sigma ART 35mm was its look or character but its big. I have thought of something else maybe in Leica as well. I know the R glass works but was not sure what does in the M at a reasonable cost. But I agree the Sony 35 is a little sterile looking. I thing it is wise to have lenses that give a nice look as to me they are more interesting renderings of your images. One reason I like my ZA fast glass like the 85 and 135 and just recently picked up the 24 f2 which looks to have a nice look to it. Now the 55 is a laser but its look is a little sterile as well but I do like having one or two lenses that are lasers for when you want that look. But I tend to agree with Big Loius the 35 is a little clinical. My biggest issue with the lens outside of issues is its just too slow for a mid wide prime. Great for travel style work but this takes me back to what I said earlier its a Prosumer style lens , small, light and acceptable speed. I much rather see them come out with all F2 style primes in the wides.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Okay folks I see a lot of dart throwing comments. If we could cool that a little and stay with the discussion at hand that would be far nicer to everyone. Thanks
 

Ben Rubinstein

Active member
Just be glad you all live in countries where you can buy, test and return. I would like to buy a couple of lenses which are two week order items with no return where I live, when you're dealing with $2500 in total, that's a lot of gamble even with a manufacturer who rarely gets it wrong.
 

biglouis

Well-known member
That is a very legitimate observation IMHO.

Despite the Leica 35/1.4 ASPH being "publicly trashed" when used on this camera, I still use it because I prefer its character over anything from Zeiss, Sony, Nikon or Canon. I do not know how a Leica 35/2 ASPH would do, since there seems to be issues with many W/A M lenses, but it'd be worth a try.

I simply place the FE35//2.8 in the category of being a very good general lens for AF walk-about, semi-no brainer family stuff, and obligatory vacation pics that otherwise would be taken on a cell phone :rolleyes: If it had been bigger, I would not have even given it a second thought.

- Marc
Marc

I think you have put your finger on what it is about the FE 35/2.8 I don't like.

You are absolutely right that as a walkabout lens it is first class. It will capture the scene, in focus and in wonderful clarity.

I'm after a look which will jump out at you as you develop the raw file in LR. The FE 35/2.8 rarely does that for me.

Incidentally, the FE 55/1.8 does it in spades! Amazing lens at f1.8.

Pondering whether to punt it on and just rely on my C-40 Summicron.

LouisB
 

vjbelle

Well-known member
I am seriously thinking of selling it and obtaining a Leica 35/2 ASPH. Am I mad to think of forgoing the benefit of AF and in-body corrections to go with a (albeit excellent optically) manual lens?

LouisB
I have the Leica 35 f2 Asph and found it unusable on the A7r. Sides, not just edges, were completely out of focus..... just doesn't work on the Sony.

Victor
 
D

Deleted member 7792

Guest
I have the Leica 35 f2 Asph and found it unusable on the A7r. Sides, not just edges, were completely out of focus..... just doesn't work on the Sony.

Victor
+1

I was very disappointed with the 21mm SEM, 35mm FLE and 50mm 'Lux on the a7R. Not sharp. Focus smearing. And not the fault of the Novoflex adapter. I'll take my sharp "low character" FE 35mm any day of the week. Maybe my photos are "walk-about, semi-no brainer family stuff, and obligatory vacation pics that otherwise would be taken on a cell phone". If so, I'll stop boring you with 'em. Thanks for the heads-up, Marc.

Joe
 
Top