Site Sponsors
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 150 of 333

Thread: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

  1. #101
    Senior Member RVB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Amsterdam
    Posts
    807
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by tn1krr View Post
    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.

  2. #102
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,181
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by Jorgen Udvang View Post
    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.
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  3. #103
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,331
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by HiredArm View Post
    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

  4. #104
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    528
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by Jorgen Udvang View Post
    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!
    Regards,
    John
    Sony fanboy, shamelessly shilling for "the man" since 2010.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  5. #105
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,181
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by Jorgen Udvang View Post
    Exactly! Let's agree to agree for once
    Sure... I'm drinking... I'd agree to a lot.
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com

  6. #106
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,331
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by jfirneno View Post
    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.
    Things I sell: https://www.shutterstock.com/g/epixx?language=en
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  7. #107
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,181
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    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
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  8. #108
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Marin County, CA
    Posts
    593
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by Jorgen Udvang View Post
    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.

  9. #109
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,594
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by HiredArm View Post
    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.

  10. #110
    Subscriber and Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,788
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    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.
    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

  11. #111
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,594
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by docmoore View Post
    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.

  12. #112
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,181
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    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.
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com

  13. #113
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Marin County, CA
    Posts
    593
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    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.

  14. #114
    Senior Member Tim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Adelaide, SA
    Posts
    1,040
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jorgen Udvang View Post
    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
    Last edited by Tim; 8th March 2015 at 17:36.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  15. #115
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    528
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by Jorgen Udvang View Post
    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!
    Regards,
    John
    Sony fanboy, shamelessly shilling for "the man" since 2010.

  16. #116
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,331
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by HiredArm View Post
    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.

  17. #117
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,331
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by HiredArm View Post
    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.

  18. #118
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,181
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by Jorgen Udvang View Post
    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.
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  19. #119
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,181
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by Jorgen Udvang View Post
    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.
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com

  20. #120
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,594
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by Jorgen Udvang View Post

    Sony's challenge is those who ignore them.
    That goes for every brand/product.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  21. #121
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,181
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    That goes for every brand/product.
    Yeah but some people are so invest emotionally or financially that they'd stay anyway. Canon is still kicking everyone's butt in sales with technically inferior image sensor but the best pro AF system.
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com

  22. #122
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,331
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by HiredArm View Post
    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.
    You have a point of course, but that's only natural. Most people want a camera that is tailor made for their own use. The challenge for companies like Sony is to find the best compromise, and even more important: build a system that people will stay with long term. Consumers are remarkably difficult to move. There's a reason why Canon are still selling Digital Rebels by the truckload.

    Look at the cars people buy. Camry and Corolla all over the world. Totally boring, but safe and functional. Remember the VW Beetle? My father bought 5 of those; green, yellow, beige, white and back to green. Technologically, it was a dinosaur from birth, but it was reliable and easy to understand. Like a clunky, old DSLR cameras with a kit zoom and a couple of primes that have to correspond to those traditional figures 28, 35, 50 and 85mm. 55mm? Come on, do you think photographers are some kind of revolutionaries?

  23. #123
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    590
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    The new 35/1.4 looks very good, except possibly an echo of what the new ZM 35/1.4 does with bright lights which can be seen in the second sample image linked to previously. The shapes change as you move toward the edges.

    But the price is high. This is not a walk around lens. I would prefer a less perfect 35/1.4 that was much smaller, and became more perfect as it was stopped down.

    I see great ambivalence in Sony design choices, and no small degree of ADD. The RX1 is their most impressive product to me, but even that camera has some design issues which make one want to pound their head: very unfriendly to MF, very slow to AF.

    Again the thick coverglass issue has made making smaller lenses alot harder in the A7 series, and, so far, in using the new mod thin sensor cover glass I can find no disadvantage. AF is fine. I see no moire. But I have not done alot of video testing.

    Anyway I think most here agree the 55 and 35 natives are small and do quite well. Branding non-withstanding LOL.

    Since sony has such a picky sensor, it's incumbent upon them to produce equally small primes at 15ish 21ish 28ish and 85ish which are made for the design, like the 35 and 55. Why they have not done so is a very good question.

    But despite my critique, one has to acknowledge they are leaders in innovation, and are showing the way forward to a new world of compact digital FF photography. I'd at least like to see the 135mm film footprint achieved LOL. A leica M the size of the M6 would be equally appreciated.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  24. #124
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,331
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by HiredArm View Post

    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.
    Nikon D750 with with 16-35 f/4 + 70-200 f/4 + 50mm f/1.8 = 2,550g
    Sony A7 II with 16-35 f/4 + 70-200 f/4 + 55mm f/1.8 = 2,300 grams

    I can fit the Nikon, D810 in my case, with those lenses plus another prime in a Lowepro inverse 200 AW. Camera bags don't get much smaller than that.

    I think we have been through this comparison before.

  25. #125
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,181
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by Jorgen Udvang View Post
    Nikon D750 with with 16-35 f/4 + 70-200 f/4 + 50mm f/1.8 = 2,550g
    Sony A7 II with 16-35 f/4 + 70-200 f/4 + 55mm f/1.8 = 2,300 grams

    I can fit the Nikon, D810 in my case, with those lenses plus another prime in a Lowepro inverse 200 AW. Camera bags don't get much smaller than that.

    I think we have been through this comparison before.
    You forgot to add the D810 weight and the A7R weight. Just saying all of that fits in my Tamrac backpack with my laptop, two sets of shades, 6 batteries, my phone, iPad, and necessary cables.

    In any comparison the answer is that the Sony system is ALWAYS lighter, the lenses are shorter, the bodies are slimmer, for manual focus users the EVF is a huge improvement for most, the system takes up less bag space, but it's as you say we've been over this. I digress as we are so far off topic now.
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com

  26. #126
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,331
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by HiredArm View Post
    You forgot to add the D810 weight and the A7R weight. Just saying all of that fits in my Tamrac backpack with my laptop, two sets of shades, 6 batteries, my phone, iPad, and necessary cables.

    In any comparison the answer is that the Sony is always lighter, takes up less space, but it's as you say we've been over this.
    Why would I add the D810 weight? To start with, I only carry one body when travelling. Secondly, other than sensor size, the D810 and A7R are hardly comparable. The D810 is vastly superior when it comes to AF, frame rate, buffer size, image quality at high ISO, image quality at low ISO, build quality, battery life, ergonomics etc. It's a totally different kind of machine. But since you ask, the D810 is 140g heavier than the D750. Also, when travelling, I carry two batteries and change battery once per week, more or less.

  27. #127
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,181
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by Jorgen Udvang View Post
    Why would I add the D810 weight? To start with, I only carry one body when travelling. Secondly, other than sensor size, the D810 and A7R are hardly comparable. The D810 is vastly superior when it comes to AF, frame rate, buffer size, image quality at high ISO, image quality at low ISO, build quality, battery life, ergonomics etc. It's a totally different kind of machine. But since you ask, the D810 is 140g heavier than the D750. Also, when travelling, I carry two batteries and change battery once per week, more or less.
    You'd add the weight because it's the fair comparison since we are comparing kit weights. You should also compare the weight of the standard A7 as that's what I have AND the D750 (sensor based on the A7 sensor) doesn't have IBIS which adds weight.

    The D810 is superior for YOU. IQ wise they are 100% comparable as it's the same sensor with slightly different specs. I always travel with 2 bodies and of course I cross shopped everything. The A7/A7R was best for me. So like I stated in the travel kit thread there's really no comparison for versatility for my needs out there.

    Going back to the topic though.
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com

  28. #128
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,331
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by HiredArm View Post
    You'd add the weight because it's the fair comparison since we are comparing kit weights. You should also compare the weight of the standard A7 as that's what I have AND the D750 (sensor based on the A7 sensor) doesn't have IBIS which adds weight.

    The D810 is superior for YOU. IQ wise they are 100% comparable as it's the same sensor with slightly different specs. I always travel with 2 bodies and of course I cross shopped everything. The A7/A7R was best for me. So like I stated in the travel kit thread there's really no comparison for versatility for my needs out there.

    Going back to the topic though.
    IQ wise, they are kind of comparable, but look at skin tones at high ISO and DR at low ISO (64 in case of the D810). I still don't understand why I should compare the weight of two bodies when the one I have does an excellent job for all the photo work I do. When it comes to AF and some of the other things I mentioned... sorry, there's no comparison. The A7R compared reasonably with the D800, but that's history (I considered the D800/E for my work, but found them too slow etc.), as is the A7 that you are using.

  29. #129
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,181
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by Jorgen Udvang View Post
    IQ wise, they are kind of comparable, but look at skin tones at high ISO and DR at low ISO (64 in case of the D810). I still don't understand why I should compare the weight of two bodies when the one I have does an excellent job for all the photo work I do. When it comes to AF and some of the other things I mentioned... sorry, there's no comparison. The A7R compared reasonably with the D800, but that's history (I considered the D800/E for my work, but found them too slow etc.), as is the A7 that you are using.
    I guess it's true what they say... Ignorance is bliss. As for low ISO well there's ISO 64 on the A7R... ISO 50 too. Besides you're the one that mentioned weight in the first place and compared another camera you apparently don't own in the D750.

    As far as the A7's being too slow you've been disproven so many times with actual photographic evidence on everything from auto racing to the theory that it's impossible to take a picture using the A7R with a lens longer than 90mm.

    Just stop it as it's kind of getting old and quite embarrassing playing the game of "let's prove Jorgen's internet hearsay wrong yet again." I'm starting to feel bad for you being a closet Sony fan and all.
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com

  30. #130
    Senior Member Slingers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    457
    Post Thanks / Like

  31. #131
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Espoo, Finland
    Posts
    125
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by HiredArm View Post
    I guess it's true what they say... Ignorance is bliss. As for low ISO well there's ISO 64 on the A7R... ISO 50 too. Besides you're the one that mentioned weight in the first place and compared another camera you apparently don't own in the D750.
    The D810 has native ISO of 64 (A7R has 100). The D810 ISO 64 is very impressive in terms of DR, 2/3 stops more than A7R in dxomark for example. With the native ISO 100 the A7R gets no such bit benefits when going below ISO 100.

    Not that these are huge differences, but let's not confuse expanded ISO and native ISO.

  32. #132
    Senior Member biglouis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,122
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    I'm sorry but each time I see a photo of the 35/1.4 I can't help 'laughing out loud'. It is such a beast.

    http://slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts...4378a_1000.jpg

    Mind you, I might still get one. I'll just ensure I adjust my expectations about portability before I get it.

    LouisB

  33. #133
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,594
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Actually, from that angle, it does not look too bad. They should have pictured with the battery grip as well, for a good measure.

    FWIW, I have to hand it Sony. They shut up a vocal section of people that was demanding more lenses and not cameras. Genial!

    Pair this with that huge & slow power zoom...may be I am getting delirious here. :-)

  34. #134
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,181
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by tn1krr View Post
    The D810 has native ISO of 64 (A7R has 100). The D810 ISO 64 is very impressive in terms of DR, 2/3 stops more than A7R in dxomark for example. With the native ISO 100 the A7R gets no such bit benefits when going below ISO 100.

    Not that these are huge differences, but let's not confuse expanded ISO and native ISO.
    You're right that is the native resolution and it's not a huge deal. To say that it is is a night and day difference in IQ is disingenuous. Even more so than the guys saying that the D8xx is as good as MF.
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com

  35. #135
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    314
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA


  36. #136
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    92
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Me too just read that review from LensRentals. Doesn't look that great for the price and size. Though, it probably is useful for videographers.
    I'll keep my Sigma 35mm Art.

  37. #137
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    523
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Certainly an interesting lens, but I suspect that most users would be better off with the cheaper slower Sonnar f2.8. That won't stop lots of people lusting after the faster lens of course. Its a bit like the A7R: how many users have made a print over 30"?

    As for improving high ISO quality driving the need for faster lenses down and this not actually happening, there is a good reason why not: people's camera and lens purchases are not always well attached to actual need. They are often relative to 'the alternatives' and what capability one can afford relative to other consumers and users.

    We can all fall into this trap is we spend more time with cameras than with prints (or final digital outputs).

  38. #138
    Senior Member Ario Arioldi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Milano, Italy
    Posts
    784
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    For my taste and use the size does not fit with the compact body of the A7's.
    Ario
    www.arioarioldi.net
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  39. #139
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,594
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by Ario Arioldi View Post
    For my taste and use the size does not fit with the compact body of the A7's.

    It is DBA (Dead Before Arrival) for me for that very reason.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  40. #140
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Espoo, Finland
    Posts
    125
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by SamSS View Post
    Me too just read that review from LensRentals. Doesn't look that great for the price and size. Though, it probably is useful for videographers.
    I'll keep my Sigma 35mm Art.
    This test again goes to show just how good that tiny FE 35/2.8 is. For the $$$ the FE 35/1.4 really should be in par or above Sigma 35/1.4 and it starts to look like that while good, it is quite not there. FE 35/1.4 usability is obviously better (face detect, eye-AF, full frame coverage, no microadjustment needed) in a Sony body vs adapted Sigma. Maybe the FE 55/1.8 and FE 35/2.8 made me a bit overcritical as they are just stellar for their price/size.

    I do not mind the size (fast/good FF glass is gonna be big), not much bigger than my FE 16-35/4 and certainly much smaller than my APO Sonnar 135/2 that I absolutely love, it is quite nice in my hands with RRS-plated A7R.

  41. #141
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,181
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Hmmmm... Completely different take for me despite the write up.

    Even at thumbnail sizes on an iPad the Distagon is clearly better than the Sonnar to me. It has more character which is what the Sonnar is missing. How it stands up to the Sigma Art is of relevance to me since I already own that lens but ultimate sharpness across the frame isn't everything for me. How it stacks up against the Loxia is also of interest to me.
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com

  42. #142
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    523
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    I agree on character, in that the 35mm Sonnar is not a character lens, but that's partly because it is scores highly in almost every technical parameter (aside from vignetting). Its the same with a Leica 35mm Summicron asph, or 24mm Elmar-M. Neither would be considered character lenses, like some of their predecessors or faster contemporaries. Could it be that the new Zony (my new abbreviation for Zeiss designed by Sony ) is trying to cut a fine balance between good enough technical performance to impress, but not so much as to be sterile?

    Most manufacturers are reluctant to design in character, because that means are measurable flaws (spherical aberration etc) that looks bad in reviews. I understand Zeiss got burnt with this when designing the 85mm f1.4 Planar ZE/ZF. They wanted to make it gentle and good for portraits wide open and despite some singing its praises for this purpose (and its great sharpness only slightly stopped down), far more slated it for failing to resolve the bacteria on people's faces

    I wonder if we are trapped by numbers and the bear pit that all lenses have to fight it out in?

    Quote Originally Posted by HiredArm View Post
    Hmmmm... Completely different take for me despite the write up.

    Even at thumbnail sizes on an iPad the Distagon is clearly better than the Sonnar to me. It has more character which is what the Sonnar is missing. How it stands up to the Sigma Art is of relevance to me since I already own that lens but ultimate sharpness across the frame isn't everything for me. How it stacks up against the Loxia is also of interest to me.

  43. #143
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    235
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    31

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by HiredArm View Post
    How it stacks up against the Loxia is also of interest to me.
    HiredArm, I suspect that, sooner or later, you're gonna get Loxiated!
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  44. #144
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    To me you buy the 1.4 for the speed and the look at 1.4 or 2. But when stopped down it should equal the F2 and 2.8 lenses in resolving power. What your really buying is what 1.4 does for you. Now having said that there has been a change in the tech with 1.4 glass as the designers are trying to eliminate the aberrations wide open because people bitch about them but that's what makes the look of the lens is those aberrations. We will never see a modern Leica R 80 1.4 summilux ever again in a modern design. That lens has more wide open aberrations than you can count but that's what gave it that Mandler design look to it. He is gone folks will never see lenses like that anymore with modern designs. Even the Sony ZA 85 1.4 is a older design and it does have lens aberrations wide open why a lot of folks like it but look at the Sigma ART series the 35 and 50 they get away from that with stellar performance wide open , look at the OTus series the same thing. So now Sony and all the others are trying to get great wide open performance at the cost of look sometimes. The sigma 35mm lens that I had and now Tre has is a brilliant lens but ask either one of us on the look and we will both say it is a little sterile and that folks is the new pattern in lens design. This lens actually looks pretty nice and the test is good but it's not so much a head to head review it covers some basics. Which I expected it to be. Bottom line you need speed you need speed and the look nowadays takes a second role in the design. Designers don't want to look like idiots putting out 1.4 lenses with serious aberrations which in effect causes some really nice look or character to a lens. We have to remember character in a lens in the best description of it technically is not a perfect lens in design. The best character lenses are loaded with aberrations usually.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  45. #145
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve P. View Post
    HiredArm, I suspect that, sooner or later, you're gonna get Loxiated!
    I think it maybe the best compromise. At least that is what I am planning on. I just need to get out and prove it to myself. Okay hopping in the shower and going to get my *** out and test it. Lol I cheated and played golf yesterday.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  46. #146
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,181
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve P. View Post
    HiredArm, I suspect that, sooner or later, you're gonna get Loxiated!
    I'm not so sure yet... Five years ago I passed on the ZM35/2 (the ZM35/2.8 C-Biogon had great character by comparison but lacked speed) and bought the 35 Cron ASPH because it had more character. Lord knows I wanted to save $2K.

    I am PRETTY sure that I will get Loxiated by the Loxia 50/2 Planar though. It's based on my favorite 50 of all time. Sort of a great balance between sharpness and character and paired well with the 35 Cron ASPH in the past although they give a bit of a different signature. One is VERY modern Leica and the other VERY modern Zeiss.
    Last edited by iiiNelson; 3rd April 2015 at 06:50.
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  47. #147
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,181
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by turtle View Post
    I agree on character, in that the 35mm Sonnar is not a character lens, but that's partly because it is scores highly in almost every technical parameter (aside from vignetting). Its the same with a Leica 35mm Summicron asph, or 24mm Elmar-M. Neither would be considered character lenses, like some of their predecessors or faster contemporaries. Could it be that the new Zony (my new abbreviation for Zeiss designed by Sony ) is trying to cut a fine balance between good enough technical performance to impress, but not so much as to be sterile?

    Most manufacturers are reluctant to design in character, because that means are measurable flaws (spherical aberration etc) that looks bad in reviews. I understand Zeiss got burnt with this when designing the 85mm f1.4 Planar ZE/ZF. They wanted to make it gentle and good for portraits wide open and despite some singing its praises for this purpose (and its great sharpness only slightly stopped down), far more slated it for failing to resolve the bacteria on people's faces

    I wonder if we are trapped by numbers and the bear pit that all lenses have to fight it out in?
    The 24 Elmar has SOME character but the fact that it's a wide and lacks speed doesn't contribute well to displaying it. Close up the 24 Elmar has the same 3D rendering that the 24 Elmarit has stopped down but it isn't quite as warm in the rendering as the 24 Elmarit.

    The 35 Cron ASPH is the 35mm that I compare all other 35's to. I haven't used anything except the Sigma Art 35 that even remotely comes close to it. Yes it lacks SOME character compared to say the "Bokeh King" (v.4) and even the version 3 (which many actually believe is a bit better than the fabled Bokeh King.) The color, rendering, and tone is perfect. Not what I'd call sterile to be honest... Especially when shooting B&W on an M8/M9 based body.

    The next part is my issue what happens when engineers and marketing departments don't bother to work closely enough with operators. Sadly this isn't a Sony exclusive problem but a by product of industry norms in developed countries around the world.

    As for the desire of perfect lenses - I'm all for working out extreme aberrations and minimizing time sitting at a computer. I don't know if I'm willing to give up character completely for the pixel peepers and corner freaks to be honest. I'm definitely am not willing to give up speed to ISO - simply put if people don't care much about shallow DoF as a component of the look sometimes then they would be better serviced by smaller sensors with smaller lenses than tend to be extremely well corrected through software.
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com

  48. #148
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    235
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    31

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    I think it maybe the best compromise. At least that is what I am planning on. I just need to get out and prove it to myself. Okay hopping in the shower and going to get my *** out and test it. Lol I cheated and played golf yesterday.
    The forum relies on you getting out there and doing the heavy lifting with all these new lenses, so's we don't have to.
    You can tell your wife we said so!
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  49. #149
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    iiiNelson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    3,181
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    To me you buy the 1.4 for the speed and the look at 1.4 or 2. But when stopped down it should equal the F2 and 2.8 lenses in resolving power. What your really buying is what 1.4 does for you. Now having said that there has been a change in the tech with 1.4 glass as the designers are trying to eliminate the aberrations wide open because people bitch about them but that's what makes the look of the lens is those aberrations. We will never see a modern Leica R 80 1.4 summilux ever again in a modern design. That lens has more wide open aberrations than you can count but that's what gave it that Mandler design look to it. He is gone folks will never see lenses like that anymore with modern designs. Even the Sony ZA 85 1.4 is a older design and it does have lens aberrations wide open why a lot of folks like it but look at the Sigma ART series the 35 and 50 they get away from that with stellar performance wide open , look at the OTus series the same thing. So now Sony and all the others are trying to get great wide open performance at the cost of look sometimes. The sigma 35mm lens that I had and now Tre has is a brilliant lens but ask either one of us on the look and we will both say it is a little sterile and that folks is the new pattern in lens design. This lens actually looks pretty nice and the test is good but it's not so much a head to head review it covers some basics. Which I expected it to be. Bottom line you need speed you need speed and the look nowadays takes a second role in the design. Designers don't want to look like idiots putting out 1.4 lenses with serious aberrations which in effect causes some really nice look or character to a lens. We have to remember character in a lens in the best description of it technically is not a perfect lens in design. The best character lenses are loaded with aberrations usually.
    Agree 100% and even as nice as the Sigma Arts are (it's really amazing what they are doing optically at the cost they're doing it at) most love them because it's somewhat of an introduction for the masses to truly excellent glass. Most aren't willing to spend $2K+ on the top glass from Canon, Nikon, Leica, Zeiss, or pick a MF manufacturer. So the Sigma's look THAT much better but many complain about size which isn't much of an issue to me personally being a larger person - but I can see how it would be for some. Heavier glass and more complex designs equal weight exponentially. I mean compare an old Leica 50 Elmar to a new Noctilux. The same can be said if you compare a CV Skopar to a Nokton or ne of those Canon Nifty 50/1.8 $150 polycarbonate lenses to the Canon 50/1.2 with exotic glass elements.

    The truth is that while the 35 Distagon is twice as expensive a lot of that has to do with the fact few people will buy it and it's more of a specialty lens for a very specific audience - that audience will probably love it once they get it in their hands.

    I still don't get why so many are negative/adverse to others about having the choice between faster lenses when there are slower choices out there. We get it some of you will never buy anything that weighs more than a handful of feathers for fear of collapsing from the exorbitant weight but give it a rest please. I swear it's like people have never seen the inside of a gym/health club crying over a few ounces here or there.
    Sony Visible Light & IR Photographer
    http://www.iiinelsonimages.com

  50. #150
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Sony Zeiss FE 35mm F1.4 ZA

    My theory is you want sharp wide open regardless of size, weight and such and you want to save money to boot is get all three Sigma Art lenses 24,35 and 50 regardless if your shooting canon, Nikon or Sony. But if you have diffrent goals in a lens these may not be what you buy. Personally when it comes to my high end Mpx beast than I'm looking more for character. For other things that require very sharp wide open than these maybe it but they are a little more generic in look. Depends on need here and if we all had it our way we would have a huge assortment to fit any need. Myself I can't afford that luxury.

    I think this new Zeiss will have a better look over the Sigma Art 35 but wide open is my bet the Sigma will resolve more. Now I'm partial to Zeiss glass and always have been regardless of system I always bought Zeiss glass in the end.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •