« Previous topic | Next topic »  
Reply to topic  
 First unread post  | 10 posts | 
by signgrap on Fri May 05, 2017 12:57 pm
User avatar
signgrap
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1776
Joined: 1 Sep 2004
Location: Delaware Water Gap, PA
Member #:00424
I’m looking for a 35mm or 40mm lens to use on my Sony a7R II.  I like sharp lenses.  My current prime lenses are Sony/Zeiss 55 mm f1.8, Zeiss Batis 18 mm f2.8, Zeiss Batis 25 mm f2.0, Zeiss Batis 85 mm f1.8 (yeah I do like Zeiss Batis lenses).  The lens will be used for 2 purposes landscape/cityscapes and candid indoor portraits.  I love the Zeiss Loxia 35mm f2.0 manual focus lens.  Size and weight are just fine and image quality is excellent but it has one major drawback for me and that is it is manual focus.  I spent a couple hours manually focusing my Sony/Zeiss 55 mm f1.8 lens with fair to poor results.  I would try to focus on a specific point on a stationary object that had detail.  I would first manual focus, take an image and then switch to AF and take another image.  I would compare images at high magnification on the camera LCD; the AF point was consistently sharp in every image where the manual focus point was slightly soft to noticeably soft in comparison, rarely ever sharp.  I was focusing in what would be normal indoor illumination at night which makes it difficult for someone my age to critically focus since I suffer from age related loss of acuity (what can I say at 79  I'm getting old).  The most noticeable effect of this loss of acuity is poor dim/low light vision.  So this knocked the Loxia out of contention.  Next in consideration was the Sony/Zeiss Distagon 35mm f1 .4 auto focus lens.  Everything was great about this lens with the exception of its size and weight.  At 4.4 inches long, 3 inches in diameter and weight 1.9 lbs. this is gigantic for a 35mm lens.  The other lens in consideration is the Sony/Zeiss Sonnar 35mm f2.8 auto focus lens.  The size (1.44 inches long, 2.4 inches diameter) and weight (4.23 ounces) are perfect for walking a cityscape or landscape.  I would’ve preferred a bit faster lens say f2.0 or f1.8 for a shallower depth of field and a bit quicker AF in dim light but there doesn’t seem to be a 35mm lens comparable to the Loxia that auto focuses.  
So I am in need of some feedback as to the validity of my logic and perhaps things that I’m not considering in the equation between these lenses?  The only firm conclusion I have is that the Loxia being manual focus is just not something I can use.  Yes it would be great for landscapes as manual focus is not a problem at all when shooting landscapes but taking portraits of people indoors, in quickly changing situations is just a no go with my poor sight. 
Are there any other 35-40mm auto focus primes to consider?  
Which of these two remaining lenses has more going for it?
Dick Ludwig
 

by Jens Peermann on Fri May 05, 2017 2:56 pm
User avatar
Jens Peermann
Forum Contributor
Posts: 5155
Joined: 5 Apr 2004
Location: Lake Tahoe area of Nevada
If you already have a Canon EF to Sony E-Mount adapter I recommend the Canon 40mm/2.8 pancake lens. It has AF and has very high image quality (I remember DXO listing it as the second best Canon Prime at one time). B&H has it on sale for $179 right now, which is why you may not want it if you don't have the adapter already; the adapter will cost more than this lens.

I had this lens for about three years and was very happy with it. I sold it only after I bought the 35/2 Loxia because I have no use for another focal length between the 35 and the 50.
A great photograph is absorbed by the eyes and stored in the heart.
 

by signgrap on Fri May 05, 2017 4:50 pm
User avatar
signgrap
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1776
Joined: 1 Sep 2004
Location: Delaware Water Gap, PA
Member #:00424
Thanks Jens. I do have an adapter so I'll give it a look see.
Dick Ludwig
 

by chez on Sat May 06, 2017 11:53 am
chez
Forum Contributor
Posts: 175
Joined: 2 Dec 2003
Location: British Columbia, Can.
I use the 35 2.8 as one of my main street / travel lenses. Nice and light yet delivers very good quality images. I too would like a faster lens for those times when shooting in dim light...awaiting to see if Zeiss releases a Batis 35 1.8...that would be my dream lens.
Harry Ogloff
 

by signgrap on Sat May 06, 2017 2:44 pm
User avatar
signgrap
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1776
Joined: 1 Sep 2004
Location: Delaware Water Gap, PA
Member #:00424
chez wrote:I use the 35 2.8 as one of my main street / travel lenses. Nice and light yet delivers very good quality images. I too would like a faster lens for those times when shooting in dim light...awaiting to see if Zeiss releases a Batis 35 1.8...that would be my dream lens.
I also await a 35mm Batis f1.8  :)
Dick Ludwig
 

by prairiewing on Sun May 07, 2017 12:26 am
prairiewing
Lifetime Member
Posts: 404
Joined: 9 Sep 2003
Location: North Dakota
Member #:00208
I have the 35 f2.8 and feel it's an almost perfect walk around lens given the size and weight.  I thought it was a little pricey so I posted a WTB on Miranda and got a great copy for $400.  
Pat Gerlach
 

by signgrap on Wed May 10, 2017 7:09 am
User avatar
signgrap
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1776
Joined: 1 Sep 2004
Location: Delaware Water Gap, PA
Member #:00424
Thanks everyone for your advise and observations which confirmed what I thought might be the case. At this time the lens I'm looking does not exist. So I took Pat's advice and picked up a used Sony/Zeiss Sonnar 35mm f2.8. lens as it meets all my requirements with the exception of its aperture, would prefer f2.0 or f1.8. I'll use this lens till I can find a good replacement. Thanks again.
Dick Ludwig
 

by signgrap on Mon May 15, 2017 2:07 pm
User avatar
signgrap
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1776
Joined: 1 Sep 2004
Location: Delaware Water Gap, PA
Member #:00424
Update: I brought a used Sony/Zeiss Sonnar 35mm f2.8 lens rated EX plus. Shot a number of images outside and they all seemed a bit soft on the right side and bottom of the image. So I shoot quite few images of my test chart (f2.8 to f22 one stop apart) and indeed the right side and bottom of the image was soft compared to the left side and top, the center was tack sharp in ALL the images. I reset up the camera making sure the camera lens was centered and perpendicular to the center of the chart and got the same results. Just in case I was doing something wrong I did the same test with the Batis 35mm f2.0 and the image checked out perfect top to bottom and left to right with the edge almost as sharp as the center which was tack sharp. So the Sonnar lens was sent back for full refund. Too bad as the size and weight was perfect but I don't think I like the lens enough to pay $800 for it. Here's hoping Batis comes out with a 35mm f2.0 lens
Dick Ludwig
 

by E.J. Peiker on Mon May 15, 2017 4:32 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
That lens is decentered and likely the reason it was sold. I would immediately try to get my money back on the sale. Precision Camera, the Sony repair center in the USA has a horrible track record at correcting this sort of thing. They will simply tell you the lens is in spec and it will likely take three very expensive services before it is right. best to see if you can return it.
 

by signgrap on Mon May 15, 2017 9:13 pm
User avatar
signgrap
Lifetime Member
Posts: 1776
Joined: 1 Sep 2004
Location: Delaware Water Gap, PA
Member #:00424
E.J. sent it back as it had a 30 day no questions asked return from Adorama.
Dick Ludwig
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by:  
10 posts | 
  

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group