I bought this lens a couple months ago, and while yes it’s definitely a little more pricey than I think it should be I’ve REALLY enjoyed the size/weight of it and in real world situations have had no noticeable issues on jobs with quality of sharpness/contrast. I also find I take my camera out a LOT more because of the size as opposed to doing video rigs with my considerably bigger and chunky lenses/accessories. It’s my first 35mm prime and been really enjoying the walk around versatility. If size is a factor, and if you can find it on sale or in a deal over the holiday season I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend it 😃
I've had this lens for a couple of months and use it far more than I thought I would. It does actually have a sealing ring at the mounting in the form of a discreet O ring if you look really carefully. It stands slightly proud of the metal mount face. You are not the only person to miss this. Its size and low weight are its best features and these are the reasons I bought this lens rather than one of the several other options. It also has a Fn button and autofocus on/off switch of course. As of yet my style of shooting has not shown up any draw-dropping artifacts but one day, or evening, it probably will be an issue. Until then and not being a pixel-peeper, I'm quite happy with this lens. Its price however, is probably around £200 more than it deserves to be. Maybe.
Thanks for sharing your observations! It seems that Sony found out that such an O ring is enough of weather sealing, especially since the Sony bodies themselves are not the best in this regard (at concerning older models). Pricing for Sony lenses is a bummer, though, and it kept me from buying any native lenses for my A7 for years. I might take a closer look at Samyang lenses …
Christian Augustin Since O rings are used as seals for all kinds of things, including high pressure applications, such as inside automatic transmissions, it is unlikely, as you say, that this will the weak point on a current Sony body.
@SwitchRich All seals can leak. Badly designed ones will have a higher failure rate. Sony do not seal their bodies terribly well, so I have little hesitation in making an educated guess that this lens's seal will not be the weakest link should the camera and lens get soaked.
@ Yes. A clunk like a heavy mass moving internally. Since I have many other mirrorless lenses of different brands, I am well used to having such masses inside lenses that are held solid when attached to a camera that is switched on. Nothing to worry about. Condition normal.
I bought this lens and used it for 48 hours. After doing some more research I decided to return it and bought the Sony 24m f1.4 G master. That way I can use the super 35 feature and still shoot at 24m. It’s like having two lenses in one. 🙂
I bought the Canon version and I am using it on a Sony cam with the Sigma adaptor. It is nice and sharp, the only issue is that sometimes I have to focus twice to lock on certain subjects. I have not tested the AF in video.
Wow, what a mixed bag! I have to say that testing this myself in a camera store a couple of months back I really disliked the bokeh... and that was the main thing that drove me into the arms of Canon with their RF35 macro. Disappointing to see these negative aspects on what is an over expensive lens (considering what it is). Thank you for your review Christopher. It's worrying that the big RUclipsrs who enjoy Sony's largess at their launch events weren't inclined to share the negative points you've uncovered.
Searching for a 1.8 aperture lens as an alternative to my Tamron 28-75 G2, I was torn between this and the 50/1.8 because these are my most used focal lengths. However, even though there are gigantic benefits on the spec sheet for this one (AF speed, silent AF, no focus breathing, more versatile focal length overall), I went with the 50/1.8 because it is just better value (in certain use cases, not always!). In my area, the 35/1.8 is 4x the price of the 50/1.8, and if you plan to use it more or less only in bad lighting or if you want to have a smaller, more lightweight setup, it gets the job done well enough. It is optically not as strong as the cheaper Tamron 35/2.8, but the AF isn't as jumpy in video mode, so these 150€ are invested relatively well. Additionally, I have to say that I don't really find these older lenses "not sharp" or anything. Indeed, they give a softer look, but that fits in nicely for some situations. Lenses don't have to be clinically sharp - I think this makes images less enjoyable.
Interesting review. Mine has a mounting gasket and does not suffer from the comma issues or the image softness for that matter. Was your test sample supplied by Sony? I personally was blown away with how good this lens is for the money.
They all have a mounting seal and Christopher really should correct this gaff. Like you, I have not noticed either any softness or comma, but I certainly haven’t tested it to the extent either would show up. Ignoring its initial cost, I’m also very happy with it. I has a hard time deciding between this and the Samyang and Sigma. The size and weight of it finally clinched it.
A slight PINCUSHION distortion in a 35mm lens? That's impressive! Kudos to Sony on that! Just wish the lens was a couple of €100s cheaper: I'm not used to spending almost the same amount on wide-angle or even mid- focal length lenses as on fast telephoto lenses. But the lack of barrel distortion, I must say, is commendable!
Thanks for yet another informative review. Can't say I'm too impressed with many of Sony's lens offerings particularly as the prices in general are high, too high IMO. I'm currently using my Canon EF lenses on my A7iii with the Sigma MC-11 adapter apart from my Tamron 28-75 which has the Sony E mount. Hoping to see a Tamron 70-300 or thereabouts in E mount soon.
Had this lens for a few weeks now. I was torn between the Sigma 35mm f1.4 and this one, but went with the Sony due to the lighter weight and better autofocus. I somewhat regret it now, seeing the performance for price and not having 1.4 aperture hurts. I was hoping this would be more like the 55mm f1.8 or 85mm f1.8. I'll likely trade it for the 55mm
Hi, appreciate your video. Question for you. I am new to photography and I was told the Sony f1.8 35mm lens worked with the sony a6000 and so I bought the lens. However, everything I see talks about the lens compatibility with a full frame body. My sony a6000 body is 3/4 frame and not full frame. Is this lens compatible with the 3/4 frame? Also on your review the lens you show has an autofocus button. Confused I bought the same lens and in the same box with the same model number as you showed but my lens does not have an autofocus?
Sony a7R2 is not working in terms of AF performance tests anymore. Recently I was using this lens on my a9 and AF (with response settings) was simply cartoony fast. Like instant grab of the subject eye from infinite. I think your review is useful, but for my personal use, this is one of the best lenses ever, the combination of speed, size, subject sharpness is the exact mix that I need from a 35mm lens.
This lens is not perfect, but I'd chosen it instead of 35GM, because it lighter, smaller, no focus breathing, smaller minimum focus distance, after 3 years, this litter guy is one of my best choices
would you recommend it? right now its 22% off for 490€ and im tempted to buy it for my a7rv. i was never a fan of primes but recently i noticed i needed a lens with a large aperture opening thats also small, and this seems to be exactly that. the smearing issues and the fact its not tack sharp are kind of pushing me back
@@urbanie I used to had the same problem like you: need small, fast lenses but also need tack sharp. But you can't have all with that price range. 35GM has that sharp but it large and pricey. All lens have pro & cons. I mean you have to choose. For me, 35mm FE is not tack sharp at f/1.8, f/2.2, (corners are less sharp, like most lens) but at that apeture, I only care about the center of photo, the center is about 8.7/10 wide-open, but I only really notice when I zoom in 50%, 100% (only in the first 2 weeks after buying the lens, now I never do that again). If you often have to print, you may consider rent some lens to compare and check if thet fit your demand or not. I rent 35 GM, 35 Sigma, 35 FE, and I decided to buy 35FE, save money to buy other accessories
@@Chuchuphinh you're right, the funny thing is, i do video very often with a7rv. i find this lens pretty nice for video because its light and almost no focus breathing, and the main issue with 35gm is horrid focus breathing, i feel like this would be a good companion lens to sigma 24-70 f2.8 since that lens is 835 grams heavy, what do you think?
@@urbanie 35GM is a nice lens, A7RV have lens compensation fix,l in setting. have you tried it? My A7 mark iii does not have lens compensation. So the only thing you need to concert is weight (and maybe price)
I have a 28mm f2 for my only single traveling lens. do you think having a 35 mm F 1.8 will it be better or consider an upgrade from a 28 mm lens? I know the 28 MM will produce less bokeh compared to 35. But is it that different on quality and bokeh? What do you think?
Nice lens, but not very sharp (at least the copy I sent back). If you don't care for really fast lenses, the Tamron 35 2.8 is an almost macro lens too, it's gonna be a fun lens
Many reviewers had reviewed this lens and most of them agreed that it is one of the better 35mm lenses out there for the Sony mount. Your copy may be marked as a lower end of the lens spec. maybe you should ask Sony to check your copy.
@@christopherfrost Some reviewers believe it is better than Samyang 35mm f1.4, you gave the impression it is not. Also, the photographer/reviewer compared it against the Sigma 35mm f.1.4 and preferred the Sony, and he thought the Sony is better the Samyang.
@@yttean98 I don't know who 'the photographer/reviewer' is (!) but I don't really care what he or she thought. I've presented you with clear, objective findings in this video, and I'm not going to start testing 50 different copies of this lens and 50 different copies of the Samyang lens in order to try and find an average behind the sample variation, because I don't have the spare money or the free time. Feel free to do that yourself, though.
@@christopherfrost No one is disputing your findings, what I am saying is that your copy maybe at the bottom end of the lens spec. because more than a few reviewers find the sony 35mm f1.8 to be a very good lens better in many ways the Samyang 35mm f1.4. If you don't believe me do a search on RUclips. That is all don't read too much into my response.and be offended.
I need some advice. I am currently using the Samyang 35 1.4 (on an a7ii) and the autofocus is very unreliable, and I would like to get another lens. Does the sony 35 1.8 have a more reliable autofocus? (I mainly shoot cars)
Obviously I'm doing something wrong because my stock Sony ZV-1 (with proper settings) takes better images than my new Sony a7ii with FE 35 mm f 1.8 lens. Is there a tutorial how to set it up correctly? Portraits and street photos wise?
I'm pretty torn between getting this or the Sigma 35mm 1.4. The Sigma is faster and performs better in tests, but when I look at images of the two they seem comparable in giving nice looking images. The big advantage of the Sony is the smaller size and weight.
@@edelynagustin Good to know. I actually didn't end up getting either. I'm planning to buy the Sony 35mm 1.4 GM instead. It's a lot of money though, and recently I don't shoot professionally anymore, so I'm a bit slow in purchasing the thing, haha.
Really was hoping for a 35mm 1.8 with the same IQ as the 55mm 1.8 I'd love to have a compact prime with f1.8 but 55mm isn't wide enough for me. Too bad the IQ of the 35mm isn't in the same ballpark. I would gladly have paid $200 more if it was...
@Foto4Max Well, from what I've been seeing corner sharpness isn't even close to the 55 f1.8 wide open. It's more like the 50 f1.8 (which actually has great sharpness but can't compete with the 55 when it comes to corner sharpness wide open). I only use FF so I can imagine it'll be great on APS-C where you only use the middle part of the lens but for my A7R II I'm not so sure.
Thanks for this review. An excellent lens it would seem but of course no lens satisfies everyone. I've handled this lens in-store and the Batis 40/2 on the same occasion. Both are impressive in their construction and handling. I've read numerous reviews and frankly I find it hard to decide which suits me best. Added to that I own a Sony-Zeiss 35/2.8. I shall probably stick with it but these are tempting offerings.
Well I eventually settled for this Sony 35/1.8 and managed to part-exchange my 35/2.8 Sony Zeiss. This far I'm well pleased with it. Handles beautifully, compact for 1.8, well built, nice weight, fast AF and of course the IQ is top notch. It certainly meets my requirements.
I think something is wrong with the tested copy. Mine has neither this coma problem nor the softness (especially close up). The sharpness is comparable to the Sony 55 f / 1.8
There is really big copy variance in sony 35mm 1.8... Our local Sony club talks about it a lot... Some has coma, some has really strong vignetting or CA. Many people sold their copy just for bad luck. But if you get "good piece" it is best 35mm 1.8 for sony FE. IQ is much more better than Samyang (the worst copy variance ever, also many technical issues with older A7 bodies than A7 III - A7 II and A7R II shuts itself many times or got serious AF malfunctions - even FW upgrade doesn't help) and on par with sigma (sigma is a bit sharper maybe). But there is no doubt its the best AF 35mm lens for sony FE. Super fast and precious... No brainer for video shooting in 35mm. And one big "+" is good minimum focus distance...
Christopher I really like most of your videos for many reasons but i'm 100% sure you got exceptional bad copy of Sony lens and exceptional good copy of Samy. :)
hi, so samyang is better picture quality i guess but is it faster af and what about focus breathing. i mean those points should be mentioned as well.. but tnx u made some good points
hi! so wich lens would you suggest as a small, lightweight alternative (35mm)? the new tamron 35f2.8? it's weathersealed, that's nice, but the AF-performance is horrible. and f2.8 instead of f1.8 for shooting in low light conditions? The sigma and Samyang f1.4 are way to big for kinda "stealth" street shooting...
Man I'm torn. I wanted something lighter than my 35 ART and got a 28/2 and 45/1.8 but I love the 35 FOV. Bummed this doesn't live up to the hype. I've had 2 bad copies of the Samyang 1.4 so it looks like I'm sticking with the ART
Thanks again for the review! I found the Samyang a bit softer in my real world test somehow... But I do agree with your final statement. Like you I was expecting a bit more as well. The best 35mm for Sony is the Sigma ones. Did you test them out already?
I tested the Sony 35mm 1.8 and Samyang 35mm 1.4 side-by-side and can't really confirm your observations, though I tested the infinity performance on my less demanding A7 III. At 1.8 the Sony is sharper edge to edge compared to the Samyang at 1.4. And even comparing both lenses at 1.8, the Sony is a bit sharper at the edges. Center performance is about equal. Just my findings.
Question: if you could only choose three lenses for your Sony full frame what would they be? As always, most trustworthy lens reviews on RUclips. THANKS CHRIS. ⚡✊⚡Hope 2020 will have tons of Sony FE.
very informative as always! Thanks a lot! would you mind take a look at the new TAMRON PRIMES for SONY E? Especially the 24f2.8 amd the 35f2.8. they're all about 430€ - quite affordable for fullframe. and they are kinda weathersealed... really would appreciate that!!! greets/simon
Thanks for the review. I've got the Sony 35mm f2.8, so I'll stay with that for now. Hopefully Sony brings out a 35mm f1.4, built to the same standard as the recent Sony 24mm f1.4 GM.
I am a complete noob. If I want a greater depth of field should I go with the Sony 35mm 1.4 or 1.8? It looks like the 1.4 has a manual control of the aperture. Sorry for my noobness.
Great video and reveiw as always Chris. I was going to go for this 35mm lens from Sony (as I have both the Sony A7S II and the Sony A7 III). I will mainly be using for video work. I had seen other reviews that placed this lens somewhere between OK and good (and that it was particularly good for focus breathing and its weight and size was a winner for me, for gimbal use). Am now wondering if there are other 35mm lenses you would recommend for video work on the Sony A7 series, that were good on focus breathing, auto-focus/ focus, sharpness, weight and price?
Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 IS Macro = reasonably well-priced, IQ, stabilization, 0.5x close focus capability, sharp enough (not soft, being non-L) Nikkor Z 35/1.8S is not sharp (like its 50/1.8S) as well, like this sony, and both may be less sharp then canon. Overall, RF lens is a well-rounded package, along with EOS-RP for street & general/travel, & 24-105/4L (which surprisingly is sharper than the RF 35mm prime, despite being a zoom, because it's an "L" lens).
I had one. Sold it for the Sony tested here. It's a much (much) better lens, but it's massive (compared to the Sony). And it 's much more expensive (and very hard to find on the 2nd hand market). You'll find a good and honest review here : sonyalpha.blog/2018/11/27/zeiss-batis-40mm-f2-cf/ both in English and French. And just for the record, I'm really enjoying the 35 f1.8 from Sony. IMHO, The Batis 40mm is one of the best Sony lens, but it was too big and heavy for my need.
You can read everything you want to know in this review by Andy Westlake from Amateur Photographer: www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/reviews/lenses/zeiss-batis-40mm-f-2-cf But a review by Christopher Frost would be awesome too!
The Batis 40 f2 has some weird aperture problem where it will automatically stop down to f2.8 (think it used to be worse at f4) at close focus. That put me off the lens.
@@firstsoldier4257 All E-mount lenses work on Sony APSC. It's one mount, E mount. Some lenses have larger image circle (FE) and they work on both size sensors.
I thought there would be some compatibility issues (black ring) by putting an APS-C lens on a Full Frame camera? The reason I ask is because I have an A7RIII and I'm worried that there might be some fish-eye style blackening around the frame.
The samyang might be sharper, even at 1.4, however it's about 3 times the size of the little sony 1.8 and in real world useage you won't notice any difference at all.
@@christopherfrost indeed plus for environmental portraits you usually won't center the subject so performance outside the center matters also. Fans of smaller lenses always try to down play the obvious sacrifices claiming "you can't see them" lol
@@shaolin95 I have the sigma 35 1.4 art lens and I've compared them directly. I can't see any difference unless I pixel peep. Even the oof areas are so similar that unless compared directly it's hardly noticeable.
Thank you for your vídeo! I own this lens and it is horrible and unusable if you use it for landscape. Much worse then my old cheap dslr lenses. I wish I could sell it but no one wants it!😅 What a waste of money! Oh, and the vigneting is quite difficult to correct in LR or CM, it never goes completely away!
Far as I can tell, the only two reasons to consider this lens are its size and aberration control. Otherwise, the Samyang gives you more light, is at least as sharp, and costs less. You could get the Samyang and a good flash (or a set of good but more basic ones) or a good variable ND filter for the price difference.
I'd love a 35mm option that is lighter than my sigma 35mm 1.4 Art for times I don't *need* the low light performance, without going all the way down to f2.8. But at this price point and image quality, this lens just isn't worth it to me. It honestly performs exactly where I'd expect a 35mm f1.8, but it isn't priced to the performance. I'd buy this in a heartbeat for $350-400, but no more than that.
Christoffer you have already tested many lenses, also full-frame lenses that you have tested side by side on both full-frame and crop-body. What do you think of the fact that full-frame lenses on crop bodys perform worse? A well-known RUclips channel has already made a video for the second time about the fact that full-frame lenses perform worse on crop bodys than on a full-frame body. I have had many nikon full-frame lenses that I used on nikon cropbodys and I have not noticed anything. In the meantime I have sold my nikon gear and am now working with Fuji. Fuji does not have full-frame lenses. I have a hard time believing what that photo youtube channel says, that full-frame lenses on cropbodys perform worse.
It simply depends on the lens and whether the lens in question is sharp enough in the middle of its images for the extra resolving power needed for APS-C
Flaring might affect the middle of the image as well. So even though the image is cropped on aps-c, you might have loss of contrast in certain conditions. To use a lens hood or not is up to you. I myself use it more for protection because i rarely use clear filters.
@@christopherfrost that's isn't a 1.8 and it's huge and heavy. So what better options of 35 1.8 are there? I think you mean there are different options.
@@christopherfrost yes of course, for me the 1.4 is a far worse choice. Everyone's definition of "better" is not the same. I have the sony zeiss 35 1.4 as well as the 2.8 but barely use the 1.4 due to it's size and weight.
I wanted to like this lens a lot more, but jeez, for $700, not a chance. I thought about buying it at one point, but it desperately needs some fancier ED glass elements for that coma. It even looks like it has purplish tinting at F1.8 on full frame in the corner compared to the Samyang.
I bought this lens a couple months ago, and while yes it’s definitely a little more pricey than I think it should be I’ve REALLY enjoyed the size/weight of it and in real world situations have had no noticeable issues on jobs with quality of sharpness/contrast.
I also find I take my camera out a LOT more because of the size as opposed to doing video rigs with my considerably bigger and chunky lenses/accessories.
It’s my first 35mm prime and been really enjoying the walk around versatility.
If size is a factor, and if you can find it on sale or in a deal over the holiday season I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend it 😃
I liked the "Hi, it's me". Being used to "howdy everyone", it made me chuckle
i loved it when he said that. Sounds music to the ears .
Really appreciate that you test on both APSC and FF for E mount lenses.
thats a full frame lens it doesn't work on a ASPC kamera !
@@firstsoldier4257 All E mount lenses work on Sony's E mount APS-C cameras.
@@firstsoldier4257 you are correct. It doesn't work on ASPC cameras. But it does work on APSC cameras.
@@andokewl 😂👍🏻
I've had this lens for a couple of months and use it far more than I thought I would. It does actually have a sealing ring at the mounting in the form of a discreet O ring if you look really carefully. It stands slightly proud of the metal mount face. You are not the only person to miss this.
Its size and low weight are its best features and these are the reasons I bought this lens rather than one of the several other options. It also has a Fn button and autofocus on/off switch of course.
As of yet my style of shooting has not shown up any draw-dropping artifacts but one day, or evening, it probably will be an issue. Until then and not being a pixel-peeper, I'm quite happy with this lens. Its price however, is probably around £200 more than it deserves to be. Maybe.
Thanks for sharing your observations! It seems that Sony found out that such an O ring is enough of weather sealing, especially since the Sony bodies themselves are not the best in this regard (at concerning older models). Pricing for Sony lenses is a bummer, though, and it kept me from buying any native lenses for my A7 for years. I might take a closer look at Samyang lenses …
Christian Augustin
Since O rings are used as seals for all kinds of things, including high pressure applications, such as inside automatic transmissions, it is unlikely, as you say, that this will the weak point on a current Sony body.
@SwitchRich
All seals can leak. Badly designed ones will have a higher failure rate. Sony do not seal their bodies terribly well, so I have little hesitation in making an educated guess that this lens's seal will not be the weakest link should the camera and lens get soaked.
@SwitchRich Good to know, but it sound like a problem in heavy use.
@
Yes. A clunk like a heavy mass moving internally. Since I have many other mirrorless lenses of different brands, I am well used to having such masses inside lenses that are held solid when attached to a camera that is switched on. Nothing to worry about. Condition normal.
2:02 there's weather sealing at the rear, but inside the barrel. Look at the schematics for more detail.
My 35mm f1.8 doesn't have these problems and I love this lens so much
I'll add my thumbs-up to that too! Not only is he knowledgeable but he's just so pleasant to listen to.
I bought this lens and used it for 48 hours. After doing some more research I decided to return it and bought the Sony 24m f1.4 G master. That way I can use the super 35 feature and still shoot at 24m. It’s like having two lenses in one. 🙂
After watching all your 35mm lens reviews, I decided to buy the Sigma 35mm f1.4. Thank you!
Is the sigma 35mm 1.4 a solid lens for photography vs Video?
I bought the Canon version and I am using it on a Sony cam with the Sigma adaptor.
It is nice and sharp, the only issue is that sometimes I have to focus twice to lock on certain subjects.
I have not tested the AF in video.
@@randynguyen2020 For video Sony has much more better AF...
I use a7ii with sigma 35mm 1.4 👍
You are making the best lens reviews Christopher. I really love your videos :)
Wow, what a mixed bag!
I have to say that testing this myself in a camera store a couple of months back I really disliked the bokeh... and that was the main thing that drove me into the arms of Canon with their RF35 macro.
Disappointing to see these negative aspects on what is an over expensive lens (considering what it is).
Thank you for your review Christopher. It's worrying that the big RUclipsrs who enjoy Sony's largess at their launch events weren't inclined to share the negative points you've uncovered.
this is is bad copy of this lens.. the other reviewers on you tube are not lying ..
I love this review.... I hope from now on you will add a small comparison in all your reviews 💯
Searching for a 1.8 aperture lens as an alternative to my Tamron 28-75 G2, I was torn between this and the 50/1.8 because these are my most used focal lengths.
However, even though there are gigantic benefits on the spec sheet for this one (AF speed, silent AF, no focus breathing, more versatile focal length overall), I went with the 50/1.8 because it is just better value (in certain use cases, not always!). In my area, the 35/1.8 is 4x the price of the 50/1.8, and if you plan to use it more or less only in bad lighting or if you want to have a smaller, more lightweight setup, it gets the job done well enough. It is optically not as strong as the cheaper Tamron 35/2.8, but the AF isn't as jumpy in video mode, so these 150€ are invested relatively well. Additionally, I have to say that I don't really find these older lenses "not sharp" or anything. Indeed, they give a softer look, but that fits in nicely for some situations. Lenses don't have to be clinically sharp - I think this makes images less enjoyable.
Suffering from severe GAS, this video was really useful to me. Thank you! I
Interesting review. Mine has a mounting gasket and does not suffer from the comma issues or the image softness for that matter. Was your test sample supplied by Sony? I personally was blown away with how good this lens is for the money.
They all have a mounting seal and Christopher really should correct this gaff. Like you, I have not noticed either any softness or comma, but I certainly haven’t tested it to the extent either would show up. Ignoring its initial cost, I’m also very happy with it. I has a hard time deciding between this and the Samyang and Sigma. The size and weight of it finally clinched it.
Nice honest review. I would love to see you test done Nikon S lenses. Their 1.8’s look fantastic.
A slight PINCUSHION distortion in a 35mm lens? That's impressive! Kudos to Sony on that! Just wish the lens was a couple of €100s cheaper: I'm not used to spending almost the same amount on wide-angle or even mid- focal length lenses as on fast telephoto lenses. But the lack of barrel distortion, I must say, is commendable!
Thanks for your honest review like always. Do you think the Sigma 1.4 art outperforms this unit?
Thanks for yet another informative review. Can't say I'm too impressed with many of Sony's lens offerings particularly as the prices in general are high, too high IMO. I'm currently using my Canon EF lenses on my A7iii with the Sigma MC-11 adapter apart from my Tamron 28-75 which has the Sony E mount. Hoping to see a Tamron 70-300 or thereabouts in E mount soon.
I own one and it is horrible, a waste of money!
Had this lens for a few weeks now. I was torn between the Sigma 35mm f1.4 and this one, but went with the Sony due to the lighter weight and better autofocus. I somewhat regret it now, seeing the performance for price and not having 1.4 aperture hurts. I was hoping this would be more like the 55mm f1.8 or 85mm f1.8. I'll likely trade it for the 55mm
I have the 55mm zeiss and is very nice. I have the samyang 35mm 1.4 which is also pretty sharp.
I have the 55 Zeiss, but maybe you should check out the Samyang 45 1.8 also; dustin abbott recommends it over the 55.
Hi, appreciate your video. Question for you. I am new to photography and I was told the Sony f1.8 35mm lens worked with the sony a6000 and so I bought the lens. However, everything I see talks about the lens compatibility with a full frame body. My sony a6000 body is 3/4 frame and not full frame. Is this lens compatible with the 3/4 frame? Also on your review the lens you show has an autofocus button. Confused I bought the same lens and in the same box with the same model number as you showed but my lens does not have an autofocus?
Sony a7R2 is not working in terms of AF performance tests anymore. Recently I was using this lens on my a9 and AF (with response settings) was simply cartoony fast. Like instant grab of the subject eye from infinite.
I think your review is useful, but for my personal use, this is one of the best lenses ever, the combination of speed, size, subject sharpness is the exact mix that I need from a 35mm lens.
This lens is not perfect, but I'd chosen it instead of 35GM, because it lighter, smaller, no focus breathing, smaller minimum focus distance, after 3 years, this litter guy is one of my best choices
would you recommend it? right now its 22% off for 490€ and im tempted to buy it for my a7rv. i was never a fan of primes but recently i noticed i needed a lens with a large aperture opening thats also small, and this seems to be exactly that. the smearing issues and the fact its not tack sharp are kind of pushing me back
@@urbanie I used to had the same problem like you: need small, fast lenses but also need tack sharp. But you can't have all with that price range.
35GM has that sharp but it large and pricey. All lens have pro & cons.
I mean you have to choose. For me, 35mm FE is not tack sharp at f/1.8, f/2.2, (corners are less sharp, like most lens) but at that apeture, I only care about the center of photo, the center is about 8.7/10 wide-open, but I only really notice when I zoom in 50%, 100% (only in the first 2 weeks after buying the lens, now I never do that again).
If you often have to print, you may consider rent some lens to compare and check if thet fit your demand or not.
I rent 35 GM, 35 Sigma, 35 FE, and I decided to buy 35FE, save money to buy other accessories
@@Chuchuphinh you're right, the funny thing is, i do video very often with a7rv. i find this lens pretty nice for video because its light and almost no focus breathing, and the main issue with 35gm is horrid focus breathing, i feel like this would be a good companion lens to sigma 24-70 f2.8 since that lens is 835 grams heavy, what do you think?
@@urbanie 35GM is a nice lens, A7RV have lens compensation fix,l in setting. have you tried it?
My A7 mark iii does not have lens compensation.
So the only thing you need to concert is weight (and maybe price)
I have a 28mm f2 for my only single traveling lens. do you think having a 35 mm F 1.8 will it be better or consider an upgrade from a 28 mm lens? I know the 28 MM will produce less bokeh compared to 35. But is it that different on quality and bokeh? What do you think?
Take a look at my review of that lens and you'll see :-) personally I prefer 35mm so I'd go for the upgrade but there isn't much difference really.
Could you please do a review on the zeiss batis 40mm f2 ? Also how the 35mm f1.8 compares against that would be nice ! Great reviews btw!!
Nice, I'm going to buy the batis40
Nice lens, but not very sharp (at least the copy I sent back). If you don't care for really fast lenses, the Tamron 35 2.8 is an almost macro lens too, it's gonna be a fun lens
@@RiccardoGabarriniKazeatari mine is tack sharp! Even at F2.
I am loving that 40mm Batis. Stellar lens!
@@RiccardoGabarriniKazeatari I also think the tamron is pretty good and very good for the money, but I heard the autofocus sucks.
Thank you, really gave me the answer I was looking for before buying.
FINALLY! Great review!
Christopher did you ever do a review of the Zeiss 2.8 35mm ?
Great review as always! Thanks!
Many reviewers had reviewed this lens and most of them agreed that it is one of the better 35mm lenses out there for the Sony mount. Your copy may be marked as a lower end of the lens spec. maybe you should ask Sony to check your copy.
I made it clear in the review that I think it's great - it's just not as good as the best ones out there, and at £600, you expect a bit more
@@christopherfrost Some reviewers believe it is better than Samyang 35mm f1.4, you gave the impression it is not. Also, the photographer/reviewer compared it against the Sigma 35mm f.1.4 and preferred the Sony, and he thought the Sony is better the Samyang.
@@yttean98 I don't know who 'the photographer/reviewer' is (!) but I don't really care what he or she thought. I've presented you with clear, objective findings in this video, and I'm not going to start testing 50 different copies of this lens and 50 different copies of the Samyang lens in order to try and find an average behind the sample variation, because I don't have the spare money or the free time. Feel free to do that yourself, though.
@@christopherfrost No one is disputing your findings, what I am saying is that your copy maybe at the bottom end of the lens spec. because more than a few reviewers find the sony 35mm f1.8 to be a very good lens better in many ways the Samyang 35mm f1.4. If you don't believe me do a search on RUclips. That is all don't read too much into my response.and be offended.
@@yttean98 I'm not offended, but I certainly haven't seen anyone compare it to the Samyang lens properly, side-by-side
man....great video! Love from germany!
I need some advice.
I am currently using the Samyang 35 1.4 (on an a7ii) and the autofocus is very unreliable, and I would like to get another lens. Does the sony 35 1.8 have a more reliable autofocus? (I mainly shoot cars)
So which is the better option? The samyang f1.4?
Yup
Obviously I'm doing something wrong because my stock Sony ZV-1 (with proper settings) takes better images than my new Sony a7ii with FE 35 mm f 1.8 lens. Is there a tutorial how to set it up correctly? Portraits and street photos wise?
What are the other and better options you'd recommend? (Looking for a small and lightweight and I know the Samyang is not small)
I'm pretty torn between getting this or the Sigma 35mm 1.4. The Sigma is faster and performs better in tests, but when I look at images of the two they seem comparable in giving nice looking images. The big advantage of the Sony is the smaller size and weight.
I shoot with a sigma 35 mm 1.4 and I have a lot of issues with the auto focus. To the pojnt where I am now selling it for this lens
@@edelynagustin Good to know. I actually didn't end up getting either. I'm planning to buy the Sony 35mm 1.4 GM instead. It's a lot of money though, and recently I don't shoot professionally anymore, so I'm a bit slow in purchasing the thing, haha.
Really was hoping for a 35mm 1.8 with the same IQ as the 55mm 1.8
I'd love to have a compact prime with f1.8 but 55mm isn't wide enough for me.
Too bad the IQ of the 35mm isn't in the same ballpark. I would gladly have paid $200 more if it was...
@Foto4Max Well, from what I've been seeing corner sharpness isn't even close to the 55 f1.8 wide open. It's more like the 50 f1.8 (which actually has great sharpness but can't compete with the 55 when it comes to corner sharpness wide open).
I only use FF so I can imagine it'll be great on APS-C where you only use the middle part of the lens but for my A7R II I'm not so sure.
Thanks for this review. An excellent lens it would seem but of course no lens satisfies everyone. I've handled this lens in-store and the Batis 40/2 on the same occasion. Both are impressive in their construction and handling. I've read numerous reviews and frankly I find it hard to decide which suits me best. Added to that I own a Sony-Zeiss 35/2.8. I shall probably stick with it but these are tempting offerings.
Well I eventually settled for this Sony 35/1.8 and managed to part-exchange my 35/2.8 Sony Zeiss. This far I'm well pleased with it. Handles beautifully, compact for 1.8, well built, nice weight, fast AF and of course the IQ is top notch. It certainly meets my requirements.
@@JackieSemple thanks for the follow up
m
"It's just that I think there are some better options out there". What do you refer to Christopher? Would you shed some light? :)
As I mentioned, the Samyang AF 35mm 1.4 FE
@@christopherfrost I used to have it, but the autofocus was a lot worse in comparison. Definitely could not use it for weddings.
@@Julian-tn4lp Yes. I had the same problem. Got rid of it.
I think something is wrong with the tested copy. Mine has neither this coma problem nor the softness (especially close up). The sharpness is comparable to the Sony 55 f / 1.8
There is really big copy variance in sony 35mm 1.8... Our local Sony club talks about it a lot... Some has coma, some has really strong vignetting or CA. Many people sold their copy just for bad luck. But if you get "good piece" it is best 35mm 1.8 for sony FE. IQ is much more better than Samyang (the worst copy variance ever, also many technical issues with older A7 bodies than A7 III - A7 II and A7R II shuts itself many times or got serious AF malfunctions - even FW upgrade doesn't help) and on par with sigma (sigma is a bit sharper maybe). But there is no doubt its the best AF 35mm lens for sony FE. Super fast and precious... No brainer for video shooting in 35mm. And one big "+" is good minimum focus distance...
@@jiricezemsky1832 100% agree ;-)
@@jiricezemsky1832 if you had a7iii would you not buy
Christopher I really like most of your videos for many reasons but i'm 100% sure you got exceptional bad copy of Sony lens and exceptional good copy of Samy. :)
Why are you 100% sure of this?
hi, so samyang is better picture quality i guess but is it faster af and what about focus breathing. i mean those points should be mentioned as well.. but tnx u made some good points
So what are better 35mm options for Sony? The 35mm f2.8?
As I mentioned in the review, the Samyang 35mm f/1.4 is brighter, a little sharper, and about the same price
Christopher Frost Photography what about focus breathing in video? Is the Samyang superior as well?
hi! so wich lens would you suggest as a small, lightweight alternative (35mm)? the new tamron 35f2.8? it's weathersealed, that's nice, but the AF-performance is horrible. and f2.8 instead of f1.8 for shooting in low light conditions? The sigma and Samyang f1.4 are way to big for kinda "stealth" street shooting...
rx1
Man I'm torn. I wanted something lighter than my 35 ART and got a 28/2 and 45/1.8 but I love the 35 FOV. Bummed this doesn't live up to the hype. I've had 2 bad copies of the Samyang 1.4 so it looks like I'm sticking with the ART
future62 I would say go try.
I would probz still pick up the 35 1.8. As an amatuer photographer I value the savings in weight over optimal performance.
Thanks again for the review! I found the Samyang a bit softer in my real world test somehow...
But I do agree with your final statement. Like you I was expecting a bit more as well.
The best 35mm for Sony is the Sigma ones. Did you test them out already?
Too much copy variance with that Samyang lenses.
@@01thiefraccoon I've heard about that indeed
Hi, compare to batis 40? Which one is better?
I tested the Sony 35mm 1.8 and Samyang 35mm 1.4 side-by-side and can't really confirm your observations, though I tested the infinity performance on my less demanding A7 III.
At 1.8 the Sony is sharper edge to edge compared to the Samyang at 1.4. And even comparing both lenses at 1.8, the Sony is a bit sharper at the edges. Center performance is about equal.
Just my findings.
Samyang is known for poor copy variation, might be what you're seeing. Although Sony doesn't have a perfect track record either tbf
Wich one would you recommend, Sony 35 f1.8 vs samyang 35mm 1.4?
Question: if you could only choose three lenses for your Sony full frame what would they be? As always, most trustworthy lens reviews on RUclips. THANKS CHRIS. ⚡✊⚡Hope 2020 will have tons of Sony FE.
Good question. Maybe Sigma 14-24 f/2.8, Sony 24-105, Sigma 105mm f/1.4
@@christopherfrost thanks for sharing the secret, your Top 3, that is.
What are the "other options"? Which 35mm lens do you recommend? Have my eye on the Sony - Distagon T* FE 35mm f/1.4
The Samyang 35mm f/1.4 FE
@@christopherfrost autofocus :(
very informative as always! Thanks a lot! would you mind take a look at the new TAMRON PRIMES for SONY E? Especially the 24f2.8 amd the 35f2.8. they're all about 430€ - quite affordable for fullframe. and they are kinda weathersealed... really would appreciate that!!!
greets/simon
THIS!!
Thanks for the review. I've got the Sony 35mm f2.8, so I'll stay with that for now. Hopefully Sony brings out a 35mm f1.4, built to the same standard as the recent Sony 24mm f1.4 GM.
@@makosports Yes, I realise that but this new f1.8 seems better in many ways. I meant to say a "version 2" of the 35mm f1.4.
I am a complete noob. If I want a greater depth of field should I go with the Sony 35mm 1.4 or 1.8? It looks like the 1.4 has a manual control of the aperture. Sorry for my noobness.
I was waiting for this review harder, than for a paycheck ;)
Great video and reveiw as always Chris. I was going to go for this 35mm lens from Sony (as I have both the Sony A7S II and the Sony A7 III). I will mainly be using for video work. I had seen other reviews that placed this lens somewhere between OK and good (and that it was particularly good for focus breathing and its weight and size was a winner for me, for gimbal use). Am now wondering if there are other 35mm lenses you would recommend for video work on the Sony A7 series, that were good on focus breathing, auto-focus/ focus, sharpness, weight and price?
Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 IS Macro = reasonably well-priced, IQ, stabilization, 0.5x close focus capability, sharp enough (not soft, being non-L)
Nikkor Z 35/1.8S is not sharp (like its 50/1.8S) as well, like this sony, and both may be less sharp then canon. Overall, RF lens is a well-rounded package, along with EOS-RP for street & general/travel, & 24-105/4L (which surprisingly is sharper than the RF 35mm prime, despite being a zoom, because it's an "L" lens).
@Foto4Max hey man! you sure ? ... is it slow AF in 35RF ... or does it misfocus ?
Better this one or the Sony 35mm 1.8 OSS ?
Sony needs to update their 50mm to the 35mm and 85mm standard.
The Sony 85mm 1.8 is awesome!
sony 85mm is sharper than expensive Zeiss 85 mm
Please review the Batis 40mm F2
I had one. Sold it for the Sony tested here. It's a much (much) better lens, but it's massive (compared to the Sony). And it 's much more expensive (and very hard to find on the 2nd hand market). You'll find a good and honest review here : sonyalpha.blog/2018/11/27/zeiss-batis-40mm-f2-cf/ both in English and French. And just for the record, I'm really enjoying the 35 f1.8 from Sony. IMHO, The Batis 40mm is one of the best Sony lens, but it was too big and heavy for my need.
You can read everything you want to know in this review by Andy Westlake from Amateur Photographer: www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/reviews/lenses/zeiss-batis-40mm-f-2-cf
But a review by Christopher Frost would be awesome too!
The Batis 40 f2 has some weird aperture problem where it will automatically stop down to f2.8 (think it used to be worse at f4) at close focus.
That put me off the lens.
Thank you so much!
Does it work with the 6400?
Yes
full frame lens not ASPC
@@firstsoldier4257 All E-mount lenses work on Sony APSC. It's one mount, E mount. Some lenses have larger image circle (FE) and they work on both size sensors.
this in full frame camera lens (no crop) ?
hello, what do you recommend between sony fe 55 f1.8 and sony fe 35 f1.8, for sharpness and image quality?
it's two completely different focal lengths so it's much more important factor than just "sharpness"
Hi Chris are you planning on reviewing the 70-350mm G from Sony? Thanks!
Some day, yes
I thought there would be some compatibility issues (black ring) by putting an APS-C lens on a Full Frame camera? The reason I ask is because I have an A7RIII and I'm worried that there might be some fish-eye style blackening around the frame.
This is a full frame lens. Not to be confused with the aps-c version - Sony E 35mm f1.8 OSS.
If you could only have one lens for your A7rII, what would it be?
What exactly are the better options without getting the obvious Gmaster lens
the best lens...thanks video!
The samyang might be sharper, even at 1.4, however it's about 3 times the size of the little sony 1.8 and in real world useage you won't notice any difference at all.
You notice the difference between f/1.4 and f/1.8 in bokeh and shutter speeds, that's for sure
@@christopherfrost indeed plus for environmental portraits you usually won't center the subject so performance outside the center matters also.
Fans of smaller lenses always try to down play the obvious sacrifices claiming "you can't see them" lol
@@shaolin95 I have the sigma 35 1.4 art lens and I've compared them directly. I can't see any difference unless I pixel peep. Even the oof areas are so similar that unless compared directly it's hardly noticeable.
I picked up a minty copy of the Samyang 35mm 1.4 FE lens for $350 USD. For the price and performance, I can ignore the slightly larger size! ;-)
Can you name a few of those “better options out there”? Pls 😢
Thank you for your vídeo! I own this lens and it is horrible and unusable if you use it for landscape. Much worse then my old cheap dslr lenses. I wish I could sell it but no one wants it!😅 What a waste of money! Oh, and the vigneting is quite difficult to correct in LR or CM, it never goes completely away!
Far as I can tell, the only two reasons to consider this lens are its size and aberration control. Otherwise, the Samyang gives you more light, is at least as sharp, and costs less. You could get the Samyang and a good flash (or a set of good but more basic ones) or a good variable ND filter for the price difference.
ok, Thank you for the video.i am going to buy the zeiss 35 f1.4 back.
Thanks so much
I'd love a 35mm option that is lighter than my sigma 35mm 1.4 Art for times I don't *need* the low light performance, without going all the way down to f2.8.
But at this price point and image quality, this lens just isn't worth it to me. It honestly performs exactly where I'd expect a 35mm f1.8, but it isn't priced to the performance. I'd buy this in a heartbeat for $350-400, but no more than that.
Christoffer you have already tested many lenses, also full-frame lenses that you have tested side by side on both full-frame and crop-body. What do you think of the fact that full-frame lenses on crop bodys perform worse? A well-known RUclips channel has already made a video for the second time about the fact that full-frame lenses perform worse on crop bodys than on a full-frame body. I have had many nikon full-frame lenses that I used on nikon cropbodys and I have not noticed anything. In the meantime I have sold my nikon gear and am now working with Fuji. Fuji does not have full-frame lenses. I have a hard time believing what that photo youtube channel says, that full-frame lenses on cropbodys perform worse.
It simply depends on the lens and whether the lens in question is sharp enough in the middle of its images for the extra resolving power needed for APS-C
Christopher Frost Photography : Thank you for your answer, I aprecier that.
should i buy this 35mm or Sony 35mm 1.8 oss for Sony a6400?
Please tell me what you bought I am in the same situation rn
I'm using it on the A6400. It is pointless to use the lens hood, right?
Flaring might affect the middle of the image as well. So even though the image is cropped on aps-c, you might have loss of contrast in certain conditions. To use a lens hood or not is up to you. I myself use it more for protection because i rarely use clear filters.
Zeiss 2.8 vs 1.8 ? Thoughts?
1.8
So, I want to shoot video at 35mm on my Sony A7siii, what is the best lens in your opinion?
Maybe this one
Oh yeah #7 again! Lol loved the review!
You say there are better options out there but what better 35/1.8 options are there?
The better option is the Samyang 35mm f/1.4. For the same money you get sharper images and a 66% brighter aperture. That's a better option
@@christopherfrost that's isn't a 1.8 and it's huge and heavy. So what better options of 35 1.8 are there? I think you mean there are different options.
@@DustyCR Are you serious?
@@christopherfrost yes of course, for me the 1.4 is a far worse choice. Everyone's definition of "better" is not the same. I have the sony zeiss 35 1.4 as well as the 2.8 but barely use the 1.4 due to it's size and weight.
Hi, what are the better options of which you speak?
Samyang 35mm f/1.4 FE, and the Samyang 35mm f/1.8 is just as good IMO
I wonder how this does compared to the Sigma 30mm or Sigma 56mm F1.4?
Andrew Freeman Check out his reviews of those lenses and all shall be revealed....
@@tyroney2 So he's an all-in-one stop shop?...I this optimism..
Is it supposed to rattle?
Bought this lens last week, I will now proceed to watch this video with ridiculous amounts of anxiety.
edit: well, fuck me
Ouch
Oh hi, OBJ!
What better options do you think there are In Sony or in other Systems? Would you share that?
Look further down the comments for my thoughts on that
Does it work great with the sonya6000 because I was thinking about getting it
Yup
Better lens 35 mm for full frame Sony alpha, for everyday use
Will you try the Sigma 30 1.4 DN for APS C? Thanks
Yup
@@christopherfrost Thanks!
do you notice something sliding inside the lens when you flip it up and down?
Can't remember...don't think so
I know from a German RUclips saying that if not on the camera you can hear something blinding in the lens !
I've bought it literally yesterday... gonna try it and maybe, if it's that bad I'll change it with the Samyang 1.4
Sigma 35mm 1.4 is better..
Azeem Merchant in which way?
Please make a review of sigma 30mm 1.4 EF-M
A review is coming
I wanted to like this lens a lot more, but jeez, for $700, not a chance. I thought about buying it at one point, but it desperately needs some fancier ED glass elements for that coma. It even looks like it has purplish tinting at F1.8 on full frame in the corner compared to the Samyang.
Tom Squires this lens does not do 1.4.
@@jamesjackson4264 fixed, my bad. I was looking at the Samyang.
So should i go samyang or sony?
It's up to you
could you please compare sony 35mm f1.8 with samyang 35mm f1.4? Thanks
Anything decent lens wise for sony fullframe. wide-angle.
The 20mm f1.8 G has had good reviews. A bit more expensive than this 35mm lens, though.