I’m interested in understanding how the autofocus accuracy and AF-C performance compare with the Canon R8 + RF 35mm f/1.8 combination, the Sony A6700 with the Sigma 23mm f/1.4 DC DN combination, and the Sony A7Cii with the FE 35mm f/1.8 combination? I believe that autofocus is more crucial than sharpness, as all the lenses mentioned can deliver an acceptable level of sharpness. Could you please clarify?
It’s not just sharpness that makes a lens good of course. The quality of output is no 1. Whereas different bodies have different levels of AF performance. Of the lot, A7Cii with 35 1.8 will be best for autofocus.
I waited to pull the trigger on this lens for a long time, wondering that I already had the 18 1.4 and the 33 1.4. But I’m so glad I bought it, very very sharp and it fits a niche that I would’ve not seen otherwise. At least for street photography it’s a must have! 🖖
@@FramesTM Each of them gives you a different perspective, and that’s a good thing to keep you seeing differently with each lens. After a while in street photography, you start to see the subtle differences in each lens. You get to understand what subjects would look best at what distance. I used to only use zoom lenses when I first started, but using primes really changes how you look at your subjects. It’s just like using different tools for the same subject, as each one gives you a different feel and look, and over time this helps your eye develop, your pictures are refined and the body of work you do expands. Primes give you a better sense of depth, and if you know how to use your ISO and your F stops, you can bring that subject to life instead of just having it become another zoned subject in the frame.
Hi any chance that you could explain how the aperture value DOF or Bokeh gets smaller when you compare 1.4 to full frame equivalent. Isn’t it just opposite, that the comparable bokeh or DOF is larger, so that you have apfc 1.4 which gets to be around 1.7 or 2?
This gives the same depth of field at f/1.4 as a full frame 35mm would at f/2.1. You multiply by 1.5. So a full frame f/1.4 and even f/1.8 would have shallower depth of field (and more background blur/bigger bokeh balls)
I have this lens and it is pretty much welded to my x-t5. Beautiful image quality. The 33mm and 18mm f1.4 also brilliant lenses.
Thank you!
I’m interested in understanding how the autofocus accuracy and AF-C performance compare with the Canon R8 + RF 35mm f/1.8 combination, the Sony A6700 with the Sigma 23mm f/1.4 DC DN combination, and the Sony A7Cii with the FE 35mm f/1.8 combination?
I believe that autofocus is more crucial than sharpness, as all the lenses mentioned can deliver an acceptable level of sharpness.
Could you please clarify?
It’s not just sharpness that makes a lens good of course. The quality of output is no 1. Whereas different bodies have different levels of AF performance. Of the lot, A7Cii with 35 1.8 will be best for autofocus.
I waited to pull the trigger on this lens for a long time, wondering that I already had the 18 1.4 and the 33 1.4. But I’m so glad I bought it, very very sharp and it fits a niche that I would’ve not seen otherwise. At least for street photography it’s a must have! 🖖
How does it compare with the other two, for you?
@@FramesTM
Each of them gives you a different perspective, and that’s a good thing to keep you seeing differently with each lens. After a while in street photography, you start to see the subtle differences in each lens. You get to understand what subjects would look best at what distance.
I used to only use zoom lenses when I first started, but using primes really changes how you look at your subjects. It’s just like using different tools for the same subject, as each one gives you a different feel and look, and over time this helps your eye develop, your pictures are refined and the body of work you do expands.
Primes give you a better sense of depth, and if you know how to use your ISO and your F stops, you can bring that subject to life instead of just having it become another zoned subject in the frame.
i have it and its simply fantastic
Subscribed ❤ nice detailed review. Looking forward for more 👍
🧡
Quite informative. Thanks😃👍🏻
Frames I would love to see a video from you on how you edit your photos
Cool! Did you like something edits that you saw?
Hi any chance that you could explain how the aperture value DOF or Bokeh gets smaller when you compare 1.4 to full frame equivalent. Isn’t it just opposite, that the comparable bokeh or DOF is larger, so that you have apfc 1.4 which gets to be around 1.7 or 2?
Hey Morten! Thank you for the question! I will answer in an upcoming video
This gives the same depth of field at f/1.4 as a full frame 35mm would at f/2.1. You multiply by 1.5. So a full frame f/1.4 and even f/1.8 would have shallower depth of field (and more background blur/bigger bokeh balls)
@@Ttjam1oh yeah we agree. I read it as if you said that it was the other way round. Thanks for taking time answering 😊
Amazing information 🔥🔥
Thank you
Superb
So thankful
Nice lens if a bit overpriced.
Slightly yes