YYV_146
Well-known
I sold mine because I found that I never used it after getting the 16-35mm F4. The F4 is slower but for the most part better in low light because of the very effective OSS. It's a bigger lens and a zoom but almost as sharp at 35mm and F4...
IMO if the 16-35's size is something that you can live with, go with that one.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Just curious, how do you measure IQ?
The reason I asked is that I have never be able to definitely say one lens is better than the other (within the context of contemporary modern lenses, not comparing triplet from 50's to a T* Zeiss of the 2010's).
Each of the 35mm f/2 lenses that I keep has its own charm. But I can't say that one is definitely better than the others.
This comes down to if you prefer primes or zooms though no? Both are good enough for photography.
Samouraï
Well-known
The one lens is the 55FE.
I had a 35/2.8 FE that I sold (and I'm kicking myself about that, as it was a good copy). I really enjoyed this lens.
The Loxia 35/2 might fit the bill, too.
I had a 35/2.8 FE that I sold (and I'm kicking myself about that, as it was a good copy). I really enjoyed this lens.
The Loxia 35/2 might fit the bill, too.
uhoh7
Mentor
I agree, a good copy of the 16-35 is the best zoom available for the camera, and quite good indeed.
kxl
Social Documentary
I get the impression that while good, it is not in the same league as the 55/1.8. Compared to the Loxia, the 35mm FE is sharper in the center but exhibits quite a bit of light fall-off to the edges and corners. OTOH, the Loxia is not as sharp in the center by just as hair but has significantly less vignetting all the way to the corners.
I shoot several static subjects in different lighting (subjects that I would typically shoot), using the same or a different body (on a tripod) and existing lenses that I have and consider as having superb IQ -- these would include my ZM 50/2.0 Planar on my A7R or my Sigma 35/1.4 and 50.1.4 on my D800e. I use those images to establish my baseline, then vet other lenses against that baseline.
I agree that each lens has its own charm. Some a center-sharp but with vignetting, while others are move even throughout. I own both kinds of lenses. I am generally put off by edge-smearing and to a lesser extent, color casts. For this lens, I am looking for edge-to-edge sharpness.
Haven't thought about a zoom...
uhoh7
Mentor
Whatever you get, be sure to check very closely for decentering and arrange a return beforehand if this is the case. It's an issue even with M glass, common with Canikon, and possibly even more so with the Sony FF E glass. I read stories about this with them pretty often.
That may be true, but there is a lens profile to correct vignetting. And comparing it to, what people consider anyway, to be one of the best lenses out there and saying it is not in the same league is not really a big deal. It is still an excellent lens for actual photography. I'm not the lens testing type.
kxl
Social Documentary
Just to close out this thread, I finally succummed to getting the Kolari mod, and trading my FE 55/1.8 for a ZM 35/2.8. The 55/1.8 is an awesome lens, but I missed the tactile experience of using a manual focus lens and missed having a 35mm lens. I'm happy with the modified A7R and ZM 35/2.8.