1. Cagey75

    Cagey75

    Messages:
    9,402
    Name:
    Keith
    Edit My Images:
    No
    No denying the A7III is a bit of a powerhouse all-round.
     
    rookies likes this.
  2. jonneymendoza

    jonneymendoza

    Messages:
    7,100
    Edit My Images:
    No
  3. Raymond Lin

    Raymond Lin

    Messages:
    6,412
    Name:
    Raymond
    Edit My Images:
    No
    The Ryker relaxing with a coffee and pastry.

    [​IMG]
     
    photosample and jj_glos like this.
  4. jonneymendoza

    jonneymendoza

    Messages:
    7,100
    Edit My Images:
    No
  5. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    18,689
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    The 55mm f1.8 is excellent and quite compact and they managed a 28mm f2 too so maybe it'd be possible to do a quite compact 35mm f1.8 if they wanted to. And of course there are some in DSLR land.

    Dunno why no one has done one to date but looking at what has been possible within the Sony eco system and outside it can't be impossible.
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2018
    Jesus Quintana likes this.
  6. f/2.8

    f/2.8

    Messages:
    1,735
    Name:
    Tommy
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Big difference between a 50-55mm lens than everything else it’s far and away the easiest focal length for lens manufacturers to make. The 28mm is absolute gash and is an f/2 lens again they made a choice to not make it a f/1.8 lens.

    They could easily make a 35mm f/1.8 I just think that they don’t see it as a viable option as they can’t make it small enough due to the limitations of E-Mount. No point having it the same pusillanimous size as the f/1.4 options.
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2018
  7. LeeRatters

    LeeRatters

    Messages:
    890
    Name:
    Lee
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    A bit of local woodland.....

    [​IMG]
    ***
    by Lee, on Flickr

    [​IMG]
    ***
    by Lee, on Flickr
     
    NickTB, Phil90, ianmarsh and 6 others like this.
  8. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    18,689
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I just don't buy any of that. I don't think I want to believe that making a compact 35mm f1.8 is impossible due to some limitation in the mount as if it is they've f****d up big time and I equally don't want to believe that a f1.8 needs to be approaching the size of the high end f1.4's as nothing we've seen to date seems to point that way. f1.8 lenses are generally smaller and lighter than f1.4's in just about any focal length I can think of. We have existing compact native mount MF f1.4 and f2 lenses and whilst adding AF may increase bulk and weight I just can't see it leading to the lens being the size of a Sony or Sigma f1.4. That just doesn't make sense to me.

    As to why Sony haven't done one I can only guess. Recourses taken up doing other things? Pointing people towards the existing f2.8 or f1.4 lenses? Stupidity? Sigma seem to have been aiming at higher end f1.4's but if it's not impossible to do a compact 35mm f1.8 maybe they'll get around to it one day. If not and no one does one I may just give up one day and buy something else. Limiting my native lens line up will hopefully not make it too costly a move for me.
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2018
  9. RPhotos

    RPhotos

    Messages:
    267
    Edit My Images:
    No
    But what about the flange length? are there any full-frame compact mirrorless 35mm 1.8 lens out there?
     
  10. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    18,689
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I thought the shorter registration distance was suppose to help at wider FoV? Isn't that what we've been told?

    As I said, I have a 35mm f1.4 that's compact, MF though and there's also a MF f2 that's also compact. Surely dropping that 35mm f1.4 to f1.8 and adding AF wouldn't make it the size of a Sony 35mm f1.4.

    Lets wait and see as I bet if Sony never do one Nikon or Canon will.
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2018
  11. addicknchips

    addicknchips

    Messages:
    6,333
    Name:
    Jonathan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    There’s one dropping on the new canon mirrorless next month. 35mm f1.8 macro. Looks small and compact.

    https://www.jessops.com/p/canon/rf-35mm-f-1-8-is-macro-stm-lens-159022
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2018
  12. old bloke

    old bloke

    Messages:
    468
    Name:
    bob
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I think a small and light 35mm1.8 AF lens is achievable you only have to look at the size and weight difference between Sony's own 85mm 1.8 and 1.4 lenses to realise that
    if Sony don't do it someone else will, my bet would be on Tamron.
     
  13. Livin The Dream

    Livin The Dream

    Messages:
    4,015
    Name:
    Kris
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I read a video guys blog the other night who was raving about the 28 f2 lens. How do you mean, gash? Still unsure what 24 to get. Might look at the 25 Batis but seems a lot of money for an occasional use lens for me, and f2.
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2018
  14. JJ!

    JJ!

    Messages:
    5,212
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I love how a lot of these reviewers are suddenly saying that 1 card slot is not a deal breaker and that the Z7 is suddenly good for action.

    I’m sure these people get paid by the companies (some Sony reviews are no exception).
     
  15. JJ!

    JJ!

    Messages:
    5,212
    Edit My Images:
    No
    28 f2 seems to get a lot of love and hate!

    It’s a shame that the 50mm is not just that little bit better and also didn’t extend during focus! The 28/50 combo is a good set up IMO!
     
  16. F/1.4

    F/1.4

    Messages:
    1,884
    Name:
    Anthony
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I had the 28mm (a few copies) and didn't like the performance at all.
     
  17. twist

    twist

    Messages:
    14,519
    Edit My Images:
    No
    That's how they get hits, slate it one minute, then praise it the next.
     
  18. Livin The Dream

    Livin The Dream

    Messages:
    4,015
    Name:
    Kris
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I'm really pleasantly surprised with the 55 zeiss. There's nothing detrimental for me between 50mm and 55mm, son get used to that. But for such a small little lens, it's great.
     
  19. JJ!

    JJ!

    Messages:
    5,212
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Yeah the 55mm looks nice, but will take some saving for now haha!
     
  20. f/2.8

    f/2.8

    Messages:
    1,735
    Name:
    Tommy
    Edit My Images:
    No
    It isn't really a zeiss though. Just uses zeiss coatings.

    I also really like the 55mm, for personal work it is great just because the I.Q is pretty good and it is so small.

    In terms of performance thought the Sigma Art 50mm is a much better lens but it's huge.

    If I was using a 50mm for work I would have definitely got the Sigma Art 50mm instead.

    The 55mm is excellent for what I use it for though. I have it paired up along with the 24mm G.M as my light weight travel kit.
     
    Livin The Dream likes this.
  21. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    18,689
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Tamron did one for DSLR's and even with an adapter that lens or the similar Nikon or Canon would still be smaller than a Sony f1.4.
     
  22. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    18,689
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I'll have a think as time goes by and the newer systems fill out. At the moment it's difficult to get time to myself to go out and take pictures and I can't say how long this situation will last. I've asked and asked for help, pleaded really, but the help I got amounted to half a day here and there and even that very quickly evaporated so in some ways it's pretty pointless spending anything on gear but then I think that when I do get time to go out and pursue my little hobby I might as well enjoy it with the kit I want to use so why not indulge myself... So at some point if for example Nikon offer a good enough body and nice 35 and 85mm f1.8's I'd have no problem buying but to save hassle and expense I'd much rather Sony or Sigma or Tamron got around to a nice Sony fit 35mm f1.8 so that I didn't have the hassle of selling all of my current native Sony stuff.
     
    addicknchips likes this.
  23. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    18,689
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I was shocked when I got one. I used to think that I wouldn't ever want a better lens than the old (non Art) Sigma 50mm f1.4 but the Sony f1.8 is better than any 50mm I've used. I do notice the extra 5mm though. Actually the thinking I'd never want better also extends to 85mm as I loved the Sigma f1.4 but the Sony f1.8 is better, just not f1.4.
     
  24. JJ!

    JJ!

    Messages:
    5,212
    Edit My Images:
    No
  25. RPhotos

    RPhotos

    Messages:
    267
    Edit My Images:
    No

    They have had 5 years to make a compact 35 1.8, with some like I’ve 100 e mount full frame lenses available, you would of thought that if there was enough of a demand/ it was possible to make a suitable quality version they would of by now. Or at least said they are working on it lie tamron did with the 28-75, they announced it long before they actually let anyone test it etc.

    At least everyone who moaned persistently about the lack of 35mm 1.8’s can now get the canon r mount version and cameras
     
  26. woof woof

    woof woof

    Messages:
    18,689
    Name:
    Alan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I suppose it depends what the priorities are. Some people think that compact and reasonably priced 35 and 85mm f1.8's are basic staples of a good system whilst others would prefer a 50mm and others would prefer SOTA f1.4's. Some prefer zooms and of those some would prefer f4's and some f2.8's. I suppose it would be ideal if there was a set of lenses to suit everyone and the Sony system has filled out a lot to the point that we have most things now and indeed we have reasonably priced compact 50 and 85mm f1.8's, they just haven't so far given us a 35mm. I'm sure they could do one if they decided to. I just don't believe it's impossible due to some strange limitation of the mount... Stick an adapter on a Canikon DSLR f1.8 and it'd still be smaller than the Sony or Sigma f1.4's.

    The glaring omissions for me are the 35mm f1.8, a longer macro (150mm?) and I'd add a 50mm macro to that little list, one with a decent focus system as the one I had was rubbish and went straight back.

    PS.
    Talking about glaring things the Nikon Whatsit has a max shutter speed of 1/2,000 with EFCS. I'd find that unacceptable as I don't want to go back to fitting and removing ND's because of shutter speed limitations. I hope they either cure the shutter shock or somehow get around that limitation. Given the choice of swapping my A7 and AF 35mm f2.8 or MF f1.4 for a Nikon with a compact 35mm f1.8, if they have one, and that limitation I'll keep the Sony gear and live with the lenses I have.
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2018
  27. JJ!

    JJ!

    Messages:
    5,212
    Edit My Images:
    No
    But I think there is a demand? I best if one came out it would out-sell a lot of other Sony glass. But maybe thats what the worry is, it stops sales of the bigger lenses.

    I mean take Nikon, the 35mm f1.8g. I believe it out sells the 1.4g by a large margain.
     
  28. f/2.8

    f/2.8

    Messages:
    1,735
    Name:
    Tommy
    Edit My Images:
    No
    There isn't though not really.

    For those that want a light weight 35mm there is the 35mm f/2.8. For those that want a high quality lens with excellent optics there is the 35mm f/1.4

    Would seem a bit overkill to have a 3 different 35mm lenses, would only make sense if they where to discontinue the 35mm f/2.8.

    They won't be able to make a 35mm f/1.8 which is smaller or lighter weight than the f/2.8 version or even an equivalent weight and size due to the restrictions of the mount.

    Can't see it happening any time soon.
     
  29. twist

    twist

    Messages:
    14,519
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Why do you think EFCS over 1/2000 is such an amazing thing? Its not like the camera is limited to 1/2000 completely.
     
  30. addicknchips

    addicknchips

    Messages:
    6,333
    Name:
    Jonathan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    the above EFCS limit is the same with the fuji i think. personally not had an issue with shutter shock.
    mechanical shutter maxes out ay 1/8000 and electronic 1/32000.
     
  31. twist

    twist

    Messages:
    14,519
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Exactly my point, its not a dealbreaker and it doesn't force the use of ND. Shutter shock mainly effects images at VERY low shutter speeds, well below 1/2000.
     
    jonneymendoza and addicknchips like this.
  32. Radiohead

    Radiohead Mine sucks

    Messages:
    3,795
    Name:
    Guy
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Heads up chaps - I'm selling a Batis 25mm and 55mm f1.8 in the classifieds....
     
  33. RPhotos

    RPhotos

    Messages:
    267
    Edit My Images:
    No

    I wonder how many more 35mm 1.8’s canon sells over the 1.4l
     
  34. Raymond Lin

    Raymond Lin

    Messages:
    6,412
    Name:
    Raymond
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Street food in Taipei.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  35. Livin The Dream

    Livin The Dream

    Messages:
    4,015
    Name:
    Kris
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Upgrading? I’d have gone for the 25 but need to move other bits on yet. Bad timing.
     
  36. Radiohead

    Radiohead Mine sucks

    Messages:
    3,795
    Name:
    Guy
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Going for the 24/1.4 (Lots of winter weddings ahead) and the 50/1.4....
     
  37. Raymond Lin

    Raymond Lin

    Messages:
    6,412
    Name:
    Raymond
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Nice!

    (why i didn't bothered with the Zeiss Batis or the 55/1.8), good as they are, the 1.4 is always calling.
     
  38. jonneymendoza

    jonneymendoza

    Messages:
    7,100
    Edit My Images:
    No
    1.8 easier for travelling
     
  39. RPhotos

    RPhotos

    Messages:
    267
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Or Get both ;) a lighter wallet then and maybe no way to travel :)
     
    jonneymendoza likes this.
  40. jonneymendoza

    jonneymendoza

    Messages:
    7,100
    Edit My Images:
    No
    It's only half a stop more light... Also at the time of buying those lenses there was no 1.4.

    I also use to be primary a zoom guy
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice