Up until the end of last year I was a Fujifilm photographer. I absolutely loved and adored the system but just outgrew it. If I wasn’t shooting in daylight, the photos would always turn out disappointing. Even after investing in f1.2 and f1.4 lenses.
I had a lot of different lenses over the years;
Fujifilm:
18mm f2
23mm f2
35mm f1.4
35mm f2
56mm f1.2
18-55mm f2.8-4.0
16-55mm f2.8
50-140mm f2.8
Samyang:
12mm f2.0
21mm f1.4
35mm f1.2
85mm f1.4
My favourite one by far was the Samyang 21mm f1.4. I loved the focal length, the image quality and look and how compact it was. It was my most used lens (review here).
So when I moved from Fujifilm over to Sony, my priority was to get a ±35mm lens that I absolutely loved and adored. It had to be perfect and not just ok. It would, after all, be the most important lens in my line up.
The amazing thing about the Sony FE mount is the abundance of lens options. That is the #1 reason I moved to Sony. I honestly don’t like the cameras at all, but having an option of over 10 autofocus 35mm lenses, four alone coming from Sony directly, was absolutely incredible to me!
What did I want? Well, I wanted a 35mm lens with an f1.4 aperture. Coming from a crop sensor, I just wanted all that bokeh for once! I’ve always yearned for a full frame 35mm f1.4 lens! So, filtering out the slower f2.0-2.8 lenses, and setting aside the very tasty, but manual focus Voigtlander lenses, I ended up with a shortlist of the following three lenses:
Sony 35mm f1.4 GM
Sony Zeiss 35mm f1.4 ZA
Sigma 35mm f1.4 DG DN
Now, I also own a Sigma 24-70mm f2.8, a lens I really appreciate and use a lot. It’s my workhorse lens. It does everything really well, is versatile because of its zoom range and is so predictable and dependable. I use this lens a lot for more corporate gigs, and/or photo shoots where it’s more important to capture the moment than creating a beautiful image.
Having said that, I’m just not a big fan of Sigma. On paper, they are the best option. Always around the same quality as a GM lens, but much cheaper, and I love that most of the DG DN lenses have an aperture ring, the AFL button and the AF/MF switch. I love that and I wish all my lenses had that! But when it comes to the images, I always find the Sigmas to look a little boring. No matter the focal length. They are the best lens on paper but uninspiring in the real world.
My attention then turned to the two Sony’s. I’ve always been a fan of Zeiss and Voigtlander lenses. I love how these companies manage to make a new interpretation of old designs. They keep a vintage look but with modern quality.
I couldn’t find many sample images that had been taken with the Zeiss and here in Cork city with very limited camera shops, there wasn’t a way for me to try or rent one before buying one. I eventually stumbled across one on eBay for about €650 I believe. I thought, “F*** it, if I don’t like it, I’ll just sell it again and get something else.” I was a little bit worried that the images might have too much of a vintage look.
I got the lens, and man, was it big! Much bigger than I was used to from my Fujifilm days. It’s basically as big as the Sigma 24-70mm! Sadly, it wasn’t great a copy either. The lens hood is a two-piece metal and plastic construction that is glued together. It had separated and was in two pieces. The glue had hardened and wasn’t sticky anymore.
The aperture ring was also very sloppy, you could barely feel the individual 1/3 stop aperture clicks. As was the aperture de-clicking switch. That switch literally just slid from one side to the other. There was no discernible click at all. It had purely become a slider. I was very disappointed. Then I discovered that this lens also had the dreaded de-centered lens elements. So the corners on one side were sharp at infinity and the other side was blurry. Not a great first impression.
De-Clicking Aperture
Not only is the aperture ‘click’ switch sloppy, but it’s also not properly aligned with the markings.
A 100% close up comparing the best corner with the worst corner when focusing to infinity. Probably not the worst, and I’m not sure if I would have really noticed it in actual photos but not something I wanted to risk having.
The left two corners were worse, in particular the top left. Both right hand corners were ok in my first copy.
De-centered lens elements on my first copy of this lens:
But…
But, and it’s a big but, I absolutely loved the images that came out of this lens! They were absolutely gorgeous! I didn’t want to send this lens back, I didn’t want to let it go but I had to be an adult and do the right thing. Luckily eBay was great and I got a full refund.
You see, for me, and if you read all my other lens reviews, I don’t really care about the technical details or capabilities of a lens, except for focal length and to a certain degree, the f-stop and AF performance (although less so now with the Sony system). Sharpness, distortion, sun stars, vignetting, etc. don’t really bother me at all. For me it’s really important how the lens renders the image, the colours are very important, micro-contrast and bokeh; not just the amount and the way the bokeh looks, but also at the transitions of the in focus areas and how they transition out of focus.
When I wrote the review for the Fujifilm 56mm f1.2 for instance, I wrote how clinical and boring it looked. At one of my shoots involving the Lord Mayor of Cork, I photographed the event with the 56mm and the Samyang 21mm f1.4. Besides the difference in focal length which is obvious to see, you can spot which photo had been taken by which lens so easily because of their rendering! See the photos here. I much more preferred the rendering of the 21mm over the 56mm. Which is why I eventually got rid of the 56mm.
Shortly after returning the first, bad copy of the Sony Zeiss 35mm f1.4, I got a much better copy from an actual photo store and have been shooting with it for the last year. The aperture ring is still not as tight as I’d like it to be, same with the switch (which I wish they had just done without since I never use it), but this new copy is way better than the last. All the glass elements are centred correctly, but the lens hood did fall apart again, about 4 months later. I glued it back together. It’s not a great construction at all though, the Sigma one is miles better. The Zeiss one has actually come off a few times during weddings or events I was shooting, while the camera was dangling at my side on a harness.
Lens Hood Repairs
The two red dots on the lens body and lens hood don’t align either. But this times it’s my fault. Sorta. For not gluing the lens hood together perfectly.
Then again, this isn’t a fault that should have occured in the first place.
I’m kinda straying into the next chapter already.
What do I not like about the lens?
Vignetting. I love a lens that vignettes a bit but this lens vignettes a lot at f1.4. So much so, that when I correct the vignetting in the lens corrections module in Lightroom, I then have to underexposure the photo again on the exposure slider to correct for that. Usually by about half a stop. I’ve never come across a lens that vignettes so much. Well, to be fair, it doesn’t get very dark in the corners like some lenses, it’s just that the vignetting seems to travel so far into the centre of the image. The Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 vignettes heavier at 24mm in the corners, but the vignetting starts very far into the corner and then transitions heavily.
Sharpness. I don’t mind it at all, I’ve heard it’s not the sharpest lens. For me it’s perfectly acceptable though and I have never noticed it not being sharp enough.
Chromatic Abberations. I use this lens a lot for portraits in the sunlight. The amount of different colours this lens can create in high-contrast scenarios is incredible. Usually it’s purple fringing, but it can be green, it can be cyan, it can be magenta. In the out of focus areas you’ll often see green fringing, like in the following photo. I really dislike CA and LoCA, I don’t mind other defects on lenses, like vignetting or distortion but CA is probably the thing that annoys me most. So, I wish it didn’t have that.
Which brings me to the next issue; size. I touched on this above, but I really don’t understand why this lens is so big. Usually, big lenses are designed to be ultra-corrected. They’re that big to not have any vignetting or because they are apochramatic or ultra-sharp or ultra-light sensitive or have macro capabilities. This lens doesn’t do any of that. I don’t mind it’s size too much in a professional environment, ie. using it for a professional shoot. But, I would never take it with me for personal occasion. It’s more that I’m just confused why it’s so big.
Bokeh. In general, the bokeh has been my cup of tea. It’s not ultra-smooth, it’s more characterful. It does show a touch of swirl at closer focusing distances and does have very obvious highlights, similar to the Planar lenses. I do like the style of it, for portraits and weddings. I wouldn’t really use it too much for my more corporate work. I have had two times where the bokeh looked dreadful (but only two times so far). Maybe dreadful is too extreme but the wedding photo below is the only time I was properly disappointed in this lens. The bokeh can be a bit harsher, and with the strong summer sun hitting down at an awkward angle, it made the bokeh look like something from a cheap, manual lens. This was the only time where I preferred the look of the Sigma 24-70mm over this lens.
For full transparency, I did accidentality have the ‘Electronic First Curtain Shutter’ active, which could explain part of the problem.
An unedited photo:
An edited photo from the same wedding, at a similar time of day, in a similar position, looking in the same direction. This time taken with the Sigma 24-70mm f2.8. Still a busy background but much nicer looking, in my opinion.
That all sounds extremely negative. Is there anything I like about this lens?
I know! This all sounds terrible. Why am I wasting my time with this lens, and with repairing the lens hood and ordering two copies?
Well, it’s a weird one. I have never had a lens that I loved so much, yet had so many individual, little complaints about. So what do I love about it? Well, as I touched on a little already in the intro; I just absolutely adore the images it produces! They are so life like, I hate using the terminology of 3D pop, but it really is there. The photos from my Sigma look so flat in comparison. You can take any photo with this lens and it looks amazing. It’s not just down to being able to blur the sh*t out of the background, it’s just the rendering that’s unreal!
The micro-contrast from the Zeiss, in combination with the sharpness of the Sony sensor, mean that for the very first time, I’m actually dialling back the clarity in Lightroom by about -15 to even -20. This is great for the clients I’m photographing, as it makes it very forgiving on the skin. So keep that in mind when you’re looking at these photos that they’re all lacking a little bit of that micro-contrast.
The autofocus is also lightning quick for a lens this big, in the sun it’s as fast as my Sigma 24-70mm, but it loses it’s confidence a little in very dark situations (although this could be due to my older A7 III camera). But tracking is unbelievably good for such a large lens with an f1.4 aperture. Sony, ey? Aren’t they just amazing?
It’s difficult to really put my love for this lens in words, but put it this way, it never leaves my camera bag and it’s kinda forced me to do so many shoots with it this year. I ended up shooting so many more portraits with it and this wider focal length, whereas last year I would have used the Fujifilm XF 35mm f1.4 for (so a 50mm). That’s how much I adore the images of this lens. The depth and rendering you get from this lens is unbelievable.
Which is why I am just going to post a bucket load of sample images I have taken with it here. There are surprisingly few sample images on the internet of this lens, so I thought I’d post some to help people make up their own mind. It might be your cup of tea, or maybe you just drink coffee. Have a look below either way.
If this lens hadn’t blown me away this much, I probably would have, and came close to, buying the Sigma 35mm f1.4 DG DN. With it’s aperture ring, reliable AF, AF/MF, fantastic lens hood and at such a bargain of a price, this is the lens to buy when you’re looking at specifications and facts. When taking the artistry into the equation, and looking at the photos themselves, I personally prefer the Zeiss. Which actually is a bargain in itself, with used prices usually around €600-650.
Colours aren’t as vibrant as with the Batis range, and especially not like the Loxia lenses, but you’d have a hard time finding any other lens like that. The photos aren’t dull though. Not at all.
Sony Zeiss 35mm f1.4 ZA Distagon vs Sony Zeiss 55mm f1.8 ZA Sonnar
Another fantastic aspect of this lens, is that it creates a very similar look to the Zeiss 55mm f1.8. I really like having these two primes on me for events and weddings. I find using a 35mm and a 75/85mm combo, as would be traditional, is too extreme for me. The gap is just too large. So I’ve always enjoyed using a 28/35mm and a 50/55mm combo.
If we compare the following two images, which are very similar to each other, that I happened to take on two different days, it’s hard to tell which one is which on first glance. The give away is that the 55mm produces more swirl than the 35mm, has less vignetting, but also lacks that depth and 3D pop a bit.
Colours tend to be similar enough, and the bokeh in both lenses have that typical Zeiss look, not smooth but characterful, with the highlights appearing brighter than on other lenses. The bokeh always looks like blotches of oil paint, done by an artist, rather than someone using the sharpness slider in Photoshop to “de-focus” the background layer.
The biggest difference in these photos is that they’re not the exact same bench, so the background is a little different, though similar. I was also surprised how little difference there is in the amount of bokeh. Sure, I was closer to the family with the 35mm, but all in all, very similar as well. If only the 55mm had an aperture ring and visually, a better looking design. It’s so bland looking and looks like a budget lens. Oh what I would also do for all of my lenses to sport an aperture ring!
Sony Zeiss 35mm f1.4 ZA Distagon Sample Photo
Sony Zeiss 55mm f1.8 ZA Sonnar Sample Photo
Since this isn’t the fairest comparison, another way of comparing these two lenses is to check out these two photo shoots I did. I used both of these lenses for both shoots, having swapped lenses halfway through the shoot. Can you tell which lens I used for which photo when they are in a set? It’s much more difficult to tell here, I find.
Verdict
When you get a good copy, 10/10 would buy again! It’s my favourite lens for professional portraits, family shoots, couple shoots, weddings and engagements! Definitely still a strong contender, even with all the other options available in 2022/2023 if you like the look of the images this lens produces. If not, you’d probably be better with something else with a more modern look.
Enjoy the sample photos below!
UPDATE: See how it compares to the Samyang AF 35mm f1.8 lens with my review here.
