Review

Samyang AF 35mm f1.8 FE Review and Sample Photos /  by Jan

Why the Samyang AF 35mm f1.8, don’t you have a 35mm lens already?

I absolutely love and adore my Sony Zeiss 35mm f1.4 lens, even if I come across a bit negative in my review here. But it has the right amount of character, and beautiful f1.4 bokeh, while still being sharp enough and having great contrast and flare resistance to create very professional looking images. But it does weight 630g. And due to some unrelated back problems I was having, I needed to down size without losing too much image quality.

So the battery grips came off the cameras and I lost a battery. 313 grams saved per camera. I bought a Godox V350 to replace my V860iii and V1. 284 grams saved. A good start. And with the plethora of small 35mm lenses around, it being the lens I take with to 98% of my shoots, this would be a great place to save some more weight.

Ok, but why the Samyang?

The options, for me, boiled down to the Sony 35mm f1.8, the Samyang 35mm f1.8 and the Sigma 35mm f2 DG DN. The Sigma is the heaviest out of the three, and as much as I would love to love the tiny i-series, I just don’t love the way Sigma lenses render images. They all (especially my 24-70mm) render such a flat and sterile image. Which I don’t mind when photographing events, but it really gets in the way for me, when taking portraits. Between the Sony and Samyang I didn’t see much of a difference, and personally I feel like the Sony is incredibly overpriced, so I just went for the affordable Samyang.

First impressions

My first impressions were:

• It’s tiny and lightweight (420 grams lighter than my Sony Zeiss)

• Doesn’t have a very high build quality

• But I like the images

UPDATE 2026:

This Samyang was a great tiny option. But at the end of 2025 I have decided to replace it with this lens instead.

What do I like?

While it’s not a definitive replacement to my Sony Zeiss, it is a great gap till my back is feeling better again.

It’s cheap!

It is also nice to have a cheap lens on the camera that I don’t care that much about. The Sony Zeiss isn’t necessarily expensive but it is a lens where you might need to go through a copy or two or three until you find a good one. And mine’s great. So I am a bit protective about it. But with the Samyang, I will gladly ‘throw’ around the lens at weddings and events, and get some dynamic action shots, and not care too much about it. It’s also great to just throw the lens into a camera bag, to have just in case. It’s so small and light, you’d almost forget it’s there.

AF is pretty good

I must admit, I have more keepers with my Sony Zeiss and there is a difference in AF tracking. But I was surprised how snappy and good this lens’ AF still is. I wouldn’t use it for anything too important or critical, but for the portrait shoots that I mostly do with this lens, where if needs be, I can re-create a moment or situation easily, it is perfectly usable. And having said that, I have used this lens for several weddings as well and it’s not let me down.

IQ and rendering is good enough

I really like the way the photos are rendered. The flare isn’t too distracting and it doesn’t wash out too easily. The contrast and colours a good. The colours are a little muted but are neutral enough so that they do fit in well with the rest of my lenses with just a little bit of extra time in Lightroom. I don’t get that amazing 3D rendering, but it’s much more life like than the Sigma.

Everything is good enough to very good.

What’s not to like?

Not every lens can be perfect, and neither is this one. Even for the price.

Sharpness and Bokeh

The only thing that lets it down a little bit in the image quality department is the sharpness and the bokeh in certain situations. Now, I’m no sharpness guy. I’ve never bothered looking at a sharpness chart ever and truly think it’s a much overhyped topic. But this lens could use with just a little bit more resolution. But again, it’s good enough.

The bokeh is great in most cases, a little bit swirly and old-school, which I like, but in some cases it gets really muddy and gross. At least to my eye. Here are some examples (2nd photo, trees in the background):

You could smooth out the worst offenders in post, and maybe it’s just me being picky but I don’t like this look a lot.

Custom Modes

Does anyone actually use these? A dedicated aperture ring would have been way more useful.

Summary

As I’ve written this line a few times now, this lens can be summarized as ‘good enough’. It was never intended to be an amazing lens, and for the price, everything is just good enough. Now, I am really picky when it comes to my lenses and the way the images look, especially when it comes to my 35mm lenses. It’s my favourite and most used lens, so the look of it is critical to me and my brand. I wouldn’t use this lens for the rest of my life, but that I haven’t immediately replaced it and am not counting the days to go back to my Sony Zeiss 35mm is a huge compliment to it. I’m in no rush to going back, and for a threehundred-something Euro lens, that’s not bad. That’s really not bad at all!

I do also have the Samyang AF 75mm f1.8 lens and often couple these lenses up together on two bodies, and they’ve been great! I will write a review on that lens soon in the future.

Would I recommend it?

If you want the best of the best, why are you even looking at this lens? If you’re looking for something small and compact or if you’re looking for the very cheapest AF lens, absolutely, go ahead and buy this thing!

Check out my other gear reviews here.

Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 DG DN Art FE Review with Sample Images and Portraits /  by Jan

This lens is what I call my ‘Professional Lens’.

What does that mean? Does that mean I photograph with amateur lenses as well? No, not at all, but this is the lens I chose when I want to have the most professional result.

I have owned this lens for a year and a half now, and taken 21k photos with it. This is my long term review on this lens from a professional photographer’s perspective.

So let me explain why I call this my professional lens.

What I do

I do a lot of different types of photography. From wedding photography to couples and family shoots, to events, corporate gigs and even some product photography and real estate photography.

But I’d say what I do the most are portraits. And usually, for those photo shoots, my trusty Sony Zeiss 35mm f1.4 ZA Distagon or my Sony Zeiss 55mm f1.8 ZA Sonnar would be my go tos. That would depend on the amount of people I’m photographing, the environment and my general mood that day.

Sample Photos

So these shoots would have been shot with the Sony Zeiss 35mm 1.4 ZA:
Example 1
Example 2 - three of them are taken with the 70-180mm

These were taken with the Sony Zeiss 55mm 1.8 ZA:
Example 1 - the forest shots
Example 2 - the outdoor shots

And these were taken with the Sigma 24-70mm 2.8 Dg DN Art:
Example 1
Example 2

These lenses are some of my favourites ever, and I love the way they render. They really do have that 3D look to them, that I don’t see from all fast primes in these focal lengths (especially the Sigma primes often look flat and boring to me), and I do love Sony Zeiss swirly bokeh and strong character.

But, this character isn’t always appropriate. For weddings and couple shoots yes! But for corporate headshots, less so.

Sigma 24-70mm 2.8 DG DN Art Characteristics

So I use this Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 DG DN lens for all my corporate gigs and occasions where I need a clean, realistic depiction of the subject I’m photographing. And that’s the fantastic thing about this lens. For me, it will never blow me away with the way it renders, but it is so consistent and unsurprising (that’s a compliment). With my other lenses, in tough conditions, the characterful bokeh becomes, let’s say, a little too characterful at times. Or the 55mm suffers more from flaring which isn’t always pleasant. No such thing here with the Sigma 24-70mm DG DN. It’s always sharp, from close focus to infinity. It always handles the background well. It handles flaring really well. It’s good in all focal lengths, with no massively noticeable drop off to either end. And the AF is the best of any lens I own.

In daylight, the autofocus is on par with the 35mm, 55mm, and the Tamron 70-180mm. But in difficult and dark lighting conditions, it absolutely obliterates the 35mm & 55mm. I have yet to use the 70-180mm indoors.

The close focus ability is also fantastic. While not being a true macro, it can focus close enough for my needs and has prevented me from needing to buy a dedicated macro lens for product photography or for close ups of wedding rings etc. I really appreciate this feature a lot!

I also appreciate:

• the fantastic quality of the lens hood and that the hood can only be removed by pressing a release button

• the build quality in general

• and the price!

Close focus

It’s not just handy for product photography, but for babies too!

What would I like to change?

I would love for all of my lenses to have aperture rings! I currently have five lenses with a Sony FE mount and only two of my lenses have an aperture ring. I know all (or most?) of the GM lenses do have them but it would be nice if all Sony FE mount lenses had them. I would also gladly lose the ‘AFL’ button. I have no clue how this button is supposed to be of any use to me. I’d love for it to have a use but there’s no practical purpose I can think of.

My only niggle with the image quality otherwise is the vignetting wide open at 24mm. I don’t mind vignetting at all, my 35mm has tons of it but the vignetting here is very difficult to correct. It doesn’t penetrate the image much, only really in the far corners, but it is very abrupt. There’s not a lot of transition area. It looks like the image circle of the lens is just not big enough at this extreme.

Vignetting

Here is a great example of the vignetting at 24mm, wide open, uncorrected in Lightroom.

Then there is the Lightroom lens profile. It tends to over-correct for vignetting, leaving me with brighter corners. I need to then manually adjust the photos by eye, if I want to get rid of the vignette.

Talking about the focal length in general. 24-70mm is a very popular, and by now, a traditional focal length. Coming from Fujifilm though with it’s 16-55mm f2.8 (eq. 24-82.5mm) lens, or looking at Tamron’s 35-150mm f2.0-2.8 lens, or Canon’s 28-70mm f2.0, I wonder if this limitation of it’s focal range and aperture is really reflective of the current technology available. The Canon is hugely expensive but the Tamron is actually really affordable (the Samyang version even more so), so I wonder also if an improvement in this regard would really warrant a huge price increase.

But I would love it if they increased the focal length to 85mm or 100mm even, and if they increased the aperture on the wide end to f2.0, I could see myself leaving the Sony Zeiss 35mm at home for certain shoots.

The extended focal length, while retaining f2.8 and the great image quality would be the most interesting to me.

So, would I recommend this lens?

If you’re doing corporate work, yes! This lens, in combination with any of the A7 Sony cameras will deliver a high-end result that your clients will love. From corporate events to headshots to product photography to corporate environmental photos, this lens will do it all! Predictable, albeit, a little sterile and boring.

However, if you just need a zoom lens for weddings or non-corporate events, like club photography or concert photography, I would probably just grab one of the more compact f2.8 lenses like the Sigma 28-70mm or the Tamron 28-75mm. They’re cheaper, lighter and would fit in a bit better with my primes in regards to the look of the images.