Viltrox AF 35mm f/1.8 Review

Viltrox 35mm f/1.8 Focus Speed and Performance

As a third-party budget lens, the Viltrox AF 35mm f/1.8’s autofocus performance was always going to be scrutinized under a magnifying glass. And while it didn’t perform perfectly, it still exceeded my expectations here.

In short, the lens autofocuses quickly and quietly, similar to name-brand lenses. I didn’t encounter any issues focusing in low light, and the AF had no difficulty locking onto low-contrast subjects. During my entire time in the field with the Viltrox AF 35mm f/1.8, I relied upon autofocus and never felt the need to switch to manual focus.

That said, in a lab environment, I did notice that autofocus accuracy and consistency were not quite as high as most name-brand lenses. When autofocusing on a test target, the Viltrox never went wildly off the mark. But it would occasionally front-focus or back-focus to a small degree – detectable in a lab but not obvious in real-world conditions.

As for the lens’s close-focusing capabilities, it’s pretty weak. You get a maximum magnification of just 0.1x (1:10) with the Viltrox AF 35mm f/1.8, which is worst-in-class. It’s fine for larger subjects, but not workable for serious close-up photography.

Distortion

The Viltrox AF 35mm f/1.8 exhibits just 0.80% pincushion distortion as measured in the lab. Adobe’s default correction in Lightroom does a good job eliminating this distortion, and it never becomes a problem in practice. Here’s a simulation of 0.80% pincushion distortion for reference:

Vignetting

In uncorrected images, the Viltrox 35mm f/1.8 has moderate levels of vignetting. It’s high enough that you’ll probably want to correct it much of the time at f/1.8 and f/2, but at least by f/2.8, vignetting diminishes significantly.

Here’s a full chart of vignetting levels:

Lateral Chromatic Aberration

There is a negligible amount of chromatic aberration on the Viltrox AF 35mm f/1.8 at every aperture. Here’s the chart:

Anything under about one pixel is almost impossible to notice in real-world images, even with chromatic aberration corrections turned off. The amounts you can see in the chart above are more befitting of a high-end lens, not some cheap third-party optic! Props to Viltrox for keeping lateral CAs so low on this lens.

Sharpness

The moment you’ve all been waiting for! I was curious how the Viltrox AF 35mm f/1.8 would hold up in sharpness considering that it’s a pretty cheap lens. Here’s what my testing showed:

This is performance is fine but not great. Sharpness is pretty consistent across the frame, and corner sharpness even rivals some much more expensive lenses. However, central and midframe sharpness are weak for a 35mm prime, and stopping down doesn’t improve the overall performance very much.

There’s also a ton of wavy field curvature on the Viltrox 35mm f/1.8, which is responsible for the midframes performing worse than the corners at most aperture values. Focus shift is present on this lens, too – so, for maximum sharpness, make sure to set your aperture first, then focus second.

For context, here’s how the more expensive Nikon Z 35mm f/1.8 S performs:

The Nikon Z 35mm f/1.8 S is much sharper in the center and midframes, although the corners are a closer battle. From f/1.8 through f/4, it’s actually the Viltrox whose corners are sharper. That suddenly changes at f/5.6, where the Nikon’s corners take the lead and retain it through f/16. Certainly, the Nikon lens is sharper overall, but for a budget choice, I’m fine with how the Viltrox 35mm f/1.8 holds up.

Next, let’s see how the Viltrox AF 35mm f/1.8 compares to a popular zoom lens at 35mm, the Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S:

At a given aperture value, the Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S is sharper in both the center and midframes – pretty substantially so. Meanwhile, the corners of the Viltrox are sharper until f/11, at which point it falls off faster than most lenses. Thus, at f/11 and f/16, the Nikon lens is sharper anywhere you look. Again, it’s an acceptable enough performance by the Viltrox AF 35mm f/1.8 that matches its nature as a budget lens.

You may also want to check out my comparison of the Viltrox AF 24mm f/1.8 versus the AF 35mm f/1.8, too. Both lenses are priced the same and perform similarly, so the right choice for you will most likely come down to focal length. I personally prefer the Viltrox AF 24mm f/1.8 because it does a better job undercutting the competition in price. (There aren’t a lot of cheap 24mm wide-aperture primes.)

Bokeh

Bokeh is another word for the qualities of the background blur in a photo. “Good” bokeh is completely subjective, since different photographers have their own preferences for how the background blur looks. That said, photographers commonly want their background blur to be soft, not distracting. Out-of-focus highlights that are round, uniform, and soft-edged are usually considered favorable.

To me, the Viltrox AF 35mm f/1.8 has somewhat busy bokeh. Out-of-focus specular highlights take on a purple or green tint thanks to longitudinal chromatic aberration, and they have fairly defined edges. Here’s a very typical example, plus a crop:

And here’s another example plus crop:

Again, bokeh is subjective, and maybe you like this look. Personally, though, I find that the hard edges and color fringing are clear distractions that take away from the photo.

Flare and Sunstars

The Viltrox AF 35mm f/1.8 retains high contrast in backlit situations thanks to the multi-layer nano coating, but there are several colorful dots of flare (both near the sun and away from it) that detract from the performance. Sunstars are visible at f/16 but somewhat weak. Here’s a typical example of both flare and sunstars with this lens:

The next page of this review sums up everything and explains the pros and cons of the Viltrox AF 35mm f/1.8. So, click the menu below to go to “Verdict”: