Zeiss Loxia 35mm f/2 By Nasim Mansurov 15 CommentsLast Updated On July 3, 2020«1. Overview and Specifications2. Optical Features3. Lens Comparisons4. Summary5. More Image Samples6. Reader Comments»
I own the Loxia 25. Prior to purchasing it I compared with the Sony 24mm GM and the Batis 25mm. The Loxia’s color rendering, in my eyes, is significant better.
I am surprised about the shallow DOF of that 25mm wide angle :-)
I wasn’t aware of the sun-starts, due to the rectangular shaped blades. They are not too dominating, but can create a very appealing “icing on the cake”.
Yes, it is MF. The AF-performance of my Sony A7ii is sluggish anyway. So I need to employ “tricks” when it gets to dynamic subjects.
MF with this Lens is a dream.
Hello Nasim, I have ordered this lens today, partly based on your review.
May I ask which software you use for post processing?
I particularly like the tone of the first three images in your article.
Nasim, I love this lens, purchase influenced by your thoughtful review. Using it on an a7iii.
Focus ring on mine is exactly at, and not beyond, infinity at its hard stop. This also corresponds to the center of the infinity insignia.
This lens is amazing very sharp and builder is like a meta
Really great review but I’m torn on this lens. Center sharpness is superb so for portraits it’s certainly a worthwhile investment. The bokeh really is something special given the FL, but that corner sharpness. For me, the 35 would often be used for landscape as well and it appears 5.6 is the sweet spot. Just not sure given the corners if I’d be happy throwing it through multiple applications.
Still on the fence, but I do think it’s worth the price. It’s just quite limited.
My question to you has to do with applying MF on the Loxia 35mm.
I would love to purchase the Loxia 35 mm for my Sony A7RII, that is going to be delivered soon.
I like MF very much also because it reminds me so vividly of the years in which there was no AF!
After I read about Loxia I tried intensively MF on my RX1.
However my not so stable hands (due to age) keep moving the enlarged image too much, making it difficult to reach the best possible MF.
I wonder whether the MF supporting technology in the A7RII and in the Loxia, have been further improved, compared to the one in the RX1, making it easier with unstable hands to use MF?
Thanks for your reply!
Good morning from Spain.
Congratulations on the review, high quality, as all you do.
Many doubts plague me.
I am a lover of old objectives with the corresponding adapter.
In these objectives I have the problem of infinity focus and loss of sharpness.
I understand that I may not be a native objective.
Loxia thought when I saw that wonderful,, fully manual focus omenaje old school.
Happy and saving money Loxia vine and on the market for 35 f1.4 mounts E.
Smoke made my head literally.
The party continues and appears BATIS.
I am a sea of doubt.
I want the maximum image quality.
I can not get to OTUS
Within this range below 2000 euros.
What do you recommend me?
35 f 1.4
Loxia 35 F 2
Thank you very much for your work
greetings from Spain
Rey, I apologize for a late response. The Batis 25mm f/2 is a very different lens in terms of focal length compared to the 35mm f/1.4 or Loxia f/2, so you cannot really compare it. As for 35mm f/1.4 vs Loxia 35mm f/2, it all depends on what you want to do with these lenses and if you have size/weight considerations. Personally, I think the Sony 35mm f/1.4 is a bit too big and too heavy, so I would go for Loxia. But if size/weight and budget are not an issue, then by all means go for the Sony 35mm f/1.4 – it has superb optics, has AF and gives you one stop of light advantage.
Hello Rey and Nasim,
Regarding the Sony FE 35mm 1.4, I recently purchased a copy to evaluate as a possible replacement for my Loxia 35mm to get the extra benefit of a faster lens and auto-focus. However, as many others have experienced, my copy was extremely soft on the right side and did not resolve completely until f/8, whereas the Loxia was sharp across the frame at f/4-f/5.6. Even though the lens was extremely sharp in the middle and auto-focus was very precise, I found the softness issue with the 35mm 1.4 unacceptable and returned it. As you note Nasim, it is an extremely heavy lens and really challenges the benefits of having a compact, high performance mirrorless system, but I was willing to accept that downside if the lens was as advertised. Until a native AF 35mm is introduced that can rival the performance of what I have, the Loxia 35mm will do for me. Thanks!
Thanks for this review. It would be interesting a comparison with the ZF 35 distagon f2 (which I own) mounted on the A7 II.
Did you find in the biogon the same 3D effect of the distagon?
Carlo, the Distagon 35mm f/2 is not designed for a mirrorless camera and would have to be used via an adapter. Any time you attach a lens not native to a mirrorless camera with an adapter, either the corners will perform poorly (low-pass filters vary in size), or there might be other implications to sharpness due to two mounting points. Because of this, I personally avoid testing lenses via adapters. For general, non-scientific use however, adapters can work pretty well.
I personally really like the way Biogon renders images – I would say it is pretty similar to Distagon…
So I’ll waint the comparison with the Sony FE 35 1.4 :)
Loxia 50 f2 and the ZM 50 f2 are nearly identical in rendering. Loxia is almost better at f/2 and f/2.8 in the edges, at least on a7r.
This looks like a nice performing lens, great pictures, thanks! Please let me ask sth about focusing with such a mf lens: From testing an A7 I got the impression that focusing with peaking is not so accurate and magnification slows down the process significantly and makes composing impossible while mf-focusing with a DSLR is faster and accurate enough for most cases while keeping control over composition. Is peaking and magnification a question of practice or are there in fact relevant differences between DSLR mf focusing and EVF mf focusing? Personally I see advantages with mf EVF focusing for landscape and macro photographers but disadvantages for eg. streetshooters and everything else, IMHO.
Dave, you are most welcome! I personally avoid using focus peaking without magnification, because it is often hard to see. I have been personally relying on magnification focusing. Yes, it is slower and might not work for fast action, but it is really accurate! If you are a street photographer, you might need to either pre-focus, or choose an AF lens instead… You cannot really compare DSLR manual focusing with mirrorless, since the latter is much more accurate. That green dot in a DSLR is rarely ever accurate and there is a lot of “play” in it.
Thanks Nasim. Canon gives me a focus confirmation on the focus point, that is quite reliable. Variances can be saved with a bit thinking about distance and aperture. Sony could do the same: just a red flash on a focus point. However, there is room for improvement in the A7 line. True is, that nothing is more accurate than magnification, at least with my E-M1. I was just a bit insecure whether the problem with A7 is more on my side. The mf-focusing in a breeze, as Mr. Steve Huff calls it, is simply not true. There fore I much appreciate your answer. Thanks!