[shoplink 31639 ebay]
[/shoplink]
The very first Stock of Loxia 35mm lens are now shipping in [shoplink 31639 ebay]Germany (on eBay)[/shoplink] and [shoplink 31640 ebay]Japan (on eBay)[/shoplink]. It will ship soon at BHphoto. And here are the first three reviews of the new lens:
VeryBigLobo (Click here) writes:
Zeiss Loxia 35/2 is made of high quality light metal and glass. The only other material that can be found is a blue (company color) rubber sealing gasket ner the lens mount. While Zeiss Loxia is not claimed to be weather sealed, this little detail will certainly help keeping dust and moisture away from the electric contacts and sensor. Loxia looks impressive so far and that is exactly what I expected after brief hands-on Photokina 2014. It is maybe not the sharpest lens in absolute figures in the center, but it has rather flat focus field and brilliant control of chromatic aberration. (I’ll have to check for LoCA) Distortion is also negligible. Corners wide open are good enough and they will certainly improve with more distant subjects.
The.me (Click here) like the lens but also metnioned one limit of the lens:
What disappoints me is the way that even a slight inadvertent touch of the focusing ring will change where you have put it. It is not loose — remember it is a Zeiss, but I had hoped for more stiffness. This is crucial for a manual focus system that you do not constantly want to adjust. And working with only a left hand, which I’m forced to do, now requires a dexterity of acrobatic-like precision just to avoid the slightest change of focus.
BackGroundBlur (Click here) writes:
To be honest I was expecting the Sony to be a tad sharper than the Loxia. From my initial tests it seems to be the opposite by quite a large margin. Nailing focus is also much easier on the Loxia due to the correct focus scale / infinity stop. Combine that with the significant difference in bokeh, and it looks like I won’t be using the Sony 2.8/35 very much anymore. Don’t get me wrong, the Sony is a very good lens with excellent 3D pop, but the Loxia lives up to its full expectation and it indeed as spectacular as its 2/50 brother.
Zeiss Loxia preorders:
Zeiss Loxia 50mm f/2 Planar T* Lens for Sony E Mount at BHphoto, Adorama, WexUK, CameraPro, Digitalrev.
Zeiss Loxia 35mm f/2 Biogon T* Lens for Sony E Mount at BHphoto, Adorama, WexUK, CameraPro.
Zeiss Lens Hood for Loxia 50mm f/2 Planar T* Lens at BHphoto and Adorama.
Zeiss Lens Hood for Loxia 35mm f/2 Biogon T* Lens at BHphoto and Adorama.
Zeiss 52mm Front Lens Cap for Touit and Loxia Lenses at BHphoto and Adorama.
Zeiss De-Click Key for Loxia Lenses (5-Piece Set) at BHphoto and Adorama.
Zeiss Rear Lens Cap for Loxia E-Mount Lenses at BHphoto and Adorama.
34 Responses
Really hope this 35mm and 50mm goes on a buy one get one free sale like the touit lenses.
Doubt it. I’m sure they learned there last last time around. You do wonder how much those things cost though if they can liquidate them like that.
It’s a Biogon not a Distagon, which may be is requiring more flange distance (even if there is a ZM f1.4 version). I would like to compare it with the ZM and with the Nikon Distagon 35mm in terms of sharpness. For what I have understood high resolving power and sharpness cannot work together, more evident for wide angle lenses: at the end for high density digital sensors it’s better to have more resolving power (with less sharpness) and increase sharpness with post-processing (the opposite is impossible). Any comment? Impressions?
Could you explain the difference between sharpness and resolving power? Do you mean micro-contrast? or perceived sharpness on the image level (not pixel level)?
Resolving power of a lens is an optical measurment in “lines per mm”.
Here for example: http://www.olympus-ims.com/it/microscope/terms/resolving_power/
Sharpness could be something more perceptive, related to micro-contrast, too, and others.
Tutorial about how to reading a lens MTF, power resolution and sharpness/micro-contrast:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/resolution.shtml.
The first and third pretty much contradict each other? Sample variation?
First places the test chart within a few meters from the camera, third is focused at infinity. This is why test charts never tell you the whole story.
Panasonic is full of surprises. It is not only a battery company but is also shaping to be an optical powerhouse. Wish they would make lenses for FE. 🙂 Thanks for your comparisons.
The background blur review says “Perhaps the focus was slightly off” about the image from the Sony 35mm lens. The review doesn’t strike me as being particularly scientific or thorough so I’d take the conclusion that the Loxia 35 f/2 is sharper than the Sony “by quite a large margin” with a big spoon of salt.
Agreed, find it hard to believe the 35/2.8 performed that poorly.
More like a wheelbarrow of salt
Very nice lens, but no AF? Hmm, that does not sound like a bargain at € 1.250,00…
you’re paying for image quality. if you can’t focus yourself this lens is clearly not for you.
Nobody said that i cant focus, but i would like to have both options. At this price its a bad joke without AF. But tell the people its pro leica style and they pay every price ;)…
Meh, the Sony zeiss 35/2.8 is AF and smaller and lighter. More compact hood too. I’ll save my money & stay with my 35/2.8 thanks
Splitting hairs: No doubt we see differences in magnified crops between different lenses. But honestly all three lenses from the background blur review are excellent with whatever sensor size. We need to know the final output medium to figure out what gear we need for the results we want. This ‘what is better’ leads to nowhere. The Pana 1.7 20mm as the ‘worst’ lens there is technically not distinguishable from a medium format camera picture printed as a 9x11inch fotobook; just know your gear (eg stop the Pana down a bit) and take your time for making and processing your pictures for the medium you want. And later we also should think about our style. Then all this tech talk is getting even less important. Digital photography is mature and maybe rumors sites should think about changing direction and support their entertaining tech news with a bit more educational posts IMHO. Thanks!
idiot! This review isn’t splitting hairs at all, the difference is not a hair’s width, but so big you can drive a pickup truck through it. did you even look at the images?
of course the panasonic will be the worst because it’s on a small sensor with half the resolution. that’s not the fault of the lens obviously. you can’t get the kind of sharpness illustrated clearly in the article with the tiny sensors in the aps and m43 cameras.
the output medium has no bearing on the fidelity of the image, those are just choices for how you want to display it. I could print a photo on my office laserjet from my hasselblad but that won’t make the image any better. the two are unrelated. you might need to know the output medium but that’s only because you didn’t bother to read or look at the blog post and/or understand a word of it.
digital imaging is by no means a mature technology, why else do you think sony brings out a new camera every 4 months?? We are right at the very start of digital imaging and right at the bleeding edge of mirrorless. if you’re buying a sony A7x you’re an early adopter. 35mm film cameras reached market maturity in the 90s, digital is an infant.
and you’re just totally wrong about not being able to tell a medium format image from one on the little panasonic m43 sensors at 9×11, that’s utter nonsense. Just because you’re a beginner and can’t understand the differences please don’t try to make it out like there’s not more to this than what you know.
did you even look at the images, the differences are huge.
Careful, careful, that’s too much photography you are talking, it might upset the teenage geeks 🙂
I forgot to tell you that I am almost blind and therefore print in braille. Nevertheless I know for sure that you and manners aren’t related at all either.
There is a wonderful Hahnemühle-Booklet shown in the Leica store in Zürich where a specialist printed landscapes at about 15x22cm from pictures taken with a Leica S. The sales person saw a clear difference compared to all other cameras existing. And he seemed to be very determined and convinced in telling so – like you.
Here is another ‘idiot’ who wants to teach us, that digital photography is mature: http://blog.mingthein.com/2014/10/23/the-future-of-photography-lies-in-education/
And I tech you, that you might be a case where enthusiasm turned to madness. Try it again and show competence with a factual post.
Quoting someone else? That’s “smart”. Quoting Ming Thein? That’s even worse…
Dave, you make very good points. I’ve updated the review with new, stopped down images in good light. The Panasonic 20/1.7 is still not able to keep up, but you are right, in many uses it is more than sufficient and that’s why it remains one of my favorite lenses of all time. I have recorded countless of my favorite shots with this lens.
Nevertheless my updated test confirms the astounding technical quality of the Loxia. It is just incredible.
I tried the Loxias, I tested the Otus’ and was even after digital MF. I know the attraction of this wonderful gear. I should have accepted your review as a technical point of view and thankfully I see that you got my points.
On loxia ergonomics and IQ of 50/2 by Dirk De Paepe: http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2014/12/10/ten-weeks-with-the-zeiss-loxia-planar-250-and-the-sony-a7r-by-dirk-de-paepe/
“…but I had hoped for more stiffness.” So what your saying is the loxia is sloppy.
I’m glad i re-bought a used fe35 for 1/3 the price of the loxia. I was waiting for the loxia but couldn’t wait no more. reading thr reviews, its not better, bigger, more ex and mf.
It depends on your needs. The Loxia has a stop of extra light/bokeh and is significantly sharper. The Sony is incredibly light and small, and still a kick-ass performer.
“…but I had hoped for more stiffness.” I bet, I bet.
LOL C & N will be laughing all the way to the bank.
I’ve updated the article with a better sharpness comparison. Same results through. The Loxia is AMAZING.
http://backgroundblur.com/#!/articles/5486bdb7e2939c1336dcbfab
buy the 35FE 2.8 or keep it and save some money for the 16-35/f4 its a much better bang for the buck then the Loxia
I would love to see another comparison shot or two between the Sony f/2.8 and Loxia f/2 lenses. Landscapes, by preference. My love is landscapes while I’m backpacking and rock climbing. The Loxia seems more durable, but will it make a difference?