Loxia 35 vs Sigma 35mm with MC-11

[kobebryant]

I am currently struggling if I should replace/ sell my loxia 35mm.

This is a really good lens that I have enjoyed so much to use, especially when I am alone and that I could dig into enjoying the pure joy of photography. I have no complaints to the quality.

The only problem here being,  I purchased a 35mm lens mainly for walk-around and travel light, alongside with my 55mm. I currently also own a 16-35 F4.

So I was thinking, if I should get the sigma lens + adapter cheap, should I replace it, with autofocus? Anyone has used it on 1st gen a7 and what was it like? e.g. focus speed, weight.

I like doing videos with my friend when I am travelling, and I found that a MF lens is actually not as convenient during a journey.

So I have 3 potential options:

1) Replace Loxia with Sigma

 

2) Keep Loxia and travel with 16-35 F4 + 55mm

 

3) Sell Loxia (you dont need a 35mm prime!)

 

If I sell the loxia I would probably use the money for a batis 85mm or 70-200 F4. But indeed I am not much into portraits but instead I intend to use it for landscape when a telephoto lens is needed. (or sometimes sports)

 

Any inputs would be appreciated!

[Golem]

........................... ... .. ................  .  .  ...........

So I have 3 potential options:

 

1) Replace Loxia with Sigma

 

2) Keep Loxia and travel with 16-35 F4 + 55mm

 

3) Sell Loxia (you dont need a 35mm prime!)

 

........... .. ... .. ....  ...   . .

  

Any inputs would be appreciated!

  

1) Seldom any reason to spend money replacing

same with similar or similar with same. Non-starter.

 

2) Making use of current gear. Always OK.

  

3) The statement in "( )" is unthinkable. Non-starter.  

  

4) Listing options as THREE choices. Always hints

at just rationalizing GASsy silly ideas. Three is like

a holy number, giving things gravitas. Non-starter.

  

  

You're welcome.

[kobebryant]

Haha thanks. Appreciate that. But I really want to know how people feel, both loxia and sigma 35mm.

For loxia, is it a good way to manually focus, then recompose the image, or actually change the position of the focus magnifier square and compose before focusing?

If the sigma works well I would actually be able to save some money, albeit its size...
 

[Navman50]

Two more comments...

 

1. If its the Sigma Art lens that you are considering, have you compared its size against the Loxia? There's a big difference!!!

 

2. Have you explored zone focussing? With my Loxia I have worked out the focus position needed to give maximum depth of

field while maintaining infinity focus, and often use it as a pre-focussed point and shoot - for closer shots, practise estimating

your subject distance, focussing to that on the lens, and doing the same - with practice you should be able to do very well with this.

[kobebryant]

Yes. I have been using MF lenses for quite a long time. Just that in some situations, a MF lens is inadequate, as a walk around lens. However, 35mm is pretty easy for zone focus actually!

And ya I know, the sigma art is really heavy, just tested today...

[Navman50]

Another cheap but high-performing option is the little Canon EF 40mm pancake - check out the reviews,

which indicate higher level performance than one would expect for such a small, simple lens. I use one

with the Metabones adapter, and it focuses very well. Obviously it doesn't compare with the Sigma Art

for speed or performance, but for some uses, I think that its underrated, and for street shooting, is

a very discrete size.

[Golem]

Beats me what "performance" means lens-wise. I

know the light passes thru the 40/2.8 EF at least

as fast as thru any other lens, and my impression

from using it is maybe it passes even faster :-) My

estimate is zero to 186000 miles per second in no

time flat. But thaz on a Canon. I'm sure it's waaay

faster on a Sony ....

  

I just can't bring myself to spend twice the cost of

that lens on an adapter to put it on my Sony ! I do

have other EF lenses but none of them will bring

anything to the Sony that I don't already have as

A-mount lenses. Put the 40 on a Metabones and

it's a $400 40/2.8. It would be more sane to go for

the native 35/2.8 FE, but I already have the very

wonderful 35/2.0 A-mount. Well maybe someday

Canon will make a cool live view body and my 40

will finally have a happy home .... and pigs will fly.

[JimmyD]

If you want autofocus, I would suggest the Sony Zeiss 35mm f/2.8. Razor sharp, small and light. I personally like the rendering of the Loxias, but if you want a walk-about to capture quick candids with AF, then the Sony Zeiss 35mm f/2.8 would be better than the Sigma. And I agree with the earlier comments challenging your "you don't need a 35mm prime" statement. I shoot all over the focal length spectrum, but if I am limited to one focal length it is 35mm.

[IamJF]

If you want to get rid of manual focus -> Seiss 35/2,8. I would not title razor sharp, but it's a beauty, especially for traveling.

I just bought the 55, think it's a great combo for everyday stuff.

 

So you have great options - bigger and heavy for landscape etc, small and light for street/family/...

 

and btw - if you miss manual focus, try a contax 135mm ... ;-)

[EVVK]

Loxia is supposed to have awesome microcontrast while 35mm Art doesn't have any. I haven't had a chance to try it yet.

 

The Sigma 35mm is really a benchmark winner in synthetic tests. Sharpness, distortion etc.. Personally I liked the 50mm Art much better the Sigma qualities show up much better there. Not that the 35mm is bad in any way it's still one of a kind of a lens. Works quite well with the MC-11 adapter, but it may hunt more in low light compared to some native FE lenses like 55mm (probably due higher T-stop?).

 

http://petapixel.com/2016/03/14/problem-modern-lenses/

Personally I've been wanting the Loxia 35mm to complement the Sigma but currently I'm leaning toward Zeiss ZE 35mm F2 instead.

[martys]

just curious, have you made a decision yet?  I'm finding I need/want a 35mm more and more to fill the gap between my Zeiss Batis 2/25mm and Zeiss Loxia 2/50 and can't decide on which of the available options would best meet most of my needs. I love the size of the Loxia line, but am sometimes tripped up with the manual focus. I'm actually considering selling my Loxia 50 and getting the Sony Zeiss 1.8/55 if for nothing else the advantages of auto focus and all the A7Rii features available to it (eye tracking, etc). I've thought about the Sony Zeiss 2.8/35 for the same reasons, small and auto focus and half the price of the Loxia. Ugh, so many choices, but not enough choices? 

[Gilgenberg]

i have so many 35mm lenses and i did had a resistance to buy the Sony 35mm 2.8 but in the end i bought one

and i must say it is a gem of a lens!

small, very sharp, very nice rendering and consistent all over the frame,

 

not a summicron in resolution but sharp at 2.8 all over the frame and very nice handling/build quality 

 

and AF!