35mm lens for the A7?

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by Nate_Dogg, Nov 29, 2013.

  1. Nate_Dogg

    Nate_Dogg TalkEmount Regular

    Feb 6, 2013
    Eugene, OR
    Nate Pfeifer
    Looking for a manual focus/cheaper (< $400) alternative to the FE 35mm f/2.8 Zeiss. I have a CV Nokton 40mm f/1.4 that I'm planning to give a try, but I'm skeptical that it will have good corner performance, since it's an RF lens.

    So far I'm considering:
    - Canon FD 35mm f/2 SSC
    - C/Y Zeiss Distagon 35mm f/2.8

    Any other thoughts on a solid 35mm performer?

  2. addieleman

    addieleman Passionate amateur Subscribing Member

    Nov 13, 2012
    Ad Dieleman
    I have the Canon FD 35/2 S.S.C. (not the concave front lens one), I'll put it on the A7 tomorrow in daylight next to a lot of other lenses :). I'm planning on getting the Voigtländer 40/1.4 because I love the angle-of-view of 40mm on FF, so please tell me how it performs!
  3. bobbywise

    bobbywise TalkEmount Regular

    Nov 6, 2013
    Nantes, France
    Robert Wisbey
    I've tried the 40mm summicron-c and that seems fine on the A7.
    I think it's only the wide angle lenses that may have corner issues (apparently more so with the A7r).
    • Like Like x 2
  4. addieleman

    addieleman Passionate amateur Subscribing Member

    Nov 13, 2012
    Ad Dieleman
    I just tested the Canon FD 35/2 S.S.C. It's an awesome lens on the A7! Well useable wide open and it's very sharp across a large portion of the frame; only the extreme corners remain unsharp until about f/11 where they become acceptable. But you can judge for yourself, test shots are here.

    I also did a test with the Minolta MD 35/1.8, with rather low expectations. It wasn't that bad after all. It's very soft wide open and picks up in contrast at f/2.8; far corners need f/8 to sharpen up. It has the typical Minolta signature, lower contrast than the Canon 35/2, but I'm positively surprised. I tested this lens earlier on the NEX-6 and it disappointed me bigtime then: not sharp outside the center. The test shots are not directly comparable with those of the Canon 35/2 because the sun went away during this run :(.

    Obviously the "sweet spot" that you enjoy with using 135-format lenses on APS-C cameras is gone now, visible here by the fairly abrupt degradation in the extreme corners. OTOH, the A7 seems more forgiving than the NEX-6. More tests to follow, but a weekend is so short!
    • Like Like x 3
  5. f/otographer

    f/otographer TalkEmount Regular

    Aug 20, 2013
    The C/Y Distagon is an excellent choice, but so is the Yashica ML 35/2.8. Good luck finding one though they are pretty rare. It focuses a little closer then the Distagon as well I believe.

    The Minolta MD 35/2.8 is a stellar lens. Hard to beat for the price.

    M42 Zeiss Flektogon 35/2.8 and 2.5?

    I would really choose the Yashica ML 35/2.8 myself. I just can never afford one when they sometimes come up for sale.
  6. serhan

    serhan TalkEmount All-Pro

    Aug 27, 2011
    CZJ 35mm 2.4 is a nice lens, soft on the corners, need to stop down but its colors and min focus dist are excellent. Review:

    CV 35 1.4/40 1.4 works, but I think they are more people lenses then landscape lenses. There is also slr version CV 40mm f/2 pancake lens which has good reviews even on D800, again needs to stopped down.

    I have an old Nikkor 35mm 1.4 lens that I will try, but it is not small lens like rf lenses, still smaller then modern 35mm 1.4 lenses.
  7. quezra

    quezra TalkEmount Top Veteran

    Aug 22, 2012
    The FDn 35/2 that I tried once was crazy sharp on a 5N. I doubt there's much fall-off on full frame - it's just not how Canon made their lenses. Most of the 35/2s appear to have been quite good. That said, I got myself a Voigtlander 35/1.4 because it's just so darn cute. :p
  8. felice

    felice New to TalkEmount

    Nov 30, 2013
    Samyang, What else?

    I have the Samyang 35/1.4 in Canon EF fit and that lens is really worth every single cent.