Yesterday I bought a used FE 2.8/35mm, primarily intended for use in the smallest possible kit as a snapshot lens when I want to carry the minimum weight and size and still have a serious camera with me. But is it also to be preferred as a landscape lens over the FE 4/24-70mm that I have used up to now? The prime should be better than the zoom, right? Let's find out... All images shown at 100 % viewing, in the true spirit of the pixel-peeper that is me . Surprisingly, not much of a difference, the zoom may be just a little sharper despite being wide-open. Center crop at f/8 is essentially the same. Now there's a surprise: the zoom is much better near the extreme corner. Left upper corner shows the same kind of difference. And at f/8 the same story: the zoom is clearly better. Want to see more? Check out all full-resolution images. So the 2.8/35 I bought is a dud? Don't really think so. When going up close it shows some decentering, resulting in a worse right edge, but it's not visible further out in these test shots. The 2.8/35 I borrowed last Sunday at the Sony booth showed more or less the same behaviour: sharp at the focus point, but the focus plane certainly isn't flat. A third copy I tried a year ago didn't show excellent corner sharpness either in a flat subject, the reason I didn't buy it then. Lloyd Chambers says the same in his evaluation of this lens, which is much more thorough than mine of course. This is in fact an evaluation of the camera (A7R II, firmware V3.20) in combination with the lenses. I used autofocus throughout and I confirmed the well-documented focussing behaviour of both lenses: the 2.8/35 focusses wide-open irrespective of the aperture set, the 4/24-70 focusses with the shooting aperture as long as it's f/11 or larger; when stopping down below f/11 it opens up a bit (to f/11?) for focussing. This might explain the somewhat better sharpness of the 4/24-70 at f/4, the 2.8/35 could have been at a disadvantage due to focus shift when focussing at f/2.8 and shooting at f/4. I was pleasantly surprised by the sharpness wide-open of the 2.8/35 and I don't really see the sharpness at smaller apertures others rave about. I hope that at some point in time there will be an option to tune this focussing behaviour to your own preferences via additional menu items. If focus shift adversely affects the 2.8/35's performance, manual focus should improve things; I'm going to try that later. Also it is my experience that it's important to switch off image stabilization for optimal image quality of the 4/24-70 (even more so for the FE 4/16-35, especially at 35mm). With Steadyshot on you run the risk of ending up with pictures unsharp at one edge. Here's hoping that there'll be an option of disabling OSS while keeping the in-body stabilization. Of course the 2.8/35 is not affected, not having OSS. So there you have it. That 4/24-70 zoom once again proves it can be an excellent performer and with these high-resolution cameras the challenge of bringing out the best possible image quality becomes ever greater. On the other hand, a little less than optimum performance becomes less and less interesting for many applications. I'm sure that I'll be happy to print big even if pixel-peeping shows some defects like shown here.