Up next in 10
Nikkor Z 35mm F1.8 S-Line Review | Still Worthy in 2025?
0 views
Jun 1, 2025
Photographer Dustin Abbott shares a deep dive review of Nikon's original 35mm on the Z-mount platform - the Z 35mm F1.8 S. Is it still worth buying in 2025? | T | Read the Text Review: | Visit the Image Gallery: | Purchase the Nikkor Z 35mm F1.8 S @ B&H Photo https://bhpho.to/44XsmmI | Adorama https://howl.link/17wga2obbgt04 | Amazon https://amzn.to/4dFhCfb | Camera Canada https://shrsl.com/4woeu | Amazon Canada https://amzn.to/43k4xV0 | Amazon UK https://amzn.to/4dEsaLk | Amazon Germany https://amzn.to/3ZxaSu3 Purchase the Nikkor Z 50mm F1.8 S @ B&H Photo https://bhpho.to/3XWrpa4 | Adorama https://howl.link/cvr81ys4etsto | Amazon https://amzn.to/4ieEi6w | Camera Canada https://shrsl.com/4vpdb | The Camera Store https://tinyurl.com/Buy50S | Amazon Canada https://tinyurl.com/Buy50S | Amazon UK https://amzn.to/43V9xjI | Amazon Germany https://amzn.to/4imgCxc Check out the DA Merch here: https://bit.ly/TWIMerch | Become a Patron: https://www.patreon.com/dustinabbott | On the Web: http://dustinabbott.net/ | Sign up for my Newsletter: http://bit.ly/1RHvUNp | Instagram: http://bit.ly/DLAinsta | Facebook: http://on.fb.me/1nuUUeH | Flickr: http://bit.ly/1UcnC0B | 500px: http://bit.ly/1Sy2Ngu Follow Craig @ https://www.instagram.com/craigstoffersen/ Want to support this channel? Use these affiliate links to shop at: B&H Photo: http://bhpho.to/1TA0Xge Adorama: https://howl.link/nt4zdz1goa7ql Camera Canada: http://bit.ly/DLACameraCan Sony Canada: https://www.thesonyshop.ca/?ref=abbott Amazon: https://amzn.to/3HrY64d Amazon Canada: https://amzn.to/3qG1p18 Ebay: http://bit.ly/DustineBay Into the AM Clothing: https://bit.ly/intotheAMda and use code DUSTIN10 for 10% off Fioboc Clothing: https://tinyurl.com/FiobocDA20 and us code DUSTIN20 for 20% off Make a donation via Paypal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/dustinTWI ============================= Table of Contents:
View Video Transcript
0:00
[Music]
0:10
hi I'm Dustin Abbott and I'm here today
0:12
to give you my review of the Nicor Z
0:16
35mm F1.8 S-line lens now I recognize
0:20
that this is another one of these lenses
0:22
that was actually released quite a long
0:24
time ago but I'm playing catch-up on the
0:27
Nikon space and so I'm going through
0:30
some of the catalog lenses and so that I
0:32
have an opportunity to give you a fair
0:34
perspective when I review future lenses
0:36
and how they compare to what's already
0:38
in existence on the platform so this is
0:40
the second of the three f1.8 S-line
0:43
lenses that I have reviewed and while I
0:46
didn't find it as exceptional as the
0:48
50mm f1.8 8 i continue to think that
0:50
this is a really solid lineup of lenses
0:52
and I'll break down why in today's
0:54
review now before I jump into that I do
0:57
want to give you a quick disclosure this
0:58
lens was loaned to me from Nikon Canada
1:01
and so I thank them for the loaner
1:04
they've had no input on my conclusions
1:06
however and they will not see this video
1:07
before you do so we'll start by taking a
1:10
look at the build and handling any of
1:11
you that are familiar with this lineup
1:13
of lenses it's all very very similar
1:16
they are extremely similar in size to
1:19
one another this lens is also very
1:21
similar in size to the new newer 35mm
1:25
f1.4 that just came out and so it is uh
1:28
2.5 mm shorter and it's 45 g lighter but
1:32
you put the two lenses side by side and
1:34
you would be hardressed to see the
1:36
difference in terms of the basic
1:37
footprint of the lenses now all of these
1:40
lenses are they're not small for an F1.8
1:44
8 lens because they are designed to be
1:46
premium lenses however if you stack this
1:49
up next to the newer 35mm f1.2s line
1:53
lens you can see that they are
1:55
remarkably different in size and so if
1:57
you are interested in the kind of the
1:59
paradigm of having a more compact lens
2:01
that still has premium quality well
2:03
that's where the f1.8 line lenses make
2:06
sense so those dimensions are 73 mm or
2:09
2.87 87 in in diameter by 86 mm or 3.39
2:15
in in overall length the Lynn weighs in
2:17
at 370 g or right over 13 ounces making
2:21
it the uh very slightly the smallest and
2:24
the lightest of this trio of lenses it
2:27
does have a nice build quality it is a
2:31
mixture of both you know high-end
2:33
engineered plastics and then also metal
2:36
bits on it uh people have owned these
2:38
lenses now for the long haul and they've
2:40
held up and so it's a build quality that
2:42
works it does have a nice degree of
2:45
weather sealing with eight different
2:46
seal points throughout the lens it does
2:49
have a gasket at the rear lens mount
2:51
along with internal gaskets and coating
2:53
on the front element to help with all of
2:55
that uh it does come with a lens hood my
2:58
loner copy did not arrive with that so I
3:01
can't demonstrate it to you here but it
3:03
is a very similar plastic hood to what I
3:05
see on the 50mimeter f1.8s or the 50
3:08
millimeter f1.4 and so uh and it's it's
3:12
not particularly premium but it does the
3:14
job now for being a premium lens it
3:17
doesn't have much when it comes to
3:18
features we do have an AFMF switch which
3:21
is always appreciated but even the while
3:24
the newer uh f1.4 four lenses tend to
3:26
not have the
3:28
afmf switch what they do have is a
3:30
secondary ring and so you have a
3:32
dedicated manual focus ring and then the
3:35
customizable control ring in this case
3:37
we've only got one ring so you've got to
3:39
pick and choose kind of what it serves
3:41
now even if you assign some other
3:42
quality to it while you're in autofocus
3:44
mode it will still work as a manual
3:46
focus ring uh if you're switched into MF
3:50
however it does mean that you lose
3:52
manual focus kind of like that automatic
3:54
manual focus override and so I do miss
3:56
having that secondary ring for that
3:58
reason however I did find that if I
4:01
shifted into uh power aperture control
4:04
that I was able to do a smooth aperture
4:06
rack and so I was I was pleased with the
4:09
performance there it also works very
4:10
well as a manual focus ring it has good
4:12
damping good feel and a good uh manual
4:15
focus simulation and so all of that I
4:18
think is well executed here there are
4:21
nine rounded aperture blades inside they
4:23
do a good but not exceptional job of
4:26
maintaining a circular shape you may
4:27
have noticed during that aperture rack
4:29
you will see just a little bit of the
4:31
kind of non-agonal shape there but
4:33
overall the the impression is that it's
4:36
nice and round up front we have a 62mm
4:39
front filter thread and those filters
4:43
are that filter size I should say is
4:45
shared with the 35mm f1.4 and then also
4:48
the 50mm uh f1.8 and f1.4 four lenses
4:52
and so uh you know there's there's a
4:53
possibility you can do some filter
4:55
sharing across those which is great
4:56
because 62 millimeters outside of this
4:59
hasn't really been an exceptionally
5:01
popular uh filter size and so at least
5:05
they're they're keeping some kind of
5:07
standardization going on there minimum
5:09
focus distance is pretty decent you can
5:11
focus as closely as 25 cm and you get a
5:15
0.19 times magnification so almost a 1:5
5:19
ratio and so that's good that's useful
5:21
for a lot of things and I felt like up
5:23
close quality was pretty
5:26
good now the price here is MSRP remains
5:30
at where it was at launch which is about
5:32
$850 US and that is where it's roughly
5:35
selling at the moment i'm not quite sure
5:37
why this one re retails for about $220
5:40
more than what the 50mm f1.8s does um I
5:44
would say as we're going to see by the
5:46
end of the review that if you're going
5:47
on quality alone optical performance I
5:50
would reverse that but anyway this does
5:52
remain a little bit more expensive uh
5:55
particularly for an F1.8 lens at about
5:58
$850 so let's talk autofocus uh this
6:01
series they rely on STM focus motors and
6:04
so typically I associate STM with being
6:08
you know kind of like down budget a bit
6:10
but Nikon's STM motors really work quite
6:13
well and I've seen them use STM all the
6:16
way up into the the 135 Plenna and it
6:19
worked well there so I'm not really
6:21
going to complain even if I don't find
6:22
STM to be the sexiest kind of focus
6:25
motor it has good speed i did notice
6:28
when I was doing this test there was a
6:30
little bit more noise than what I heard
6:31
on the 50 mm it's not loud or anything
6:33
but you can just hear a little bit of a
6:34
sh back and forth as it's racking focus
6:38
back and forth uh I did find that it had
6:40
good confidence and accuracy with a
6:43
variety of different subjects and that
6:45
was using my Z8 but then also I tested
6:48
this as a part of doing the Z5 Mark II
6:51
uh review and on that body as well this
6:53
body here it focused excellent there
6:56
also and so good autofocus all overall
6:59
no problem for stills on the video side
7:01
of things I found basically what I've
7:04
come to expect on Nikon so I think that
7:07
when it comes to stills uh Nikon is
7:10
basically right there with Canon and
7:12
Sony when it comes to video AF I feel
7:14
like they're just a few notches behind
7:16
and here's the the main reason here when
7:18
I am obviously using a good quality
7:20
first-party lens on you know multiple
7:22
camera bodies I get the same results and
7:24
that is that when I'm doing just these
7:26
focus pulls back and forth where I'm
7:28
doing touch to focus you can see that it
7:30
moves quick back and forth but it
7:32
doesn't always move confidently and so
7:34
it got it has the thrust but then it
7:36
will do pulsing uh just some some
7:38
unnecessary behavior that would be
7:40
obviously not cinematic at all and so
7:43
that's probably the biggest issue there
7:46
so it's not visible steps going back and
7:48
forth it's the micro pulsing and just
7:50
not settling quickly i did notice that
7:52
there was a bit more focus breathing
7:54
than what I saw with the 50mm f1.8 but
7:57
not bad either i found that my hand test
8:00
however worked a lot better and so I
8:03
lost all of that micro pulsing and lack
8:05
of confidence and so in that setting it
8:08
was able to transition from hand to the
8:09
eye back and forth very good i've also
8:12
used this combination for several of
8:14
these type episodes where I was filming
8:16
for my channel and autofocus was steady
8:19
i had zero issues with it no jumping
8:22
around or or losing tracking on me i
8:25
also found out just shooting real world
8:27
shots that when I was shooting static
8:29
shots they stayed nice and steady no
8:31
pulsing and then if I was shooting shots
8:33
where there was any kind of you know big
8:35
kind of natural transition where I
8:37
wasn't doing touch to focus to do a
8:39
focus pull that there they were better
8:42
damped and had more of a cinematic
8:44
quality as you can see here and so
8:46
overall I I like the video AF find what
8:49
I didn't like is just specifically if I
8:51
was doing touch to focus and doing major
8:53
focus pulls because there it just and
8:55
that's one of my standardized tests so
8:57
obviously I notice it it just wasn't
8:58
great in that
9:00
regard autofocus in general however I
9:03
give good marks it's gotten the job done
9:06
now for you know six plus years for a
9:08
lot of people and people seem to be
9:10
happy with the lens now when it comes to
9:12
the image quality side of things this is
9:14
an optical design of 11 elements in nine
9:17
groups that includes two extra low
9:19
dispersion and three aspherical elements
9:22
as I looked at the MTF chart I could see
9:24
that the 50mm
9:26
f1.8s was continually tracking higher
9:29
than what this lens was however when I
9:31
lined it up compared with the new 35mm
9:33
f1.4 I could see a little bit more
9:36
difference between uh this lens and the
9:39
f1.4 lens so clearly there is you know
9:42
we've got stages of performance here i
9:45
found in terms of practical tests that I
9:48
did see some minor longitudinal style
9:50
chromatic aberration a little bit on my
9:52
test chart a little more in real world
9:54
subjects so it's not as perfectly
9:55
corrected in that regard as what the
9:57
50mm was however I found when it comes
10:00
to lateral style chromatic aberrations
10:01
that I saw basically nothing and so nice
10:04
and clean for that which is good in a a
10:06
wider angle lens to get that better kind
10:08
of performance when it comes to vignette
10:10
and distortion I saw a bit of barrel
10:13
distortion i corrected it with a plus
10:15
five nothing significant was fairly
10:18
linear corrected nicely manually and of
10:20
course as a first-party lens it's going
10:22
to get great uh correction profiles
10:24
either in camera or in software however
10:27
if you turn off in all of the
10:29
corrections when it comes to vignette
10:31
it's got a lot of vignette i had to max
10:33
out the sliders in Lightroom to correct
10:35
for that so that's dialing in 100 i
10:38
could correct it cleanly then but it
10:40
took everything that I had in terms of
10:42
latitude there and so that obviously is
10:44
a challenge for this particular lens
10:47
when it comes to the resolution I will
10:49
do the deep dive breakdown at the end of
10:51
the video if you're interested in that
10:52
but testing on the Z8 and 45 megapixels
10:55
I found and looking at 200%
10:57
magnification I found that the center
10:59
looks very good good detail but not
11:01
quite as much contrast as the 50mm the
11:04
mid-frame uh you can see a little
11:06
slippage from the center of the frame so
11:08
it's not quite as good though still good
11:10
in mid-frame and the corners while they
11:12
remain dark even with the profile
11:15
attached to them overall the resolution
11:17
doesn't look too bad there i don't think
11:19
contrast is off the chart but I I wasn't
11:22
overly disappointed with what I saw
11:24
there what I found as I begin to stop
11:26
the lens down is that at f2.8 the center
11:31
becomes exceptional and so you get that
11:33
really great contrast that I saw on the
11:36
50mm uh by f4 the mid-frame has caught
11:39
up with that mid-frame is starting to
11:41
look exceptional by f4 and then at f5.6
11:44
six the corners are I think at their
11:46
peak level and they look very very good
11:49
i found in real world shots that I was
11:51
happy with the resolution across the
11:53
frame particularly when I stopped down
11:54
the lens a little bit but what I did
11:56
notice is that it didn't pack as much of
11:57
that bite and contrast punch at f1.8 as
12:01
what I saw with the 50mm lens when you
12:05
do stop down and you get that higher
12:06
contrast I find that you I did get that
12:09
that deeply saturated color punch that I
12:11
really liked from the uh f1.8 or the 50
12:14
millimeter f1.8 and and so I mean once
12:17
you stop down a little bit you can get
12:19
images that really have a lot of punch
12:21
to them defraction is going to show up
12:23
on a high resolution body i see it some
12:26
by f11 and more so by f-16 it's not so
12:29
bad that I wouldn't consider the end
12:31
result usable however so go ahead and
12:33
shoot at all available apertures if you
12:35
really need that smaller aperture for
12:37
some reason when it comes to looking at
12:40
the bokeh performance I found as far as
12:42
the specular highlights go geometry is
12:45
not terrible from the lens and there's
12:47
only the tiniest bit of green fringing
12:49
around specular highlights not enough to
12:51
really show up at a global level so
12:53
that's not a concern what I did find is
12:55
just some generalized busyiness in there
12:58
it doesn't it's not like the concentric
12:59
rings like the onion bokeh but what it
13:02
does look like is like a a slide under a
13:04
microscope you know where you've got
13:06
microscopic things that are swimming
13:08
around in the soup there it's just not
13:10
clean and I found the same to be true
13:12
with the 50mm f1.8 and notice that while
13:15
the f1.4 its specular highlights had
13:17
much more fringing around them they were
13:19
cleaner inside i wouldn't be surprised
13:21
if the same is true with the 35mimeter
13:23
f1.4 as well and so when it comes to the
13:26
quality of the bokeh it's it's I would
13:28
consider it to be good but not great and
13:30
so I think that there is a little bit
13:32
more outlining than what I would like if
13:34
I you know threw on for example the Sony
13:37
35mm f1.4 and shot it at
13:40
f1.8 i found that I definitely favored
13:43
the bokeh from the Sony it's just softer
13:46
and a little bit more uniform looking uh
13:49
and and so but I did feel at the same
13:51
time that this lens wasn't bad in the
13:53
transition areas and that's where I
13:54
think the bokeh looks the can look the
13:56
worst on lenses is when it's really
13:58
jittery or nervous in transition that's
14:00
not true here it's just the overall it
14:03
it never becomes like super creamy in
14:05
the background and and I've certainly
14:07
have seen 35mm lenses that are capable
14:09
of that though to be fair they're often
14:11
not f1.8 lenses they're f1.4 or f1.2
14:15
type lenses and so that is one of the
14:17
downsides of that you know smaller
14:19
maximum aperture there i did find
14:22
however that I liked the look of just
14:24
colors in general images have a very
14:26
clean kind of pristine look to them and
14:29
so I definitely appreciated the quality
14:31
of what I saw there and that was true
14:33
even in this setting where I was
14:34
shooting at blue hour it was really
14:36
intense color levels at that point but
14:39
it handled them without them getting
14:41
kind of go or or ugly looking and so I I
14:44
appreciated color rendition top to
14:46
bottom i also found that flare
14:48
resistance was good very solid coatings
14:50
i didn't notice any kind of issue with
14:52
flare and and so a lot of these
14:54
qualities are handled well i would say
14:56
the only flaw there really that stood
14:58
out was that it does have a very
15:00
significant amount of vignette so my
15:02
conclusion is this in terms of raw
15:05
performance it feels like the price of
15:06
the 35mm and the 50 millimeter should be
15:09
reversed uh that uh as far as
15:12
performance goes the 50mm is definitely
15:14
the better lens and so to me the $850
15:17
price point it feels high and it it
15:20
feels like we are just right at the cusp
15:22
here on Nikon of getting some
15:24
challengers that from third parties you
15:27
know Viltrox is going to hit us probably
15:29
soon with the 35mm f1.2 but then after
15:33
that they also have on the road map a
15:35
you know 35mm f1.4 in their pro series
15:38
and that lens in particular I can see
15:40
being a challenge to this lens it
15:42
probably will be bigger bigger and
15:44
heavier but it will almost certainly
15:45
have more features it will have that
15:47
faster maximum aperture it will probably
15:49
have a better autofocus system in it and
15:51
so it'll be interesting to see how all
15:53
of that plays out but it feels like this
15:56
is maybe time for Nikon to start easing
15:58
off on that price they've probably made
16:00
their money on this lens and I think it
16:02
continue to be a very valid and
16:03
successful lens particularly if they can
16:05
drop down to selling it in the $5 to
16:07
$600 range where I think where the 50 mm
16:10
is right now and I think that's a more
16:12
competitive space for it that being said
16:15
if you buy this lens or if you already
16:17
own it it's a great lens it produces
16:19
greatl looking images enjoy what you
16:21
have now if you want more information
16:23
you can check out either my full text
16:25
review that's linked in the description
16:26
down below there's the typical buying
16:28
links also linkage to an image gallery
16:30
if you want to check that out and if you
16:31
want a deeper dive into the optical
16:33
performance jump in with me together
16:35
right now let's take a look at it all
16:37
right we'll start by taking a look at
16:38
vignette and distortion you can see that
16:40
there is a bit of barrel distortion
16:42
bulging out here in the center it's
16:44
linear however and so here I used a plus
16:46
five to correct that's a pretty clean
16:48
looking correction no mustache pattern
16:50
no problem there vignette however is
16:53
really really heavy and so here you can
16:55
see I've actually had to max out the
16:57
sliders to correct for that and so
16:59
you're definitely going to want to have
17:00
vignette correction turned on because
17:03
otherwise this is what you get and it is
17:05
heavy now you can see there is a bit of
17:07
longitudinal style chromatic aberrations
17:09
here it's not as perfectly corrected as
17:11
the 50mm not a whole lot before the
17:13
plane of focus some mild magenta here
17:15
but there's a little bit more pronounced
17:17
green fringing there you can see if we
17:20
take a look in here at this uh SLR face
17:23
that not too bad in these you know
17:25
transition areas there's a little bit of
17:27
green fringing here and as we go out of
17:28
focus you'll see a bit more in this area
17:31
now to be fair this is at 200%
17:33
magnification up here in the bokeh
17:35
there's just a tiny bit of fringing
17:37
around the outside so no big deal there
17:40
i wouldn't say that this is significant
17:42
enough to be a real problem in a lot of
17:44
situations when it comes to lateral
17:46
style chromatic aberrations no problem
17:48
at all here this is zero correction and
17:50
you can see that all of the transitions
17:52
from black to white look very very clean
17:54
and so that's great now as far as
17:56
resolution and contrast this is a 45
18:00
megapixel Z8 shown at 200% magnification
18:03
in the center of the frame it looks
18:05
great you can see great detail good
18:07
contrast all fantastic as we move to the
18:10
midframe it's still looking very good
18:12
just a little bit lower contrast not
18:14
quite as good but still good down into
18:17
the corners in general I would say the
18:20
corners are not looking too bad i've
18:22
certainly seen worse than this now
18:24
stopping down to f2 it makes a very mild
18:27
improvement to contrast in the center of
18:29
the frame other places a little bit less
18:31
so the one thing I will say is that
18:32
we're starting to look a little bit
18:34
brighter in the light areas the dark
18:36
levels haven't really gotten darker but
18:38
light levels look a little bit better
18:40
and because this lens has such heavy
18:41
vignette even when it comes with the
18:43
profile attached which I've done here
18:46
you're still going to see that it
18:47
brightens up as we stop the lens down
18:50
for example as I move on to f2.8 date
18:52
you can see it's just noticeably
18:53
brighter through some natural vignette
18:55
lift and the corners are starting to get
18:57
sharper here in the middle of the frame
18:59
it's got tons of pop that contrast is
19:01
looking very very crisp up in this upper
19:03
left corner you can see we are improving
19:06
but it's not like super sharp yet and
19:09
likewise here contrast is improving but
19:11
it's not yet perfect in the move from f
19:14
2.8 to f4 we can see that it is not only
19:18
does this the whole Canada it looks
19:20
crisper the lights are lighter the darks
19:22
look darker detail is just a little bit
19:24
better we can see this moir pattern
19:26
starting that shows us that contrast is
19:28
really starting to take off and fine
19:30
detail is rendering well looking down
19:32
into this corner it's starting to look
19:34
really good in the corners and by f5.6
19:37
it's looking better still and you're
19:39
going to get great detail all across the
19:41
frame by that point the situation will
19:43
stay largely the same at through f8 at
19:46
f11 defraction is going to start to
19:49
soften the image at f-16 you can see
19:51
that is it is softer relative to what we
19:54
have seen at the same time it doesn't
19:56
look bad at this point it's still I
19:58
think entirely usable even on a high
20:00
resolution body now minimum focus
20:02
distance uh as we've already seen is is
20:05
very good just uh 25 cm and you can see
20:09
that in the area of focus very nice
20:11
detail and contrast it looks great we
20:14
can also see that the plane of focus
20:16
isn't entirely flat and so it's going to
20:19
work better with threedimensional
20:20
objects something two-dimensional like
20:22
this it just doesn't work as well now
20:24
here's a real world shot this is on the
20:26
Z5 Mark II which is why the resolution
20:28
isn't quite as high but you can see it's
20:30
it's delineating those fine details here
20:32
in the dandelion clocks they all look
20:34
quite good so no problems there now as
20:37
far as the geometry here taking a look
20:39
at this you can see we do get some of
20:41
that lemon shape towards the edge but
20:43
it's not terrible and as we begin to
20:45
stop down you can see it's just it
20:47
doesn't get weird but rather here by
20:50
f2.8 it has become pretty consistently
20:53
circular across the sh frame you can see
20:55
a little bit of that non-agonal shape of
20:57
those nine aperture blades but it is
20:59
mostly round and as we stop on down here
21:02
to f4 those blades become a little bit
21:04
more pronounced the general impression
21:07
is circularish but I would say kind of
21:10
your peak is f2.8 if you're looking for
21:13
consistently round specular highlights
21:15
now as noted previously you can see what
21:17
I mentioned about inside these they're
21:20
just they're kind of generally busy it's
21:22
not concentric rings or anything just a
21:24
lot of just kind of pattern that's in
21:26
there and and so it's not quite as
21:28
smooth or creamy as what you might like
21:30
in the best of lenses this image for
21:33
example I think really gives us you know
21:35
the strengths and weaknesses of the lens
21:37
and so first of all I think that the
21:38
amount of detail and contrast is good it
21:41
doesn't have that like near macro
21:43
performance that we saw from the 50mm
21:45
f1.8 it had really impeccable contrast
21:49
and as we look towards the bokeh there
21:51
is a little bit more outlining than what
21:52
I would like the general impression if
21:54
we step back and look at the image it's
21:56
not bad but it's not like particularly
21:58
creamy either here's another shot here
22:01
and again a little bit more outlining
22:03
than what I would like you know detail
22:04
and contrast i like that it looks good
22:07
this image a little bit better because
22:10
obviously we have we're near minimum
22:12
focus distance and so you see good
22:14
detail there on the tulip as we go
22:16
towards the area that's defocused
22:19
however there definitely is kind of
22:20
outlining that I can see and so it's
22:23
it's not impeccable when it comes to the
22:25
bokeh here's another sample here now to
22:27
put it in a little bit of context I've
22:29
thrown the uh Sony GM onto a MegaDAP
22:32
adapter and have it at f1.8 as well and
22:36
we can see if we look towards the
22:37
general defocus background you can see
22:40
that it's just softer generally from the
22:42
Sony lens here you just see how these
22:45
kind of blend together whereas here
22:47
there's there's more like definite
22:49
contrast uh kind of edging and so the
22:52
whole thing is a little bit more
22:53
eye-catching where here it's just a
22:55
little bit more uniform so I think that
22:57
that helps to sum up what I would
22:58
consider to be maybe the weakness of the
23:00
rendering but at the same time you could
23:02
look at these images and and if you
23:03
weren't looking critically you could say
23:05
I don't really see much of a difference
23:07
and you'd probably be right this kind of
23:09
image however I think that the lens
23:11
excels at first of all there's very nice
23:14
I would say three-dimensional kind of
23:16
cutout of the subject cute little baby
23:18
here and as we go towards the general
23:20
defocus of everything here it's not
23:22
strongly out of focus but there is a
23:25
there's a separation of the subject from
23:27
the background and for a 35mm lens I
23:30
think that's the way it should work also
23:32
I found that because there is relatively
23:35
low kind of fringing and I would say the
23:38
global contrast is good it's again it's
23:40
not as exceptional as the F or the 50mm
23:43
but it's good enough to where images to
23:44
me just had a nice clean uh just
23:47
pristine look colors look really good
23:50
here you know there could be
23:51
opportunities for lots of fringing to
23:53
diminish this image but it looks good
23:54
and I'm very happy with that as noted
23:57
even here where colors are more intense
24:00
I think they're handled with some grace
24:01
to where they don't become go uh here
24:05
very natural looking colors even though
24:07
you know there's some deep saturations
24:08
in the yellows and oranges it still
24:11
looks very nice here there's very deep
24:13
saturations in the blues it's you know
24:15
kind of a blue hour shot generally but
24:18
again I think that the colors all look
24:20
nice here and so I'm happy with that
24:22
flare resistance here whether we're at
24:24
f1.8 and allowing that sun to kind of
24:27
come here we don't see any like blotches
24:30
artifacts loss of contrast and here just
24:32
shooting right into it at f11 uh we can
24:34
see that although it may be hard to tell
24:36
but that sun is very very intense in
24:38
this moment that it's handling it very
24:40
nicely just a little halo in this area
24:42
here but no ghosting artifacts elsewhere
24:45
and you can see the nine aperture blades
24:48
that you know we've got an 18-pointed
24:50
sunstar uh and it looks looks nice and
24:53
so I would say the flare resistance
24:55
coatings are doing a great job so you
24:57
can probably see after looking at these
24:59
tests why I come to the conclusion that
25:00
I did i think this is a very very good
25:03
lens optically but it's not as
25:04
exceptional as the 50 millimeter f1.8
25:07
still if you're looking for 35
25:09
millimeters this is a great option as
25:11
always thanks for watching have a great
25:13
day and let the light in