Over the years, I’ve tried dozens of lenses. Some were huge and fancy while some were hyper-compact, often making sacrifices in build or image quality to cut down on size.
Without spoiling to much of the review ahead of time, I’ll say: the Sony E 35mm F1.8 strikes a fine balance between those often-clashing qualities. Keep scrolling if you want dozens of sample photos and hands-on experience, but I’ll summarize it real quick:
Pros:
- Respectable image quality
- Fast and reliable AF
- Compact but still well-built
- Optical image stabilization
Cons:
- Fairly expensive compared to 3rd-party offerings
TLDR Verdict: While surpassed in pure image quality (and price) by some competitors, the Sony E 35mm F1.8 delivers quality photos in a compact & well-built packaged. Check out what other reviewers have to say (affiliate link) or keep reading for my impressions.
Size & Weight
Ok, so first up, let’s talk about why a lot of people would choose this lens over comparable competitors: size & weight. It’s not pancake size, but it’s pretty darn small. For comparison, it’s moderately smaller than my beloved Sigma 30mm and slightly larger than the non-extended kit lens.
I say this in a lot of my reviews, but it’s lenses like this that originally drove me away from bulky DSLRs and into the mirrorless ecosystem. Love it.
Build Quality
As for build quality, don’t let the small size fool you. While I personally have found that a lot of NEX-era lenses (ie. the kit lens) can feel a bit flimsy, this one is pretty solid in the hand.
You certainly don’t have a G-series lens here, make no mistake, but it’s got a nice metal-ish/plastic barrel and it feels like it could get knocked about a good bit. Note that it doesn’t come with a lens hood, but you can buy one aftermarket (doesn’t matter to me).
Aesthetically, it’s kinda mid. Obviously, the physical appearance of a camera lens should be second to it’s capabilities, but I do like having a pretty lens. This one is extremely average looking, and that’s fine.
Usability/Ergonomics
From a genereal ergonomics/day-to-day usability, it’s fine. The lens, given its small nature, doesn’t have any physical buttons nor does it offer a particularly pleasing manual focus experience.
However, the lens, while compact, is still just chunky enough to provide a decent gripping point and, for one-handed use, it’s light enough to not feel like your wrists are breaking (yes, I’m guilty of shooting street photos in one hand while juggling a cup of tea in the other lol).
As for weather sealing, Sony claims the lens is “dust and moisture resistant”. This, to me, has always meant “don’t take it out in a blizzard, but some light snow or a drizzle might be ok. Personally, I took mine out in a light snowfall and it survived just fine, even on my non-sealed ZV-E10.
One aspect where this lens really shines is OSS (image stabilization). Although many APS-C bodies now have in-body stabilization, both of mine do not, so I love having something to counter my shaky hands. This, in my opinion, is the only major advantage the Sony 35mm F1.8 has over the aforementioned Sigma 30mm F1.8 (more comparisons later).
Image Quality
So, everything is looking good so far, but what about image quality? Spoiler: it’s pretty good. My lens tests don’t get hyper-scientific so don’t expect any crazy MTF graphs or sharpness tests.
Anyway, at F1.8, we see generally solid sharpness across the entire frame with some slight softening of corners, but just keep in mind that the focus plane is very thin.
Around F2.5 is what I found to be my sweet spot for portraits. There’s enough bokeh (more on that in a minute) to create some serious subject isolation, but still a wide enough focal plane to get most of the details of my subject in focus.
Stopping down even more creates near-optical perfection (to my eyes, anyway). I really like using this lens at F8 for general daytime city/landscape stuff.
As for optical flaws: we see pretty much zero distortion (great for stitching landscapes or architecture photos). Flare is nearly non-existent even when shooting into direct sunlight. Finally, minor chromatic aberrations are present, but they’re easily fixable and barely noticeable except for in extreme conditions.
For my fellow bokeh-addicts, backgrounds are creamy and pleasant, though not quite at the same level as my often-mentioned Sigma 30mm. Regardless, bokeh beauty is often subjective, so here’s a small bokehlicious gallery for you to feast thine eyes upon.
Autofocus
Finally, the last subject to focus on is autofocus (see what I did there?). There’s not a lot to say here, but keep in mind this is a ~13 year old lens. Sony has always been on the top of their game when it comes to AF, but I did experience a bit more missed focus with this lens vs newer ones.
Still, it’s largely negligable, and I found that it worked 99.9% of the time, especially with EyeAF/tracking/AF-C/etc. Very little complaints from me here.
Conclusion
I must admit, throughout my whole time using this lens, I kept asking myself: would I recommend the Sony 35mm or the Sigma 30mm? My general bias towards the Sigma aside (it was the first lens I bought for my a6000 back in the day), I think it largely depends on what kind of body you’re using.
If you’re anything like me, you probably have crippling decision paralysis when it comes to photography gear (or anything in life lol), so I’ll give you an easy answer:
- Do you have a non-stabilized body and really want OSS? Buy the Sony.
- Do you have a stabilized body and don’t want to spend hundreds of dollars extra? Go for the Sigma 30mm.
Regardless of which you choose, you really can’t go wrong with either (I lean towards the Sigma as it’s way cheaper). If you’re interested in supporting my work here, you can purchase them through the affiliate links below as I get a (tiny) kickback. Thank you!