• expired

Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 $682.45 ($632.45 after cashback) Delivered @ Ted's Cameras

210

A further $10 off for joining the Ted's newspaper too bringing the price down to $622.45 after cashback.
To get free delivery sign up for a free Club Ted account.

Positive reviews in the comments of previous deals. I believe this is the lowest price in a while.
Stock showing in Ted stores at the moment, should be able to be shipped out before the cashback promotional period ends - call to confirm (OOS Digidrect Cannington WA, pre-order on Sony Online).
Potentially further savings with Amex and price matching with Sony Online!

Sony cashback post

Related Stores

Ted's Cameras
Ted's Cameras

closed Comments

  • +2

    This lens is ridiculous value for money. It's pin sharp, small, light and fast. Crazy good. Don't dick around, buy it.

    • How does this compare to the new GM 1.4 ?

      • To answer your question, I would have to have tried them both. Which I haven't sorry. I should have taken the opportunity during a Sony Scene ANZ portrait shoot event a few weeks ago.

  • Keen to know how this compares to the new Sigma 35 mm lens which is available for 1175 and claims to be better than most other lenses and offers f1.4.

    https://www.cccwarehouse.com.au/xcart/pc/nviewPrd.asp?idProd...

    • If it's anything like the reviews the new sigma does not perform great.

      Noticeable CA, focus breathing and soft at close focus distance.

      Watch Gerald undones review.

      https://youtu.be/JJl8MPb3Pr4

      If you're shooting video the Sony 35mm 1.8 is by far the best with minimal focus breathing, especially at this price it's a no-brainer. If you're shooting just photos the Sony 35mm 1.4 GM is the best quality and also the most expensive.

    • +1

      Sigma f1.4 DG DN just got released, few reviewers have mentioned it is not sharp wide open @f1.4, so basically you have to step down to 1.8 or more.
      But this Sony is sharp wide open at 1.8 , and its a native lens. @$632 it is amazing value.

      I toyed between these two, and finally went for the Sony 35 F1.4 GM; It is a blast ! SHARRRP even at f1.4. but more than 3 times the price of this Sony f1.8 lens !

  • +3

    Why cant cannon have these type of lens deals… Should have went with Sony :(

  • Got the similar one but APS-C version, create very nice photos too
    Also on discount and CB: https://www.teds.com.au/sony-nex-35mm-f1-8 $541

    Besides, if you have the AMEX $300 back $60 offer
    you can Price match with Sony and stack both Sony and AMEX cashback together

  • How do I work this with my Lumix gh4, an adapter? Or does that not play nicely?

    • +1

      Using an E-Mount lens on a MFT camera is physically impossible due to the differences in flange length (distance between sensor and back of lens). This lens on a MFT body would be equivalent to a telephoto focal length - good options for a small telephoto include Olympus 45mm and Panasonic 42.5mm. If you wanted a 35mm equiv, the Olympus 17mm and Panasonic 20mm also have good reviews.

  • Great value, I paid $900+ when it was released and thought I got a bargain then

  • +1

    I have this lens. Can confirm this is a gem, although I'm a bit biased as 35mm is my favourite focal length.

    Weird how the 35mm 1.8 was a massive hole in the FE mount line up a year or so back but now we're spoilt for choice with all these manufacturers throwing their 35mm hat in the ring.

    My classic duo is the Tamron 28-200mm for general purpose snaps and this 35mm for when I want that pop.

    • Could I ask how the Tamron 28-200 is with auto focus.

      Is it kind of quick or very quick.

      Thanks in advance :)

      • +2

        The AF on the Tamron 28-200 is pretty snappy. I mostly use AF-C on my A7r II which is phase detect (without the added contrast detect on the AF-S mode as that slows down focus, but us more accurate). Obviously, AF would depend on your camera model. I don't think all models A7 II and under have phase detect and so their AF will be slower.

        In my experience, it feels about as fast as this 35mm lens. It feels faster than the Sony 85mm 1.8 and 50mm 1.8, which I also have. The focus green dots are acquired almost instantly. Obviously in lower light, it may not focus as fast (and sometimes hunts) once you get down to f/4 or 5.6 when you're zoomed in, but I'm talking about dimly lit rooms.

        In short, the AF on the 28-200 is pretty good. Probably not as good as the G lenses, but I wouldn't know as I don't have any of them…yet.

        • Thanks for detailed response.

          I have a a7iii, waiting for the elusive a7iv.

          Current lenses I have are Sony 24-105 f4 and Sigma 100-400.

          I sold my Sony 70-200 f4, which I regret, so that's why I'm finding a replacement.

          • @Ausdave: How do you like the sigma?

            • +1

              @beerbudget: Yah, interested in knowing how you like the sigma too. I'm toying with either getting a telephoto like the 100-400, or getting an ultrawide like the 16-35.

              IMO the 28-200 can be a 70-200 replacement. Not sure about your use case, but keep in mind the 28-200 doesn't have OIS. I'm happy with the on-board sensor stabilisation as I usually shoot with a minimum shutter speed of 1/125 and auto ISO it to 12800. Might not be the best fit for sports photography, though. Might be worthwhile considering the Tamron 70-180 f/2.8 too, which can be had for a tad under the Sony 70-200 f/4.

              If I were you, I'd consider the 28-200mm or the 70-180. The 28-200mm for general purpose do it all lens (and a very well reviewed one at that) or the 70-180 for dat speed and bokeh.

              • +1

                @Fotato: @Fotato & @beerbudget

                The sigma 100-400 is good for the price (goes on sale around $1-1.1k), but with a few compromises.

                The autofocus is overall good, but is definitely a bit slower than other lenses I own/owned.

                It's also sharp enough, but not the sharpest.

                Apologies for not being too descriptive, but that's the best I can really convey.

                You can't really argue what it offers for that price, in comparison to the Sony 100-400 (which only has 1 stop less at the long end).

              • +1

                @Fotato: More feedback on the Sigma 100-400:

                Overall still will recommend, but only for day time nature/wildlife photography etc.

                I ended up purchasing the Tamron 28-200 today from Amazon at a good price:
                https://www.amazon.com.au/Tamron-28-200-2-8-5-6-Mirrorless-M...

                • +1

                  @Ausdave: Cheers mate, thanks for the suggestion for the lens collar. I was actually looking at them too - didn't think the sigma one was worth their asking price.

                  Also, that's a cracking price for the 28-200. I got mine for a bit over a grand and I thought that was a nice price!

                  • +1

                    @Fotato: Not saying you should get the Sigma 100-400… but it's at a good price right now haha:
                    https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/324312972621

                    $935.22 with eBay plus code PEOFY22, and you can stack the savings further with 3-5% cashback on Shopback Giftcards.

                    An ultrawide lens also sounds good, so totally up to you.

  • Does anyone know whether sony stores still allow payment with more than 1 amex card?