GMPhotography wrote:
Now this may sound crazy but use a 55 1.8 for when you need light weight Than use the GM for the nice shot of the kids and around places your comfortable . Seriously the 55 is the kissing cousin to the Batis 85 very little difference .
that's where my current thinking is - i think my kit will be the batis 25/2 + zony 55/1.8 as a pair and then the zony 35/1.4 and 85GM as another pair - so depending on my mood and the situation, i can walk out with either pair or all 4 if it's going to be a long day and i can't predict what's going to happen. another reason that i'm leaning towards the GM is exactly as you say - the "look" between the 55/1.8 and Batis 85 is very similar and don't need similar looks that close together in foc len. But if i have inter-leaved "looks" then having those 4 foc lens makes sense.
so, when i travel to Sicily with my dad in May and I'm more focused on taking photos of places, the 25+55 may get more use, whereas in August when i travel to the Riviera and Dolomites, the f/1.4 pair will get more use as I'll be interested in getting the family/friends in various environments - although i'll bring all 4 on both trips, it's just an estimate on how i'd use either pair.
Apparently SAR now has a front page piece on the noise issue. I posted there the other day and got called many names. Obviously have no clue who I am but regardless I'm not going to get involved there. I was in communication with Fred and Roger all day yesterday about this issue. I'm not going to say what we talked about but we should hopefully get some answers soon. The video I posted for members was in camera video with internal Mike with no gain or any other BS most video takes on it are being accused of and we are not trolls to boot. I'm a little pissed on how my views have been viewed as a respected working Pro I find that unacceptable but being a owner of a forum myself I totally know the BS that goes on. Honestly I don't care but it's not fair to the folks that maybe having a serious issue, these are not cheap lenses and I think every owner that bought one just wants it to work as expected. I know I do and I can get by they way it is but I want to see what Sony has to say and also like to hear Rogers tear down results. Turns out he has known me for many years so we had a nice conversation. Great guy and Fred is as well so let's see what comes about soon.
ecarlino wrote:
that's where my current thinking is - i think my kit will be the batis 25/2 + zony 55/1.8 as a pair and then the zony 35/1.4 and 85GM as another pair - so depending on my mood and the situation, i can walk out with either pair or all 4 if it's going to be a long day and i can't predict what's going to happen. another reason that i'm leaning towards the GM is exactly as you say - the "look" between the 55/1.8 and Batis 85 is very similar and don't need similar looks that close together in foc len. But if i have inter-leaved "looks" then having those 4 foc lens makes sense.
so, when i travel to Sicily with my dad in May and I'm more focused on taking photos of places, the 25+55 may get more use, whereas in August when i travel to the Riviera and Dolomites, the f/1.4 pair will get more use as I'll be interested in getting the family/friends in various environments - although i'll bring all 4 on both trips, it's just an estimate on how i'd use either pair.
Ere
*just listed my Batis 85 on the B&S board if anyone is interested (wink wink and sorry if that is breaking the rules)...Show more →
Exactly take the new zoom I just bought, it's a freaking beauty but there are going to be times I don't want the bulk and weight. I can go 15,21,85 and get my Loxia 50 back in the bag. That would cover me very well. For me the 85 goes everywhere regardless. I don't mind even with travel one heavier lens because the rest are light weight. Always think system bag because that's what you are going to carry.
Lol maybe so. I've been on forums many years and I do have a very thick skin. It's just unfair to comment about people you don't even try to find out who they are. All comes down to either detractors of a brand or fanboys. I like Sony a lot and enjoy there products but fanboy I hope I'm not perceived that way at all and others that posted about this issue which many sound like really nice people here. Anyway let's move on folks. I do have another test to share later this morning.
Received mine yesterday with trepidation after reading Guy's comments and Roger's observations, I was convinced it would go back in the box and back to B&H! However, after examining closely inside the barrel and operating the lens in AF and MF etc. I'm happy. The images are phenomenal. Yes the focusing mechanism is noisier, yet this is subjective depending on who you are and what your expectations are. Reminds me of my old Nikon 35 1.4G noise wise. I'm very pleased, this lens will not be returned!
ecarlino wrote:
I would agree 100% that the differences between the lenses can be managed. Being that my profession is trading commodities, photography is a hobby that is generally linked to traveling with family and friends. As such, probably 2/3 of the time I'm trying to capture a moment (and have very little control over anything) but don't want it look too much like a snapshot. Part of that is choosing target rich environments and the right time of day (light) and part of that is having good equipment.
So even though I'm sharing all of these tests, they're squarely focused on situations I tend to find myself in. I over analyze things before purchases or trips but when I'm traveling or out with friends, I don't sweat the details, in fact, I purposely try to not let the photography "get in the way" of having a good time with the people I'm with.
I actually love a lot of what the Batis does. So for my needs, this becomes a difficult decision, because the GM takes slightly sharper images and handles distracting backgrounds a bit better and I'm trying to determine for my purposes how often that will be a factor. but the GM "gets in the way" all of the time, because of its mass. I don't even notice I'm carrying the Batis, whereas I feel the GM constantly.
here's a shot i took last summer of my son on the ferry as we arrived into Bellagio - with the Zony 35/1.4 - which i'm glad i had and had gotten rid of the Zony 35/2.8 which practically ruined half the photos from a trip to SanDiego 2 years earlier because of its nervous bokeh. I had zero control over this situation, but i love the moment and part of that was having a good lens that i was confident in and didn't have to sweat about the background being too busy etc - i also wasn't thinking about my equipment at all and rather enjoyed our time together on that trip.
the difference between the Batis 85 and 85GM is nowhere near as wide as the Zony 35/1.4 and Zony 35/2.8 - which makes this so difficult - because for the bit extra pick-up in the 85GM, you're paying dearly in the mass (and price)....Show more →
I really like the FE35/1.4. I read about the decentering issue, but as we use it for weddings wide open and not flat subjects, we basically don't care and bought it anyway. Great rendering, fast focus, my copy has very good center sharpness at 1.4, too and for landscapes around f8 it is sharp to the corner.
Holger wrote:
I really like the FE35/1.4. I read about the decentering issue, but as we use it for weddings wide open and not flat subjects, we basically don't care and bought it anyway. Great rendering, fast focus, my copy has very good center sharpness at 1.4, too and for landscapes around f8 it is sharp to the corner.
yes, it was difficult to find a good copy of the 35/1.4 - i got lucky on #3.
Guy gave up after 3 (or 4?) bad copies which is why we were very leery when this noise issue surfaced with the 85GM. It would be useful for Sony to make a statement and (re-)establish expectations, rather than leaving everyone to second-guess what is actually going on.
GMPhotography wrote:
Apparently SAR now has a front page piece on the noise issue. I posted there the other day and got called many names. Obviously have no clue who I am but regardless I'm not going to get involved there. I was in communication with Fred and Roger all day yesterday about this issue. I'm not going to say what we talked about but we should hopefully get some answers soon. The video I posted for members was in camera video with internal Mike with no gain or any other BS most video takes on it are being accused of and we are not trolls to boot. I'm a little pissed on how my views have been viewed as a respected working Pro I find that unacceptable but being a owner of a forum myself I totally know the BS that goes on. Honestly I don't care but it's not fair to the folks that maybe having a serious issue, these are not cheap lenses and I think every owner that bought one just wants it to work as expected. I know I do and I can get by they way it is but I want to see what Sony has to say and also like to hear Rogers tear down results. Turns out he has known me for many years so we had a nice conversation. Great guy and Fred is as well so let's see what comes about soon. ...Show more →
Some people at SAR are fanboys to the extreme. Agree with what you say, here. 2000Euros is not a small amount of money for many people, so their concerns are valid in my opinion. With the Batis lenses, the 35/1.4 and the new GM lenses Sony has now almost everything we need for portraits and weddings. I hope the 70-200/2.8GM is not that expensive, as this is my favorite lens (a 135/2 would be nice, too). I am thinking of getting the 24-70GM also, as I am not that happy with the Tamron 24-70 on the Nikon bodies and Fred Miranda and your samples are very convincing.
I've been lurking in this thread with great interest, weighing pros and cons of the GM vs Batis. My primary us for an 85mm lens will be street, environmental portraiture so I'm not so concerned about corner sharpness. And I'm thinking the slightly higher contrast of the Batis may compliment my work. Price between the 2 lenses isn't a factor, but I wonder about the weight. I used to carry a Nikon D3 with a Nikon 24-70 tethered to my wrist for hours at a time and never seemed to mind the weight, although now I'm older and have grown to appreciate lighter weight which was one of the benefits moving to Sony. I've also got the Batis 25 and think it's great for so many reasons. Based on all of that I'm leaning toward getting the Batis. I'm only torn because so many people feel that the bokeh rendering of the GM is so much better than the Batis, although looking at the street scenes posted by ecarlino, I wasn't able to discern that the GM was much better (if at all) then the Batis.
If anyone has insights that will help finalize my decision, I'd be grateful.
Wow. You can't make this stuff up. Kudos to the optical formula which looks fantastic, and Fred's results in the long shots at F/1.4 are really impressive.
Once again the great FE optics bear a huge price: size and weight (and some copy angst). My 75 Summilux is like a razor in landscapes stopped down, but it doesn't get the chance because I am not dragging it on a hike. Sony themselves tout the A7 footprint as it's main selling point, yet they are making more big lenses than small ones. I'm not sure if the coverglass design helps much: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/media/2016/03/withandwithoutglass.jpg From Lensrental's test HERE
What do you have to change to get those better lines?
But the Otus popularity shows some people will put with big if it's good enough. Yet now we have the "noise" issue, which obviously speaks to a build and design issue, surprising since the optical copy variance has been brought under control.
Sony's thrashing entry into the big time FF still world just stays interesting with plot twists at each turn. And the 18 is coming!!
It seems like the noise thing is going to get even more attention than the copy variation (descentering) of some earlier lenses. Long run that's good, because they are more likely to improve the design and construction if there is hue and cry.
My huge 70/400G lens once made very soft noises, but now after a stop in laredo, it seems near silent.
Next will be the A9, with all the bulk of a DSLR plus pixels in your eye!
Lee Saxon wrote:
The degree of the difference between testing with and without a coverglass is amazing.
It makes you wonder. Why such thick cover glass? Early compatibility with existing E-mount lenses that were not even full frame? or A-mount glass? I mean, what is the benefit? I just see downsides to it.
Well now it's too late as the entire E-mount line-up was designed taking the thickness in consideration.
Fred Miranda wrote:
It makes you wonder. Why such thick cover glass? Early compatibility with existing E-mount lenses that were not even full frame? or A-mount glass? I mean, what is the benefit? I just see downsides to it.
Well now it's too late as the entire E-mount line-up was designed taking the thickness in consideration.
Back to my bokeh test . Now this one is the background at distance and i picked a pretty busy one at that. I like to test ugly as I call it. Shows us worst case scenario.
I have to say that f/1.6 looks awesome. Shooting the 100/2, the dof is nearly identical to that of an 85/1.4. But to get identical framing, it often involves taking a step back, giving me a bit deeper dof for portraits. To get most of a face in focus, I really prefer 100mm at f/2.2-2.4. The 85mms at f/1.6 looks amazing for a nice dof but amazing bokeh.
