Fred Miranda wrote:
I knew you would appreciate this lens Charles. Are you going to sell your 85/1.2L? How does rendering compare to you? (Take your time to answer this!)
Thank you Fred When I thought carefully the Batis 85 was the lens that I was not using in preference to the 85L II for portraits so the trade for the GM 85 was easy. The 85L II I will keep for now and if in 3 months I do not use it it will be on ebay.
The rendering comparison I feel the 85L II is very smooth, more so than the GM 85 but both are very unique in their style. I would compare it to the Leica 50 Lux Asph to the 50 Nocti f/1.0... almost
My request to Sony is please, as soon as possible a GM 50/1.4 !!!
charles.K wrote:
The rendering comparison I feel the 85L II is very smooth, more so than the GM 85 but both are very unique in their style. I would compare it to the Leica 50 Lux Asph to the 50 Nocti f/1.0... almost
Congratulations on the new lens, Charles!
I don't have much experience with the 85L II (only loaned it), so the Canon 135L has been my gold standard regarding rendering and bokeh for a long time. Maybe I like the look of the 85 GM because it reminds me of the 135L?
It still seems a bit different, but not much, and it is another focal length after all. Have you tried the 135L?
Stoffer wrote:
Congratulations on the new lens, Charles!
I don't have much experience with the 85L II (only loaned it), so the Canon 135L has been my gold standard regarding rendering and bokeh for a long time. Maybe I like the look of the 85 GM because it reminds me of the 135L?
It still seems a bit different, but not much, and it is another focal length after all. Have you tried the 135L?
Thank you Nils and Guy
Nils the 135L is truly an excellent lens. I had both the 135L and ZA 135/1.8 and decided to keep the ZA 135/1.8 instead just for the magic dust within the ZA 135.
The GM 85 is very unique and special. It will take another few months to really understand it and get the most from it.
Also I was going to mention that the ergonomics of the GM 85 is superb. It does not feel heavy or large, just fat and squat which is ideal for a fast lens.
Two short questions:
When using my FE 55/1.8 with live-view turned off, the lens is always wide open. Only while focusing (or pressing the preview button) it closes to the chosen f-stop. This happens not with the 85GM (no matter if the aperture ring was set to auto or not). Why?
Is there a disatvantage of shooting stills without the aperture-click? For example, is f2.64 worse than f2.8?
Thanks in advance!
Seb
Apr 15, 2016 at 05:27 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
charles.K wrote:
Thank you Fred When I thought carefully the Batis 85 was the lens that I was not using in preference to the 85L II for portraits so the trade for the GM 85 was easy. The 85L II I will keep for now and if in 3 months I do not use it it will be on ebay.
The rendering comparison I feel the 85L II is very smooth, more so than the GM 85 but both are very unique in their style. I would compare it to the Leica 50 Lux Asph to the 50 Nocti f/1.0... almost
My request to Sony is please, as soon as possible a GM 50/1.4 !!!
Charles, I think the request should actually be a GM 50 f/1.2 Seriously, I am hoping there is a Batis 50 f/1.4, and a GM 50 f/1.2. Those together with the FE 55 f/1.8 and 50 f/1.8 would be a super strong and basically unparalleled set of 50ish lenses for the system.
Sunday Sony has a press conference to announce new product from what I read. I just ordered a A6300 for backup and I would love to see them start on some GM primes. Love to see 28 1.4, 50 1.4, 135 F2. So I'm waiting on what they announce as I was going to try the 28 F2 again but I'm hoping for something better
At one point in this thread someone mentioned the A6300 and the 85 where extremely fast in AF. I'm waiting on a A6300 today and will give it a try. Looks like I have a 135 lens again . Lol
Well, the Sony/Minolta 135 STF is still head and shoulders above the rest. But this GM is definitely next best.
chrisgibbs wrote:
Anyone who shoots modern social portraiture can only better that look (maybe) by going to a 200 f/2, this is a lovely looking lens for them.
Another comment about the GM 85, is normally with the long FE lenses I do not use the lens hoods as ergonomics of carrying a "torpedo" is very annoying.
On the weekend on the beach I used the lens hood for the GM 85 and it was excellent. The best part of the design was having a rubber bumper to absorb any bumps or shocks to the front of the lens. Very nice design feature !!!
charles.K wrote:
Another comment about the GM 85, is normally with the long FE lenses I do not use the lens hoods as ergonomics of carrying a "torpedo" is very annoying.
On the weekend on the beach I used the lens hood for the GM 85 and it was excellent. The best part of the design was having a rubber bumper to absorb any bumps or shocks to the front of the lens. Very nice design feature !!!
I love the aperture ring without clicks. After focusing (back-button, AF-C, focus-mode with lock-on) you can choose the right f-stop on the fly while recomposing. when you push the shutter button the other stuff (A-mode, ISO min SS, Auto-ISO and AEL on shutter) do the rest. You can even do an ad hoc "aperture bracketing".
I don't get the idea of this 85GM. If bokeh is the main priority, there are better things such as 135/1.8 or adapted 200/2 (what, not EyeAF?, geez...just tells how immature system this is). IMHO, This f/1.4 thing gets boring very fast and when it does it becomes clear that Batis 85mm packs more punch.
Shot at f/1.4 there is some "haze" in the images, thus lacking contrast.
All in all, lots of money for another brick which plays against weight and size approach of A7-system. If one hauls 24-70 or 85GM, one can haul around a 200/2 as well. Brick is a brick is a brick.
PS. EyeAF is just a weird automation way of doing the focusing. You are relying on a machine and not really in control of the system. Correct way would be a system which focuses where YOU ARE looking at. A real eye AF. This was done by Canon with EOS 3 film camera decades ago but has been abandoned since.
PSS. Another conspiracy theory would be that Sony used different AF motors in the demo units for really silent AF operation.
charles.K wrote:
Another comment about the GM 85, is normally with the long FE lenses I do not use the lens hoods as ergonomics of carrying a "torpedo" is very annoying.
On the weekend on the beach I used the lens hood for the GM 85 and it was excellent. The best part of the design was having a rubber bumper to absorb any bumps or shocks to the front of the lens. Very nice design feature !!!
More a contrast build from 1.4 to 1.6 or some may call it veiling flare. Perfectly normal it's in almost every 1.4 out there. Otus maybe the exception. Back in the day with Leica R lenses it was more pronounced compared to more modern day lenses but it was used for artistic effect too and was for lack of a better word dreamy.
MJKoski wrote:
I don't get the idea of this 85GM. If bokeh is the main priority, there are better things such as 135/1.8 or adapted 200/2 (what, not EyeAF?, geez...just tells how immature system this is). IMHO, This f/1.4 thing gets boring very fast and when it does it becomes clear that Batis 85mm packs more punch.
Shot at f/1.4 there is some "haze" in the images, thus lacking contrast.
All in all, lots of money for another brick which plays against weight and size approach of A7-system. If one hauls 24-70 or 85GM, one can haul around a 200/2 as well. Brick is a brick is a brick.
PS. EyeAF is just a weird automation way of doing the focusing. You are relying on a machine and not really in control of the system. Correct way would be a system which focuses where YOU ARE looking at. A real eye AF. This was done by Canon with EOS 3 film camera decades ago but has been abandoned since.
PSS. Another conspiracy theory would be that Sony used different AF motors in the demo units for really silent AF operation....Show more →
I completely disagree with everything you wrote but can we still be friends?
GMPhotography wrote:
More a contrast build from 1.4 to 1.6 or some may call it veiling flare. Perfectly normal it's in almost every 1.4 out there. Otus maybe the exception. Back in the day with Leica R lenses it was more pronounced compared to more modern day lenses but it was used for artistic effect too and was for lack of a better word dreamy.
i was actually really surprised because i'm not seeing that much degradation as it moves towards wide-open, speaking solely about the area that is within the DoF, which is, of course, getting extremely narrow.
does this sort of phenomenon need to be tested at various subject distances, or does this suffice?
i'm thinking f/1.6 just to be safe, but f/1.4 really is not shabby at all.
