hiepphotog wrote:
Do you guys think it might be some coating defects on a few of these? I remember a few got problems with the AF motor. At least so far we have very low Optical variance.
Precisely why I’d like to induce the same types of flaring issues some have seen if at all possible on my end.
Personally, I’m happy with my copy. But being the curious guy I am, I’d still like to know if there are physical variances or if some of us are just not shooting it in the same way. Lens or user variance?
hiepphotog wrote:
For the two voices in this thread claiming this lens has a below average flare resistance, there are way too many others saying otherwise.
compared to my other lenses...
I am more of a critical kind of person, but I predict that I will still have the 24GM after the hype, when it has already been sold by Fred, Guy,... in a few months because of flat and yellowish rendering or flare resistance or lack of 3D...
It is good, sharp, small,... but not as good as I hoped, nothing special in the results (no Zeiss). But a big hype, typically Sony.
Sorry I take offense for your comments about the hype and I’ll speak for Fred also. We test and have very neutral preferences in our opinions but if I see something that is really good than your going to hear about it. Look your money buy whatever the hell you want but don’t ever come st me on this stuff as I’m just reporting my findings. I also expect not everything is 100 perfect otherwise I would own a pair of underwear in my life and nothing else. You don’t like it that’s your issue but don’t blame me for hyping it up. I like it and I’m not going to say something I don’t believe in .
Also every word I said good or bad about this lens is based completely on my visual testing and hard work going out without pay and spending my time on it. You have unrealistic expectations for a wide angle 1.4 lens. I’ve been shooting Professional for over 4 decades. I think by now I know a good lens from a bad one.
Please show us your visual evidence. I’ve seen nothing from you
I am more of a critical kind of person, but I predict that I will still have the 24GM after the hype, when it has already been sold by Fred, Guy,... in a few months because of flat and yellowish rendering or flare resistance or lack of 3D...
It is good, sharp, small,... but not as good as I hoped, nothing special in the results (no Zeiss). But a big hype, typically Sony.
I’m critical at times to, but I think you’re being way too unrealistic for a lens of it’s kind for the price it’s being sold for. Look at any of the other 24mm f/1.4 lenses currently available on the market and tell me this lens is lacking. You’re comparing it in ways that are completely unrealistic. It’s like saying the earth’s force of gravity is too strong because comparatively the moon has less without actually taking into consideration why this is the case.
You'd think,by now,you'd have your lens line up sorted out too
GMPhotography wrote:
Sorry I take offense for your comments about the hype and I’ll speak for Fred also. We test and have very neutral preferences in our opinions but if I see something that is really good than your going to hear about it. Look your money buy whatever the hell you want but don’t ever come st me on this stuff as I’m just reporting my findings. I also expect not everything is 100 perfect otherwise I would own a pair of underwear in my life and nothing else. You don’t like it that’s your issue but don’t blame me for hyping it up. I like it and I’m not going to say something I don’t believe in .
Also every word I said good or bad about this lens is based completely on my visual testing and hard work going out without pay and spending my time on it. You have unrealistic expectations for a wide angle 1.4 lens. I’ve been shooting Professional for over 4 decades. I think by now I know a good lens from a bad one.
Please show us your visual evidence. I’ve seen nothing from you...Show more →
OK so for me, a lightweight, when the sparring is over, do I bother with this this lens for its walkabout ease in favor of my Canon 24-70 w/metabones adapter?
GeorgieGirl wrote:
OK so for me, a lightweight, when the sparring is over, do I bother with this this lens for its walkabout ease in favor of my Canon 24-70 w/metabones adapter?
Your down to a use case so have to decide if that Canon zoom is to big and heavy to haul around or would you be better off with a prime or two. Personally I like primes but zooms are more convenient for some folks. I’d pick the Sony 24 1.4 and 55 myself if I wanted AF but my walk around is a 4 lens small MF lens kit. Personal choice here
GMPhotography wrote:
Your down to a use case so have to decide if that Canon zoom is to big and heavy to haul around or would you be better off with a prime or two. Personally I like primes but zooms are more convenient for some folks. I’d pick the Sony 24 1.4 and 55 myself if I wanted AF but my walk around is a 4 lens small MF lens kit. Personal choice here
Thanks. I think I want to build on the Sony 24 too.
GeorgieGirl wrote:
OK so for me, a lightweight, when the sparring is over, do I bother with this this lens for its walkabout ease in favor of my Canon 24-70 w/metabones adapter?
It just depends on how you feel about being stuck at the wide end of your zoom. I’d start by leaving your zoom at 24 for a while just to see how you like it.
I personally like 20-24 as a walk around focal length when I’m with family and friends since it allows me to be in the mix and still get a decent amount in the frame. YMMV though.
The beauty of this 24 lies in the fact that it punches well above its size-point in all areas. It got snappy AF, quality optical performance, and is only slightly larger than my most stellar lens I’ve ever used at 24mm in the Fuji 16/1.4 which is for a much smaller image circle. I think you will be astonished at how much more enjoyable it will be to carry the 24 around versus your zoom with adapter.
---------------------------------------------
GeorgieGirl wrote:
Thanks. I think I want to build on the Sony 24 too.
I have so much overlap I feel like a hoarder.
Don’t sweat it. You’re amongst the worst of the worst in this regard. Lol.
JohnDizzo15 wrote:
It just depends on how you feel about being stuck at the wide end of your zoom. I’d start by leaving your zoom at 24 for a while just to see how you like it.
I personally like 20-24 as a walk around focal length when I’m with family and friends since it allows me to be in the mix and still get a decent amount in the frame. YMMV though.
The beauty of this 24 lies in the fact that it punches well above its size-point in all areas. It got snappy AF, quality optical performance, and is only slightly larger than my most stellar lens I’ve ever used at 24mm in the Fuji 16/1.4 which is for a much smaller image circle. I think you will be astonished at how much more enjoyable it will be to carry the 24 around versus your zoom with adapter.
---------------------------------------------
Don’t sweat it. You’re amongst the worst of the worst in this regard. Lol. ...Show more →
A small,sharp lens is great for walkin around. CV40/1.2 or Sony 35/2.8 etc
GeorgieGirl wrote:
OK so for me, a lightweight, when the sparring is over, do I bother with this this lens for its walkabout ease in favor of my Canon 24-70 w/metabones adapter?
Just received the 24mm 1.4. Only a handful of test images so far and I'm loving it.
However mine is making a high pitched noise whenever the camera is powered on. Sign of a defective focus motor I think. So this one will have to go back for another.
@ GMPhotography: Please read carefully: I do not accuse anyone of triggering a hype. I'm just saying there is a hype.
I never said that the lens is bad. So I do not have to proof that.
I did not criticize your test procedure.
I accept your opinion that you think the lens is really great, so please accept mine as well.
I only said that I expected more. How do you know that my expectation was wrong, or that it was impossible to expect more? Are you an engineer at Sony?
Especially Sony brings constantly new products on the market to 1-2 years later mend the mistakes. This just shows that it is quite possible to expect more at launch.
I also said that I believe that some will resell the lens soon.
I think about what I need, then buy it. Many others buy many lenses without need and are also very enthusiastic about it in the beginning, this has nothing to do with occupation, but with hobby. Once the initial enthusiasm has settled, they often rate their own test results (obtained from an excellent test procedure) differently. Minor blemishes start to bother, even if they did not think that before.
For me it's the other way around with camera stuff, I try to look at the mistakes first and over time I learn to appreciate the strengths. That is quite satisfying. (I also kept the 35mm Loxia and after using it for some time I learned how to produce this fantastic 3D effect to my satisfaction although I was extremely disappointed in the beginning.)
Yes, it is the best 24mm autofocus on the market. But, that was to be expected, because it is much newer.There is nothing to celebrate. If Canon would launch a successor next year, as a Canon user, I would expect it to be better than the GM.
Since there is no alternative, I bought the GM. The Batis, however, I liked the look more and also with the Sigma Art something more. The Batis and the Sigma are technically overall worse and much less convenient to use.
IsabellaR wrote:
@ GMPhotography: Please read carefully: I do not accuse anyone of triggering a hype. I'm just saying there is a hype.
I never said that the lens is bad. So I do not have to proof that.
I did not criticize your test procedure.
I accept your opinion that you think the lens is really great, so please accept mine as well.
I only said that I expected more. How do you know that my expectation was wrong, or that it was impossible to expect more? Are you an engineer at Sony?
Especially Sony brings constantly new products on the market to 1-2 years later mend the mistakes. This just shows that it is quite possible to expect more at launch.
I also said that I believe that some will resell the lens soon.
I think about what I need, then buy it. Many others buy many lenses without need and are also very enthusiastic about it in the beginning, this has nothing to do with occupation, but with hobby. Once the initial enthusiasm has settled, they often rate their own test results (obtained from an excellent test procedure) differently. Minor blemishes start to bother, even if they did not think that before.
For me it's the other way around with camera stuff, I try to look at the mistakes first and over time I learn to appreciate the strengths. That is quite satisfying. (I also kept the 35mm Loxia and after using it for some time I learned how to produce this fantastic 3D effect to my satisfaction although I was extremely disappointed in the beginning.)
Yes, it is the best 24mm autofocus on the market. But, that was to be expected, because it is much newer.There is nothing to celebrate. If Canon would launch a successor next year, as a Canon user, I would expect it to be better than the GM.
Since there is no alternative, I bought the GM. The Batis, however, I liked the look more and also with the Sigma Art something more. The Batis and the Sigma are technically overall worse and much less convenient to use.
No lens is perfect, therefore, one can always pick those negatives and blow them up. I call that negative hype.
The overall tenor is, that this lens is a fantastic all-rounder, generating a lens excelling in many areas. If this was Sony's intention (and I am inclined to believe that) I don't see any reason to have an issue with that. As usual, with an allrounder,
it is not able to surpass all specialist lenses available.
For me, personally, it is the decathlon champion of 24mm lenses ;-) (or heptathlon).
Holger wrote:
What did you expect in the first place?
No lens is perfect, therefore, one can always pick those negatives and blow them up. I call that negative hype.
The overall tenor is, that this lens is a fantastic all-rounder, generating a lens excelling in many areas. If this was Sony's intention (and I am inclined to believe that) I don't see any reason to have an issue with that. As usual, with an allrounder,
it is not able to surpass all specialist lenses available.
For me, personally, it is the decathlon champion of 24mm lenses ;-) (or heptathlon).
I expected a little less vignetting, a little better corner sharpness stopped down, a little more defined sunstars, a little better color reproduction (subjective, I expected that), a little more character/ 3D (subjetive, I expected that).
I thouhgt, a 24mm prime should be a specialist lens? And yeah it is - all together - a little better than the 3-5 competitors, which are older. But in some categories it is even worse.
But what would a neutral person think more of a hyping wording, my wording ("good, best of class, but that was to be expected, nothing to celebrate") as promoting a negative hype or your wording ("fantastic, decathlon champion,...") as promoting a positive hype?
Are you sure that I am inflating problems or promoting negative hype? Or is it difficult for you to accept another view?
Since I switched to Sony a few years ago, I notice that the Sony users can not bear any other opinions, it is not even allowed to even relativise praise. This is new for me.
The word hype at least from my standpoint means more that I’m getting paid in some sort of way or having click bait or an ambassador for Sony or some crap like that. I’m very sensitive to this because I am the one guy that hates these reviewers that are attached to you tube channels and crap like that to earn a living that in most cases are about as worthless as a mosquito. I don’t get paid to do any review or affiliated with any company. I make ALL my money on real clients that pay my rate. I don’t even go outside this forum but share my results with the good members here. So drop the word hype it gives a very bad taste In the members mouths here. The folks here know better. This is not DPR bullshit type of site. I’m here to help people and the story ends there and your throwing my name in a bad reputation environment . That I refuse to be any part of. Maybe it’s a culture thing but hype is a horrible word for people that are truly honest about what they believe in.
