Nice shot Jose. I think you said this was at f11, so that's pretty good sunstar definition for a lens with rounded blades. But it is through folliage so it's hard to say how much of it is due to "effective aperture size/shape modification" around the sun by the branches and leaves. It does show noticeable contrast reduction towards the sun, and I'm not crazy about the magenta cast around the beams as they pass through the shadow regions, but you will not get perfect results agains the sun with any lens. I have the Sony coming in about a week and am particularly interested to see how it goes against my Loxia 21 in this regard.
Regarding the sunstar shape and definition: I don't mind 18-points but at f/8-11, it lacks the definition it gets from f/22. Usually lenses with round blades get better definition at the smallest aperture where the blade's shape is no longer round.
Same behavior with the Sigma as well, except we would have 22-point sunstars. I like both Sigma and Sony sunstars at small apertures.
Many love the Zeiss/Voigtlander 10 and 12-straight aperture blades while others think it's a distraction. I find them attractive and it may be cool to compare the Voigtlander sunstar to the Sony side by side.
I tried a sunstar comparison today but it's been overcast and hazy....
Nice picture, not so nice sunstar. Shape is OK, but it is not well defined and appears to be surrounded by ghosting, magenta/purple, and a large blob of flare.
The ghosting reminds me of my Sony 12-24/4G. I have a similar pic I took with it, and saw similar ghosting that I didn't like. I haven't tested my Sigma 14-24 enough to know how it would perform under similar conditions, but I don't see it with my VC12. I know Fred has seen good performance on his copy, so I gotta wonder.
I also can't help myself from comparing those bottom corners. The lower right corner of the frame looks much softer than the lower left corner.
pdmphoto wrote:
Nice picture, not so nice sunstar. Shape is OK, but it is not well defined and appears to be surrounded by ghosting, magenta/purple, and a large blob of flare.
The ghosting reminds me of my Sony 12-24/4G. I have a similar pic I took with it, and saw similar ghosting that I didn't like. I haven't tested my Sigma 14-24 enough to know how it would perform under similar conditions, but I don't see it with my VC12. I know Fred has seen good performance on his copy, so I gotta wonder.
I also can't help myself from comparing those bottom corners. The lower right corner of the frame looks much softer than the lower left corner.
Yeah, it's odd that the lower right corner is unsharp compared to the left corner. I have a second shot taken from the same position where both corners are equally sharp.
The entire shot is in my view is not critically sharp, it was taken at 1/8s but I was interested on what the sunstar would look like through the foliage.
Sunstar Rendering 1: Sony 12-24/2.8 GM, Sigma 14-24/2.8 DG DN and Voigtlander 12mm f/5.6 III comparison
Here is a sunstar comparison between Sony 12-24/2.8 GM, Sigma 14-24/2.8 DG DN and Voigtlander 12mm f/5.6 III at 12mm. To help with the side-by side comparison, the 12mm images were cropped to 14mm to match the Sigma's widest FL.
Sunstar rendering varies between these lenses but the Sony and Sigma's sunstars share similar appearance because they are equipped with round aperture blades. This enables specular highlights to remain circular several stops from wide open.The negative is that small apertures are needed for defined sunstars. (usually f/16-22 but f/22 is optimal)
On the other hand, we have the Voigtlander's "look". The CV 12mm f/5.6 III is capture defined sunstars a third f/stop from wide open. For landscapes it means you would never need an extra f/22 image just for the sunstar. The negative of straight blades is decagon-shaped specular highlights when not shooting wide open.
Sony 12-24/2.8 GM = 9 round blades (18-point sunstar)
Sigma 14-24/2.8 Art = 11 round blades (22-point sunstar)
Voigtlander 12/5.6 III = 10 straight blades (10-point sunstar)
Which one do you like best? Sony, Sigma or Voigtlander? Which aperture do you prefer?
Thanks again Fred, and well done on matching the sun-star size across lens changes while the sun and perhaps also leaves are moving.
I do like the Sony's star better than the Sigma's, especially at F8-F11. Both because of the somewhat reduced number of spokes, but also the better convergence of the rays. But I agree that neither are a match for the well defined 10-point CV star that results from its straight blades. The CV also doesn't suffer the alternating or variable length of the spokes you tend to get with odd numbers of blades used in the zooms (presumably the odd number helps improve bokeh). That irregularity actually bothers me more for these zooms as you stop down to improve spoke-definition, and my favorite of the zoom shots you show here is probably the Sony at f11.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Here is a sunstar comparison between Sony 12-24/2.8 GM, Sigma 14-24/2.8 DG DN and Voigtlander 12mm f/5.6 III at 12mm. To help with the side-by side comparison, the 12mm images were cropped to 14mm to match the Sigma's widest FL.
Have the 12mm images also been scaled up to match the Sigma or only cropped? If the latter, I think the comparison disadvantages the Sigma because the same aperture value at 14mm correpsonds to a larger physical opening than at 12mm. But if the 12mm images have also been scaled up perhaps the disadvanatge is negated (although I'm not entirely sure about that).
randomguy wrote:
I like Voigt 12 and Sigma f18 best. Surprising that I like Sigma better than GM.
I noticed the sharper spokes at F18 with the Sigma (than the Sony) too, but I think it's probably due to the amount of sun that happended to be shining through the trees in that shot rather than a lens effect. If you look at f22 the Sony has slighlty better defined spokes again (as for the other apertures).
I finally started using the 12-24 gm now outdoors here in upper california region near the lakes. So far I am really impressed what I see just beautiful biting sharp landscape shots. I've been shooting at 12-18mm mostly and really loving what i see so far. I haven't been able to transfer the images yet to my laptop to look in detail but all images I've shot i double checked to make sure its in focus. Shooting at 12mm is super fun. I've never done it before and I think I fell in love
What's really amazing is shooting with the sun in the frame and i can't see any flares. This has been a dream that finally is a reality I am up here for a whole week in lake tahoe and been going around some other areas as well so I will try to share some great shots I got so far. I did a quick comparison test with my 16-35 and the images coming out of the 12-24 just have something about them; insane sharpness, rendering ect.
Also I am really liking the sunstars! Sure they arent as unique as the voigtlander but there ain't no 12-24 2.8 voigtlander
Here is a sunstar comparison between Sony 12-24/2.8 GM, Sigma 14-24/2.8 DG DN and Voigtlander 12mm f/5.6 III at 12mm. To help with the side-by side comparison, the 12mm images were cropped to 14mm to match the Sigma's widest FL.
Sunstar rendering varies between these lenses but the Sony and Sigma's sunstars share similar appearance because they are equipped with round aperture blades. This enables specular highlights to remain circular several stops from wide open.The negative is that small apertures are needed for defined sunstars. (usually f/16-22 but f/22 is optimal)
On the other hand, we have the Voigtlander's "look". The CV 12mm f/5.6 III is capture defined sunstars a third f/stop from wide open. For landscapes it means you would never need an extra f/22 image just for the sunstar. The negative of straight blades is decagon-shaped specular highlights when not shooting wide open.
Sony 12-24/2.8 GM = 9 round blades (18-point sunstar)
Sigma 14-24/2.8 Art = 11 round blades (22-point sunstar)
Voigtlander 12/5.6 III = 10 straight blades (10-point sunstar)
Which one do you like best? Sony, Sigma or Voigtlander? Which aperture do you prefer?...Show more →
Hmmm... what's with the Sony at f22?
Pretty blurry down the right side.
Also at f18 but less so.
Haida has announced what looks like a solution for rear glass filters for the 12-24 GM. Hopefully other manufacturers will too, although FC will need to be evaluated. It may be the case Sony didn't provide an option for glass filters for a reason....
Interesting kit. Just like the f4 version. Price is not bad either. Funny thing is i rarely ever use nd filters (let alone any pretty much, kinda shy'd away from then. I got my gnd and polarizer heida 150mm glass. Just waiting to see if lee filters releases an adapter for this lens and I'll be good.
rvh23 wrote: Haida has announced what looks like a solution for rear glass filters for the 12-24 GM. Hopefully other manufacturers will too, although FC will need to be evaluated. It may be the case Sony didn't provide an option for glass filters for a reason....
Judging from the new filter set images, it looks like Haida used the same glass thickness as the one designed for the Sigma 14-24, which means induced field curvature will be very noticeable because the glass is too thick at 0.5m. Hopefully they changed the thickness to 0.3m which both Aurora and Kase rear ND filters have.
Haida Rear Lens Filter Kit for Sony FE 12-24mm F2.8 GM Lens
rvh23 wrote:
I noticed the sharper spokes at F18 with the Sigma (than the Sony) too, but I think it's probably due to the amount of sun that happended to be shining through the trees in that shot rather than a lens effect. If you look at f22 the Sony has slighlty better defined spokes again (as for the other apertures).
After f/11, The Sigma and Sony's sunstar definition is equal. What changes is the extra 4 strokes and slight gap asymmetry for the Sigma. I wish the Voigtlander 12 had their most recent 12 blade aperture mechanism.
To my eyes, the Voigtlander 12/5.6's sunstar are optimal at or after f/7.1, while both Sony and Sigma lenses get better definition after f/16 (Optimal at f/18-22). The Sony at f/8-11 is capable of producing a more defined sunstar than the Sigma.
I am up here for a whole week in lake tahoe and been going around some other areas as well so I will try to share some great shots I got so far. I did a quick comparison test with my 16-35 and the images coming out of the 12-24 just have something about them; insane sharpness, rendering ect. 
