This topic is in the 2021 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2021Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
p.12 #1Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I am curious, why can't Sony just increase vignetting and wouldn't that make up for most of the rumored size decrease?
As I understand it, 35mm and up is the breaking point at which mirrorless can no longer take advantage of the lack of a mirrorbox, so we can't get compact lenses in this range like we do wides--we are back to SLR size lenses.
But, lenses like ZM 35 1.4 and CV 35 1.7 offer excellent IQ across the frame wide open and are pretty tiny (compared to a ZA 35/1.4 and especially Sigma 35/1.2). The way they do this seems to be having RF levels of vignetting--which is a tradeoff I love. They both have CA as well, but so does the GM 24, even at 2.8 I have seen some axial CA if the situation is demanding enough.
Obviously, complete CA suppression, coma, bokeh and transitions and such require more complex and larger designs (along with AF and sealing). But the GM 24 shows astigmatism, longitudinal and lateral CA, some very minor outlining and onion rings and heavy vignetting anyway.
So I guess my question is, though perhaps simplistic, can't Sony release a 35 1.4 GM and make most of the compromise with vignetting and keep the package relatively small? At least much smaller than the ZA 35/1.4.
Zeiss and CV seem to offer fairly high degrees of correction. And the rendering on the 35/1.7 in particular is fairly smooth and pleasant (minus the loads of cat's eye).No takers to my question above? I'd like to understand this better.
Sure they could increase vignetting. But optical vignetting produces not just darker corners but also a great deal of swirl and of axis areas which effectively have a small aperture which damages bokeh. Also an AF lens has to have a smaller focusing group which makes for a larger lens overall, strangely.
nehemiahphoto wrote
@DavidBM@@@I am curious, why can't Sony just increase vignetting and wouldn't that make up for most of the rumored size decrease?
As I understand it, 35mm and up is the breaking point at which mirrorless can no longer take advantage of the lack of a mirrorbox, so we can't get compact lenses in this range like we do wides--we are back to SLR size lenses.
But, lenses like ZM 35 1.4 and CV 35 1.7 offer excellent IQ across the frame wide open and are pretty tiny (compared to a ZA 35/1.4 and especially Sigma 35/1.2). The way they do this seems to be having RF levels of vignetting--which is a tradeoff I love. They both have CA as well, but so does the GM 24, even at 2.8 I have seen some axial CA if the situation is demanding enough.
Obviously, complete CA suppression, coma, bokeh and transitions and such require more complex and larger designs (along with AF and sealing). But the GM 24 shows astigmatism, longitudinal and lateral CA, some very minor outlining and onion rings and heavy vignetting anyway.
So I guess my question is, though perhaps simplistic, can't Sony release a 35 1.4 GM and make most of the compromise with vignetting and keep the package relatively small? At least much smaller than the ZA 35/1.4.
Zeiss and CV seem to offer fairly high degrees of correction. And the rendering on the 35/1.7 in particular is fairly smooth and pleasant (minus the loads of cat's eye).
Sure they could increase vignetting. But optical vignetting produces not just darker corners but also a great deal of swirl and of axis areas which effectively have a small aperture which damages bokeh. Also an AF lens has to have a smaller focusing group which makes for a larger lens overall, strangely.
Dec 10, 2020 at 01:00 PM
p.12 #2Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
DavidBM wrote:
I am curious, why can't Sony just increase vignetting and wouldn't that make up for most of the rumored size decrease?
As I understand it, 35mm and up is the breaking point at which mirrorless can no longer take advantage of the lack of a mirrorbox, so we can't get compact lenses in this range like we do wides--we are back to SLR size lenses.
But, lenses like ZM 35 1.4 and CV 35 1.7 offer excellent IQ across the frame wide open and are pretty tiny (compared to a ZA 35/1.4 and especially Sigma 35/1.2). The way they do this seems to be having RF levels of vignetting--which is a tradeoff I love. They both have CA as well, but so does the GM 24, even at 2.8 I have seen some axial CA if the situation is demanding enough.
Obviously, complete CA suppression, coma, bokeh and transitions and such require more complex and larger designs (along with AF and sealing). But the GM 24 shows astigmatism, longitudinal and lateral CA, some very minor outlining and onion rings and heavy vignetting anyway.
So I guess my question is, though perhaps simplistic, can't Sony release a 35 1.4 GM and make most of the compromise with vignetting and keep the package relatively small? At least much smaller than the ZA 35/1.4.
Zeiss and CV seem to offer fairly high degrees of correction. And the rendering on the 35/1.7 in particular is fairly smooth and pleasant (minus the loads of cat's eye).No takers to my question above? I'd like to understand this better.Sure they could increase vignetting. But optical vignetting produces not just darker corners but also a great deal of swirl and of axis areas which effectively have a small aperture which damages bokeh. Also an AF lens has to have a smaller focusing group which makes for a larger lens overall, strangely.
Well said. I have found most lenses I like in term of rendering in the past have generous coverage (so better vignette performance, bokeh ball is also more circular) 50lux ASPH M, Nikon 58G, Panasonic 70-200 zoom, Leica 80lux, Leica R 100mm APO and even Sigma 45mm have a quite nice corner behavior. I don't think I am a mainstream user though.
For new sigma 35mmf2, I think cat eye is more than I prefer but that is a trade off I am willing to take after evaluate everything on the table. It really all depend what kind of trade off to take, for example, how smaller it will be, what about price, build quality, AF performance or how bad the vignetting is, how is the intended usage etc...There must be a balance lay somewhere make you either buy it or not.
This 35GM will not be disappointing if you ask me given a prove track record of 24, 85 and 135 gm.
nehemiahphoto wrote
nehemiahphoto wrote
@DavidBM@@@@I am curious, why can't Sony just increase vignetting and wouldn't that make up for most of the rumored size decrease?
As I understand it, 35mm and up is the breaking point at which mirrorless can no longer take advantage of the lack of a mirrorbox, so we can't get compact lenses in this range like we do wides--we are back to SLR size lenses.
But, lenses like ZM 35 1.4 and CV 35 1.7 offer excellent IQ across the frame wide open and are pretty tiny (compared to a ZA 35/1.4 and especially Sigma 35/1.2). The way they do this seems to be having RF levels of vignetting--which is a tradeoff I love. They both have CA as well, but so does the GM 24, even at 2.8 I have seen some axial CA if the situation is demanding enough.
Obviously, complete CA suppression, coma, bokeh and transitions and such require more complex and larger designs (along with AF and sealing). But the GM 24 shows astigmatism, longitudinal and lateral CA, some very minor outlining and onion rings and heavy vignetting anyway.
So I guess my question is, though perhaps simplistic, can't Sony release a 35 1.4 GM and make most of the compromise with vignetting and keep the package relatively small? At least much smaller than the ZA 35/1.4.
Zeiss and CV seem to offer fairly high degrees of correction. And the rendering on the 35/1.7 in particular is fairly smooth and pleasant (minus the loads of cat's eye).
Well said. I have found most lenses I like in term of rendering in the past have generous coverage (so better vignette performance, bokeh ball is also more circular) 50lux ASPH M, Nikon 58G, Panasonic 70-200 zoom, Leica 80lux, Leica R 100mm APO and even Sigma 45mm have a quite nice corner behavior. I don't think I am a mainstream user though.
For new sigma 35mmf2, I think cat eye is more than I prefer but that is a trade off I am willing to take after evaluate everything on the table. It really all depend what kind of trade off to take, for example, how smaller it will be, what about price, build quality, AF performance or how bad the vignetting is, how is the intended usage etc...There must be a balance lay somewhere make you either buy it or not.
This 35GM will not be disappointing if you ask me given a prove track record of 24, 85 and 135 gm.
Dec 10, 2020 at 01:34 PM
p.12 #3Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
DavidBM wrote:
I am curious, why can't Sony just increase vignetting and wouldn't that make up for most of the rumored size decrease?
As I understand it, 35mm and up is the breaking point at which mirrorless can no longer take advantage of the lack of a mirrorbox, so we can't get compact lenses in this range like we do wides--we are back to SLR size lenses.
But, lenses like ZM 35 1.4 and CV 35 1.7 offer excellent IQ across the frame wide open and are pretty tiny (compared to a ZA 35/1.4 and especially Sigma 35/1.2). The way they do this seems to be having RF levels of vignetting--which is a tradeoff I love. They both have CA as well, but so does the GM 24, even at 2.8 I have seen some axial CA if the situation is demanding enough.
Obviously, complete CA suppression, coma, bokeh and transitions and such require more complex and larger designs (along with AF and sealing). But the GM 24 shows astigmatism, longitudinal and lateral CA, some very minor outlining and onion rings and heavy vignetting anyway.
So I guess my question is, though perhaps simplistic, can't Sony release a 35 1.4 GM and make most of the compromise with vignetting and keep the package relatively small? At least much smaller than the ZA 35/1.4.
Zeiss and CV seem to offer fairly high degrees of correction. And the rendering on the 35/1.7 in particular is fairly smooth and pleasant (minus the loads of cat's eye).No takers to my question above? I'd like to understand this better.Sure they could increase vignetting. But optical vignetting produces not just darker corners but also a great deal of swirl and of axis areas which effectively have a small aperture which damages bokeh. Also an AF lens has to have a smaller focusing group which makes for a larger lens overall, strangely.
Thanks—this makes sense.
nehemiahphoto wrote
nehemiahphoto wrote
@DavidBM@@@@I am curious, why can't Sony just increase vignetting and wouldn't that make up for most of the rumored size decrease?
As I understand it, 35mm and up is the breaking point at which mirrorless can no longer take advantage of the lack of a mirrorbox, so we can't get compact lenses in this range like we do wides--we are back to SLR size lenses.
But, lenses like ZM 35 1.4 and CV 35 1.7 offer excellent IQ across the frame wide open and are pretty tiny (compared to a ZA 35/1.4 and especially Sigma 35/1.2). The way they do this seems to be having RF levels of vignetting--which is a tradeoff I love. They both have CA as well, but so does the GM 24, even at 2.8 I have seen some axial CA if the situation is demanding enough.
Obviously, complete CA suppression, coma, bokeh and transitions and such require more complex and larger designs (along with AF and sealing). But the GM 24 shows astigmatism, longitudinal and lateral CA, some very minor outlining and onion rings and heavy vignetting anyway.
So I guess my question is, though perhaps simplistic, can't Sony release a 35 1.4 GM and make most of the compromise with vignetting and keep the package relatively small? At least much smaller than the ZA 35/1.4.
Zeiss and CV seem to offer fairly high degrees of correction. And the rendering on the 35/1.7 in particular is fairly smooth and pleasant (minus the loads of cat's eye).
Thanks—this makes sense.
Dec 10, 2020 at 03:18 PM
p.12 #4Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
zhangyue wrote:
I am curious, why can't Sony just increase vignetting and wouldn't that make up for most of the rumored size decrease?
As I understand it, 35mm and up is the breaking point at which mirrorless can no longer take advantage of the lack of a mirrorbox, so we can't get compact lenses in this range like we do wides--we are back to SLR size lenses.
But, lenses like ZM 35 1.4 and CV 35 1.7 offer excellent IQ across the frame wide open and are pretty tiny (compared to a ZA 35/1.4 and especially Sigma 35/1.2). The way they do this seems to be having RF levels of vignetting--which is a tradeoff I love. They both have CA as well, but so does the GM 24, even at 2.8 I have seen some axial CA if the situation is demanding enough.
Obviously, complete CA suppression, coma, bokeh and transitions and such require more complex and larger designs (along with AF and sealing). But the GM 24 shows astigmatism, longitudinal and lateral CA, some very minor outlining and onion rings and heavy vignetting anyway.
So I guess my question is, though perhaps simplistic, can't Sony release a 35 1.4 GM and make most of the compromise with vignetting and keep the package relatively small? At least much smaller than the ZA 35/1.4.
Zeiss and CV seem to offer fairly high degrees of correction. And the rendering on the 35/1.7 in particular is fairly smooth and pleasant (minus the loads of cat's eye).No takers to my question above? I'd like to understand this better.Sure they could increase vignetting. But optical vignetting produces not just darker corners but also a great deal of swirl and of axis areas which effectively have a small aperture which damages bokeh. Also an AF lens has to have a smaller focusing group which makes for a larger lens overall, strangely.Well said. I have found most lenses I like in term of rendering in the past have generous coverage (so better vignette performance, bokeh ball is also more circular) 50lux ASPH M, Nikon 58G, Panasonic 70-200 zoom, Leica 80lux, Leica R 100mm APO and even Sigma 45mm have a quite nice corner behavior. I don't think I am a mainstream user though.
For new sigma 35mmf2, I think cat eye is more than I prefer but that is a trade off I am willing to take after evaluate everything on the table. It really all depend what kind of trade off...Show more →
Oddly enough, when I put that CV 35 1.7 on a GFX it offered full coverage with no hard vignetting even though it’s small and fast and has a bit of swirliness and lots of cat’s eye on FF.
And my Sonnetar 73 too offered terrific coverage, into the corners bokeh-wise, despite its tiny.
GFX 50R + Sonnetar 73
CV 35 1.7 + GFX50r
DavidBM wrote
nehemiahphoto wrote
nehemiahphoto wrote
@DavidBM@@@@@I am curious, why can't Sony just increase vignetting and wouldn't that make up for most of the rumored size decrease?
As I understand it, 35mm and up is the breaking point at which mirrorless can no longer take advantage of the lack of a mirrorbox, so we can't get compact lenses in this range like we do wides--we are back to SLR size lenses.
But, lenses like ZM 35 1.4 and CV 35 1.7 offer excellent IQ across the frame wide open and are pretty tiny (compared to a ZA 35/1.4 and especially Sigma 35/1.2). The way they do this seems to be having RF levels of vignetting--which is a tradeoff I love. They both have CA as well, but so does the GM 24, even at 2.8 I have seen some axial CA if the situation is demanding enough.
Obviously, complete CA suppression, coma, bokeh and transitions and such require more complex and larger designs (along with AF and sealing). But the GM 24 shows astigmatism, longitudinal and lateral CA, some very minor outlining and onion rings and heavy vignetting anyway.
So I guess my question is, though perhaps simplistic, can't Sony release a 35 1.4 GM and make most of the compromise with vignetting and keep the package relatively small? At least much smaller than the ZA 35/1.4.
Zeiss and CV seem to offer fairly high degrees of correction. And the rendering on the 35/1.7 in particular is fairly smooth and pleasant (minus the loads of cat's eye).
For new sigma 35mmf2, I think cat eye is more than I prefer but that is a trade off I am willing to take after evaluate everything on the table. It really all depend what kind of trade off...Show more →
Oddly enough, when I put that CV 35 1.7 on a GFX it offered full coverage with no hard vignetting even though it’s small and fast and has a bit of swirliness and lots of cat’s eye on FF.
And my Sonnetar 73 too offered terrific coverage, into the corners bokeh-wise, despite its tiny.
GFX 50R + Sonnetar 73
CV 35 1.7 + GFX50r
Dec 10, 2020 at 03:25 PM
p.12 #5Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
And then CV 75mm has noticeable cat eye and hard vignette on GFX, I do love its rendering very much.
I can’t say cat eyes equal coverage if we scientifically classify this. It is a general rule that I gained from using experience that lens have severe cat eye usually have corner rendering issue and usually also happen have less coverage. I would say as long as lens have smooth pretty bokeh most of time, I can ignore corner problem, but not many I have seen.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
zhangyue wrote
DavidBM wrote
nehemiahphoto wrote
nehemiahphoto wrote
@DavidBM@@@@@@I am curious, why can't Sony just increase vignetting and wouldn't that make up for most of the rumored size decrease?
As I understand it, 35mm and up is the breaking point at which mirrorless can no longer take advantage of the lack of a mirrorbox, so we can't get compact lenses in this range like we do wides--we are back to SLR size lenses.
But, lenses like ZM 35 1.4 and CV 35 1.7 offer excellent IQ across the frame wide open and are pretty tiny (compared to a ZA 35/1.4 and especially Sigma 35/1.2). The way they do this seems to be having RF levels of vignetting--which is a tradeoff I love. They both have CA as well, but so does the GM 24, even at 2.8 I have seen some axial CA if the situation is demanding enough.
Obviously, complete CA suppression, coma, bokeh and transitions and such require more complex and larger designs (along with AF and sealing). But the GM 24 shows astigmatism, longitudinal and lateral CA, some very minor outlining and onion rings and heavy vignetting anyway.
So I guess my question is, though perhaps simplistic, can't Sony release a 35 1.4 GM and make most of the compromise with vignetting and keep the package relatively small? At least much smaller than the ZA 35/1.4.
Zeiss and CV seem to offer fairly high degrees of correction. And the rendering on the 35/1.7 in particular is fairly smooth and pleasant (minus the loads of cat's eye).
For new sigma 35mmf2, I think cat eye is more than I prefer but that is a trade off I am willing to take after evaluate everything on the table. It really all depend what kind of trade off to take, for example, how smaller it will be, what about price, build quality, AF performance or how bad the vignetting is, how is the intended usage etc...There must be a balance lay somewhere make you either buy it or not.
This 35GM will not be disappointing if you ask me given a prove track record of 24, 85 and 135 gm.
And my Sonnetar 73 too offered terrific coverage, into the corners bokeh-wise, despite its tiny.
Dec 10, 2020 at 03:39 PM
p.12 #6Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
As someone who never saw the size and weight of the ZA 35/1.4 as problems, my hope is that the GM builds on great aspects of that lens (low distortion, great bokeh wide open with great central resolution) while removing the aspherical signature from the bokeh, improving vignetting, improving color aberration correction, and bringing the outer-zones' resolution more in line with the central by f/2.8 for group shots and focus-stacked landscapes. If size and weight are the priority, my fear is we'll see some resolution improvements, hopefully an absence of aspherical gunk, CA will be a wash, and vignetting, bokeh, and distortion will be significantly worse.
Dec 10, 2020 at 05:51 PM
p.12 #7Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
freaklikeme wrote:
As someone who never saw the size and weight of the ZA 35/1.4 as problem, my hope is that the GM builds on great aspects of that lens (low distortion, great bokeh wide open with great central resolution) while removing the aspherical signature from the bokeh, improving vignetting, improving color aberration correction, and bringing the outer-zones' resolution more in line with the central by f/2.8 for group shots and focus-stacked landscapes. If size and weight are the priority, my fear is we'll see some resolution improvements, hopefully an absence of aspherical gunk, CA will be a wash, and vignetting, bokeh,...Show more →
Not quite sure on the Bokeh will be significantly worse if it's smaller. I like the GM 24 bokeh more than the ZA 35/1.4. I do agree that unless they are going to do some real magic, CA might remain the same or worse. XA front element might work, or maybe they discover Blue Spectrum Refractive tech
. I personally prefer much better vignetting control, probably cause I surrounded myself with too many small lenses in the past. I hate to deal with it at time. But I guess I can accept that compromise over the distortion compromise that Leica and Panasonic took with their fast 50/1.4 SL.
FWIW, the M-mount Lux 35 ASPH is much smaller than any other modern Lux in the line-up. RF is technically a mirrorless as well, so I do wonder why. Not that I want the GM 35 to have those characteristics on the Lux 35 ASPH.
As someone who never saw the size and weight of the ZA 35/1.4 as problem, my hope is that the GM builds on great aspects of that lens (low distortion, great bokeh wide open with great central resolution) while removing the aspherical signature from the bokeh, improving vignetting, improving color aberration correction, and bringing the outer-zones' resolution more in line with the central by f/2.8 for group shots and focus-stacked landscapes. If size and weight are the priority, my fear is we'll see some resolution improvements, hopefully an absence of aspherical gunk, CA will be a wash, and vignetting, bokeh,...Show more →
Not quite sure on the Bokeh will be significantly worse if it's smaller. I like the GM 24 bokeh more than the ZA 35/1.4. I do agree that unless they are going to do some real magic, CA might remain the same or worse. XA front element might work, or maybe they discover Blue Spectrum Refractive tech
. I personally prefer much better vignetting control, probably cause I surrounded myself with too many small lenses in the past. I hate to deal with it at time. But I guess I can accept that compromise over the distortion compromise that Leica and Panasonic took with their fast 50/1.4 SL.FWIW, the M-mount Lux 35 ASPH is much smaller than any other modern Lux in the line-up. RF is technically a mirrorless as well, so I do wonder why. Not that I want the GM 35 to have those characteristics on the Lux 35 ASPH.
Dec 10, 2020 at 06:06 PM
p.12 #8Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
hiepphotog wrote:
Not quite sure on the Bokeh will be significantly worse if it's smaller. I like the GM 24 bokeh more than the ZA 35/1.4. I do agree that unless they are going to do some real magic, CA might remain the same or worse. XA front element might work, or maybe they discover Blue Spectrum Refractive tech . I personally prefer much better vignetting control, probably cause I surrounded myself with too many small lenses in the past. I hate to deal with it at time. But I guess I can accept that compromise over the distortion compromise that Leica...Show more →
If it increases optical vignetting, you'll get more distinct cat's eyes, and if it increases distortion, that can be a problem as well. Bokeh post-distortion correction isn't as smooth to my eye as bokeh from a low distortion lens. I think it's one of the chief advantages the 85 GM has over the new Sigma 85. I see the difference regularly between my high-distortion Viltrox 85/1.8 and low-distortion Nikon AF 85/1.8D.
If they want to pattern the 35 GM after the 35L II, I'm all for it.
freaklikeme wrote
As someone who never saw the size and weight of the ZA 35/1.4 as problem, my hope is that the GM builds on great aspects of that lens (low distortion, great bokeh wide open with great central resolution) while removing the aspherical signature from the bokeh, improving vignetting, improving color aberration correction, and bringing the outer-zones' resolution more in line with the central by f/2.8 for group shots and focus-stacked landscapes. If size and weight are the priority, my fear is we'll see some resolution improvements, hopefully an absence of aspherical gunk, CA will be a wash, and vignetting, bokeh, and distortion will be significantly worse.. I personally prefer much better vignetting control, probably cause I surrounded myself with too many small lenses in the past. I hate to deal with it at time. But I guess I can accept that compromise over the distortion compromise that Leica...Show more →If it increases optical vignetting, you'll get more distinct cat's eyes, and if it increases distortion, that can be a problem as well. Bokeh post-distortion correction isn't as smooth to my eye as bokeh from a low distortion lens. I think it's one of the chief advantages the 85 GM has over the new Sigma 85. I see the difference regularly between my high-distortion Viltrox 85/1.8 and low-distortion Nikon AF 85/1.8D.
If they want to pattern the 35 GM after the 35L II, I'm all for it.
Dec 10, 2020 at 06:35 PM
p.12 #9Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
I wouldn't mind picking up another RX1R2 once the dust settles. Do you think the Sigma 35/2 and.Sony 35/1.4 will cause prices for the RX1R to drop?
Fred Miranda wrote:
It already exists but it's glued to the body.
Fred Miranda wrote:
It already exists but it's glued to the body.
Dec 10, 2020 at 09:32 PM
p.12 #10Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
akashyap wrote:
I wouldn't mind picking up another RX1R2 once the dust settles. Do you think the Sigma 35/2 and.Sony 35/1.4 will cause prices for the RX1R to drop?
I'm sure there are a lot of RX1R shooters that would jump to an E-mount lens with similar draw. If that happens, perhaps we will see used RX1R series selling more than usual.
I wouldn't mind picking up another RX1R2 once the dust settles. Do you think the Sigma 35/2 and.Sony 35/1.4 will cause prices for the RX1R to drop?
Fred Miranda wrote
It already exists but it's glued to the body.I'm sure there are a lot of RX1R shooters that would jump to an E-mount lens with similar draw. If that happens, perhaps we will see used RX1R series selling more than usual.
Dec 10, 2020 at 10:21 PM
p.12 #11Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
I am really excited about this lens.
Dec 19, 2020 at 10:44 AM
p.12 #12Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
nandadevieast wrote:
I am really excited about this lens.
I will hold my excitement until we see the images it produces. (And the official size of this thing)
I am really excited about this lens.
I will hold my excitement until we see the images it produces. (And the official size of this thing)
Dec 19, 2020 at 11:08 AM
p.12 #13Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Fred Miranda wrote:
nandadevieast wrote
I am really excited about this lens.I agree. But based on Sony's recent track record with lenses I'd be really surprised if it was a let down.
Dec 19, 2020 at 11:22 AM
p.12 #14Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
nhsonyshooter wrote:
I will hold my excitement until we see the images it produces. (And the official size of this thing)I agree. But based on Sony's recent track record with lenses I'd be really surprised if it was a let down.
Although not a GM, the 35/1.8 was a recent release and a let down for me. It's still a great lens but not what I wanted in terms of rendering. The latest GM prime was the 135/1.8 and if Sony goes that route aiming for ultimate resolution + correction, it may not be what I want in a 35mm lens.
For my own personal taste, I'm excited about the possibility of Sony getting this right but we don't know much about it, except that it will be released next year.
Fred Miranda wrote
nandadevieast wrote
I am really excited about this lens.Although not a GM, the 35/1.8 was a recent release and a let down for me. It's still a great lens but not what I wanted in terms of rendering. The latest GM prime was the 135/1.8 and if Sony goes that route aiming for ultimate resolution + correction, it may not be what I want in a 35mm lens.
For my own personal taste, I'm excited about the possibility of Sony getting this right but we don't know much about it, except that it will be released next year.
Dec 19, 2020 at 12:00 PM
p.12 #15Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Fred Miranda wrote:
Although not a GM, the 35/1.8 was a recent release and a let down for me. It's still a great lens but not what I wanted in terms of rendering. The latest GM prime was the 135/1.8 and if Sony goes that route aiming for ultimate resolution + correction, it may not be what I want in a 35mm lens.
For my own personal taste, I'm excited about the possibility of Sony getting this right though but we don't know much about it, except that it will be released next year.
Been thinking about that lately: wonder if the 35 1.8 FE was part of their exclusivity deal with AP. It's basically a perfect journalistic prime in that it's discrete, well built, has an excellent AF system, transitions excellently to a video prime due to its lack of focus breathing + linear focus ring response, and to top it off can get some nice close ups.
AP would basically be their biggest single client for this type of optic—and apologies for the possible tinfoil hat here, but the lens was released soon before the AP deal was announced and I can't see a way a GM could better the 1.8 in terms of just getting the shot.
Although not a GM, the 35/1.8 was a recent release and a let down for me. It's still a great lens but not what I wanted in terms of rendering. The latest GM prime was the 135/1.8 and if Sony goes that route aiming for ultimate resolution + correction, it may not be what I want in a 35mm lens.
For my own personal taste, I'm excited about the possibility of Sony getting this right though but we don't know much about it, except that it will be released next year.
Been thinking about that lately: wonder if the 35 1.8 FE was part of their exclusivity deal with AP. It's basically a perfect journalistic prime in that it's discrete, well built, has an excellent AF system, transitions excellently to a video prime due to its lack of focus breathing + linear focus ring response, and to top it off can get some nice close ups.
AP would basically be their biggest single client for this type of optic—and apologies for the possible tinfoil hat here, but the lens was released soon before the AP deal was announced and I can't see a way a GM could better the 1.8 in terms of just getting the shot.
Dec 19, 2020 at 12:58 PM
p.12 #16Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
JVan_02 wrote:
For my own personal taste, I'm excited about the possibility of Sony getting this right though but we don't know much about it, except that it will be released next year.Been thinking about that lately: wonder if the 35 1.8 FE was part of their exclusivity deal with AP. It's basically a perfect journalistic prime in that it's discrete, well built, has an excellent AF system, transitions excellently to a video prime due to its lack of focus breathing + linear focus ring response, and to top it off can get some nice close ups.
AP would basically be their biggest single client for this type of optic—and apologies for the possible tinfoil hat here, but the lens was released soon before the AP deal was announced and I can't...Show more →
There may have been a need for a 35/1.8 among several clients, not just AP. If you don’t like carrying a heavy zoom then a 35/1.8 or 35/2 is an excellent choice. I used to own a Nikon AF 35/2 and before that an Olympus OM Zuiko 35/2 (I started out with manual film SLRs), and I’m just an amateur. We’ve gone from none to suddenly a bunch of 35/1.8-2 lenses. A 35mm is the widest wide angle before you get any serious distortion. That make for an excellent, inobtrusive, fast, light, carry everywhere lens. Did I say inobtrusive? A 35/1.4 might not tick the light and inobtrusive boxes, and a 35/2 was fast even in the days of film when 400 ISO was fast film.
Sigma 35/2 Contemporary seems to tick all the boxes.
Fred Miranda wrote
Although not a GM, the 35/1.8 was a recent release and a let down for me. It's still a great lens but not what I wanted in terms of rendering. The latest GM prime was the 135/1.8 and if Sony goes that route aiming for ultimate resolution + correction, it may not be what I want in a 35mm lens.For my own personal taste, I'm excited about the possibility of Sony getting this right though but we don't know much about it, except that it will be released next year.
AP would basically be their biggest single client for this type of optic—and apologies for the possible tinfoil hat here, but the lens was released soon before the AP deal was announced and I can't...Show more →
There may have been a need for a 35/1.8 among several clients, not just AP. If you don’t like carrying a heavy zoom then a 35/1.8 or 35/2 is an excellent choice. I used to own a Nikon AF 35/2 and before that an Olympus OM Zuiko 35/2 (I started out with manual film SLRs), and I’m just an amateur. We’ve gone from none to suddenly a bunch of 35/1.8-2 lenses.
A 35mm is the widest wide angle before you get any serious distortion. That make for an excellent, inobtrusive, fast, light, carry everywhere lens. Did I say inobtrusive? A 35/1.4 might not tick the light and inobtrusive boxes, and a 35/2 was fast even in the days of film when 400 ISO was fast film. Sigma 35/2 Contemporary seems to tick all the boxes.
Dec 19, 2020 at 01:11 PM
p.12 #17Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
bjornthun wrote:
There may have been a need for a 35/1.8 among several clients, not just AP. If you don’t like carrying a heavy zoom then a 35/1.8 or 35/2 is an excellent choice. I used to own a Nikon AF 35/2 and before that an Olympus OM Zuiko 35/2 (I started out with manual film SLRs), and I’m just an amateur. We’ve gone from none to suddenly a bunch of 35/1.8-2 lenses. A 35mm is the widest wide angle before you get any serious distortion. That make for an excellent, inobtrusive, fast, light, carry everywhere lens. Did I say inobtrusive? A...Show more →
Well, the new Sigma might produce a better image but if I were doing anything related to journalism again I'd pick the Sony. Having the latest AF system matters, 1/3 an extra stop will probably translate better to the print sizes you see in articles than the niceties of Sigma's superior image, and the Sony has at least some protection against water ingress. Additionally, Sony simply outclasses the Sigma when it comes to video.
There may have been a need for a 35/1.8 among several clients, not just AP. If you don’t like carrying a heavy zoom then a 35/1.8 or 35/2 is an excellent choice. I used to own a Nikon AF 35/2 and before that an Olympus OM Zuiko 35/2 (I started out with manual film SLRs), and I’m just an amateur. We’ve gone from none to suddenly a bunch of 35/1.8-2 lenses. A 35mm is the widest wide angle before you get any serious distortion. That make for an excellent, inobtrusive, fast, light, carry everywhere lens. Did I say inobtrusive? A...Show more →
Well, the new Sigma might produce a better image but if I were doing anything related to journalism again I'd pick the Sony. Having the latest AF system matters, 1/3 an extra stop will probably translate better to the print sizes you see in articles than the niceties of Sigma's superior image, and the Sony has at least some protection against water ingress. Additionally, Sony simply outclasses the Sigma when it comes to video.
Dec 19, 2020 at 01:40 PM
p.12 #18Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Fred Miranda wrote:
I will hold my excitement until we see the images it produces. (And the official size of this thing)I agree. But based on Sony's recent track record with lenses I'd be really surprised if it was a let down.Although not a GM, the 35/1.8 was a recent release and a let down for me. It's still a great lens but not what I wanted in terms of rendering. The latest GM prime was the 135/1.8 and if Sony goes that route aiming for ultimate resolution + correction, it may not be what I want in a 35mm lens.
For my own personal taste, I'm excited about the possibility of Sony getting this right but we don't know much about it, except that it will be released next year.
I'm with you that the 35mm 1.8 didn't do it for me either. But that actually gives me a better feeling about the GM rendering better. My only concern now is how big is it going to be. If they can make it smaller somehow than the Zeiss it will be a winner. At least for me
nhsonyshooter wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
nandadevieast wrote
I am really excited about this lens.For my own personal taste, I'm excited about the possibility of Sony getting this right but we don't know much about it, except that it will be released next year.
I'm with you that the 35mm 1.8 didn't do it for me either. But that actually gives me a better feeling about the GM rendering better. My only concern now is how big is it going to be. If they can make it smaller somehow than the Zeiss it will be a winner. At least for me
Dec 19, 2020 at 01:52 PM
p.12 #19Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
JVan_02 wrote:
Sigma 35/2 Contemporary seems to tick all the boxes.Well, the new Sigma might produce a better image but if I were doing anything related to journalism again I'd pick the Sony. Having the latest AF system matters, 1/3 an extra stop will probably translate better to the print sizes you see in articles than the niceties of Sigma's superior image, and the Sony has at least some protection against water ingress. Additionally, Sony simply outclasses the Sigma when it comes to video.
It's possible that the Sony has faster/more accurate AF but I don't think we have seen an evidence showing this.
bjornthun wrote
There may have been a need for a 35/1.8 among several clients, not just AP. If you don’t like carrying a heavy zoom then a 35/1.8 or 35/2 is an excellent choice. I used to own a Nikon AF 35/2 and before that an Olympus OM Zuiko 35/2 (I started out with manual film SLRs), and I’m just an amateur. We’ve gone from none to suddenly a bunch of 35/1.8-2 lenses. A 35mm is the widest wide angle before you get any serious distortion. That make for an excellent, inobtrusive, fast, light, carry everywhere lens. Did I say inobtrusive? A 35/1.4 might not tick the light and inobtrusive boxes, and a 35/2 was fast even in the days of film when 400 ISO was fast film.Sigma 35/2 Contemporary seems to tick all the boxes.
It's possible that the Sony has faster/more accurate AF but I don't think we have seen an evidence showing this.
Dec 19, 2020 at 01:55 PM
p.12 #20Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
nhsonyshooter wrote:
I will hold my excitement until we see the images it produces. (And the official size of this thing)I agree. But based on Sony's recent track record with lenses I'd be really surprised if it was a let down.Although not a GM, the 35/1.8 was a recent release and a let down for me. It's still a great lens but not what I wanted in terms of rendering. The latest GM prime was the 135/1.8 and if Sony goes that route aiming for ultimate resolution + correction, it may not be what I want in a 35mm lens.
For my own personal taste, I'm excited about the possibility of Sony getting this right but we don't know much about it, except that it will be released next year.I'm with you that the 35mm 1.8 didn't do it for me either. But that actually gives me a better feeling about the GM rendering better. My only concern now is how big is it going to be. If they can make it smaller somehow than the Zeiss it will be a winner. At least for me
Being slightly smaller than the 35/1.4 ZA is a more realistic expectation than it being slightly bigger than the 24/1.4 GM. (as reported)
Fred Miranda wrote
nhsonyshooter wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
nandadevieast wrote
I am really excited about this lens.For my own personal taste, I'm excited about the possibility of Sony getting this right but we don't know much about it, except that it will be released next year.
Being slightly smaller than the 35/1.4 ZA is a more realistic expectation than it being slightly bigger than the 24/1.4 GM. (as reported)
Dec 19, 2020 at 01:57 PM