p.30 #5 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
RoamingScott wrote:
I don't see the issue with posting EFCS bokeh shots...many people will shoot that way and shows a "worst case" scenario.
Because it’s a user error. Many people will shoot with bad focus too, or with clipped highlights. It’s not that hard to turn off EFCS at high shutter speeds, or switch to e-shutter! You don’t learn much about lens by seeing bokeh deformation due to high shutter speeds and EFCS, you learn mainly about the cameras shutter mechanism.
p.30 #6 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
1bwana1 wrote:
This looks like a superb lens. I just couldn't justify having this and my CV 40mm f/1.2, and I don't see myself giving that one up.
Still, I am so tempted.....
Here are some justifications for you to own both:
1) Different focal length. Remember the 40mm f/1.2 is actually narrower than 40mm.
2) Different aperture. Not a big reason but reason enough for some folks to prefer the Sigma 35/1.2 Art
3) AF vs MF: Different way to take pictures. Sometimes feels good to go back to basics.
4) Size and weight: The 35/1.4 GM is sure small for what it is but still way bigger than the 40/1.2, especially the SE version.
5) Different sunstar rendering.
6) Different overall rendering and character.
p.30 #9 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
realVivek wrote:
The EU price will ease after the initial demand.
Good then they can ship them to the US
Edit: Shouldn't read things on my phone with no glasses. I thought you said EU price will erase initial demand.
I need to read things twice with out my glasses before replying. Sorry
p.30 #11 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Justin Stone wrote:
Based on what I’ve seen from samples posted it does on both counts.
Did u see the sample i posted above? Ca seems on the level of my 24mm gm which to me is moderate.
I love everything abouut the 24mm , weight bokeh. Except loca which to me is not low.
p.30 #12 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
lora_to wrote:
The mid-february ship date is suspiciously close to 5 years after the ZA 35/1.4 was announced on March 5th afair. I wonder if there was some sort of moratorium or maybe it's just coincidence and Sony figured it's been long enough to not disgruntle ZA buyers.
I'm with you. I think there is more going on behind the curtain between Zeiss and Sony than we know. If the ZA 35mm 1.4 drops significantly after that you can consider yourself right I think. I'd love to know the back story between the 2 company's. Zeiss is going one direction and Sony the complete opposite.
p.30 #13 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
I see what you see. Could be better, but those are pretty harsh circumstances.
wind30 wrote:
Did u see the sample i posted above? Ca seems on the level of my 24mm gm which to me is moderate.
I love everything abouut the 24mm , weight bokeh. Except loca which to me is not low.
p.30 #15 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
wind30 wrote:
Did u see the sample i posted above? Ca seems on the level of my 24mm gm which to me is moderate.
I love everything abouut the 24mm , weight bokeh. Except loca which to me is not low.
There are far more and far better examples than that that show a very low level of aberrations, especially Gerald's review. A darker object against a completely blown out background isn't a valid test for CA/LoCa.
p.30 #16 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Oh damn. Watched Gordon Laing's review where he compared it to the Sigma 35 1.2. That is an astonishing improvement in those distance shots and with that nano 2 coating from the 12-24 GM that I love so much. Faster more accurate AF too. Not sure what is not to like! Focus breathing really don't matter to me as that appears to be the weak point to the new GM lens. To me the sigma 35 1.2 flare really annoys me even indoors shooting with ceiling lights causing flares. Might be a time to swap for a lighter setup?
p.30 #18 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Dave Sanders wrote:
There are far more and far better examples than that that show a very low level of aberrations, especially Gerald's review. A darker object against a completely blown out background isn't a valid test for CA/LoCa.
Ok i just watched geralds review. Honestly i dont like his reviews as i find he does not test the lens the way i use it and cones to different conclusions than me with previous lens.
U need a high contrast edge to see loca. That is why review sites like lenstip use a black white bars for loca. His samples for loca is totally wrong.
p.30 #19 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
The weight itself is probably an enough reason for me to switch from the sigma f1.2 to the gm...
sigma is just shooting themselves in designing a f1.2 vs f1.4. If a f1.4 could save like 200grams of weight, I will not be so tempted to switch. The weight of the f1.2 is just too much.
p.30 #20 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Dave Sanders wrote:
There are far more and far better examples than that that show a very low level of aberrations, especially Gerald's review. A darker object against a completely blown out background isn't a valid test for CA/LoCa.
This happened with the Sigma 35/1.2 and Voigtlander 50/2 APO lenses as well. Initial sample images showed low axial CA for the majority of images but many focused on extreme high contrast scenarios showing fringing. Remember the tin foil tests?
I think it's safe to say that the 35/1.4 GM has above average axial CA correction for a 35mm lens but color error may still be visible under extreme conditions.
