I am curious to hear what you think. The peculiar thing about some of these recent modern optics is that some situations can really bring the worst in them, especially LoCA, though it can be only in some rare occasions. From lenstip, I see on axis, the GM has a tad more color error in focus, while out of focus, it’s about the same.
p.32 #2 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
TheDeadTexan wrote:
B&H preorder is tomorrow morning 7AM ET
I don't think they've ever had EDU discounts on preorders as far as I know. If anything you might see it a month or two down the road like with the 12-24GM, but this looks like it'll be in massive demand like the 24GM was, and in these COVID times I can only imagine what supply is going to be like when initial stock runs out.
Edit:
Just checked B&H and they're still not offering the EDU discount on the 24GM even after all this time, so there's no way they'll discount this one when it launches. ...Show more →
They do have EDU discount on 24GM. It is $1,118.40 with 20% EDU discount right now. There was even higher discount when it stacked with normal discount for the holidays.
p.32 #3 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
praneethz wrote:
They do have EDU discount on 24GM. It is $1,118.40 with 20% EDU discount right now. There was even higher discount when it stacked with normal discount for the holidays.
Oh yeah, you're totally right. A lot of other lenses show me the EDU discount without having to add them to cart that's why I thought it wasn't offered.
I'd love for the 35GM to get a discount, but I'm not counting on it. Fingers crossed anyway.
p.32 #4 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
hiepphotog wrote:
I am curious to hear what you think. The peculiar thing about some of these recent modern optics is that some situations can really bring the worst in them, especially LoCA, though it can be only in some rare occasions. From lenstip, I see on axis, the GM has a tad more color error in focus, while out of focus, it’s about the same.
Honestly, like you said I can't really tell unless I use the lens often.
The 24mm has bad loca that I can see on web sized pics on some of my keepers, especially winter snowscapes with tree brances. That is why I am slightly dissappointed with it.
I use only 24mp bodies so sharpness is not that big a deal and I don't pixel peep, most modern lens are sharp to me. The only stuff that really matters is LoCA, bokeh, and maybe flare.
p.32 #6 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
hiepphotog wrote:
I am curious to hear what you think. The peculiar thing about some of these recent modern optics is that some situations can really bring the worst in them, especially LoCA, though it can be only in some rare occasions. From lenstip, I see on axis, the GM has a tad more color error in focus, while out of focus, it’s about the same.
p.32 #7 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Is Sony the new Leica in digital AF space? Master of miniaturizing lenses with the right amount of compromises... They even pass on the saving cost to the customers . They could have easily charged more like people have predicted here. Maybe sale of the GM 135 wasn't going as well as the GM 24 so they have zero'd down to their winning formula. I was thinking hard about adding the Canon R5 to use some of their excellent RF lenses, but this really extinguishes the desire. Already submit my pre-order to my local Sony store. Now waiting for 28, 50, 100 and that rumored 16.
Release date in Japan is 2/12 and official price in Japan is 198530 yen + tax. It's about $1900 before tax so quite much more than U.S. price, but street price will usually be somewhat lower than official. Still would expect Japan street price to be somewhere around $1800 including tax.
Official Japan price for 24/1.4 GM is 198000 yen before tax so it's very similarly priced.
I'm not currently planning to get one as I just got Sigma 35/2 DG DN recently and I still have the Sony Zeiss 35/1.4.
p.32 #9 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
hiepphotog wrote:
Is Sony the new Leica in digital AF space? Master of miniaturizing lenses with the right amount of compromises... They even pass on the saving cost to the customers . They could have easily charged more like people have predicted here. Maybe sale of the GM 135 wasn't going as well as the GM 24 so they have zero'd down to their winning formula. I was thinking hard about adding the Canon R5 to use some of their excellent RF lenses, but this really extinguishes the desire. Already submit my pre-order to my local Sony store. Now waiting for 28, 50, 100 and that rumored 16....Show more →
A great analogy but without the price tag.
It's true -- Sony did something extraordinary here. A small and high IQ 35/1.4 GM -- almost the size of the 24/1.4 GM which was already small to begin with. Kept the beautiful rendering too.
Many have doubted this was possible, myself included.
p.32 #10 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Just spent forever watching reviews online, I'm glad I can say I was wrong about the price 😁
Although vignetting does look quite bad, which I was concerned about after seeing the small front element. I really don't understand why they wouldn't just use a larger one? Even the 24 GM looks like it has a larger front element. I'm also worried about focus breathing, although I'm hoping after seeing it tested some (if any reviewers decide to actually test it) that it will prove to be a non issue.
All in all it looks like a great lens for the size. Now I just need to figure out how to get $1400 😂
p.32 #11 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Teo Rey wrote:
Just spent forever watching reviews online, I'm glad I can say I was wrong about the price 😁
Although vignetting does look quite bad, which I was concerned about after seeing the small front element. I really don't understand why they wouldn't just use a larger one? Even the 24 GM looks like it has a larger front element. I'm also worried about focus breathing, although I'm hoping after seeing it tested some (if any reviewers decide to actually test it) that it will prove to be a non issue.
All in all it looks like a great lens for the size. Now I just need to figure out how to get $1400 😂...Show more →
Vignetting is not as bad as optical vignetting which is not correctable. The latter seems to be well controlled for the new GM where the specular highlights remain fairly circular compared to lenses like the Sigma 35/1.2 or Sigma 35/2 when wide open.
p.32 #13 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Teo Rey wrote:
Just spent forever watching reviews online, I'm glad I can say I was wrong about the price 😁
Although vignetting does look quite bad, which I was concerned about after seeing the small front element. I really don't understand why they wouldn't just use a larger one? Even the 24 GM looks like it has a larger front element. I'm also worried about focus breathing, although I'm hoping after seeing it tested some (if any reviewers decide to actually test it) that it will prove to be a non issue.
All in all it looks like a great lens for the size. Now I just need to figure out how to get $1400 😂...Show more →
the sigma 35 f1.2 has a huge front element, but its vignetting is not really better than the sony 35 according to lenstip (at least for apertures below f2.8)
p.32 #14 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
nandadevieast wrote:
If they are clever they will never make a 28. A lens that everyone will readily abandon after launch
People cried hoarse for a APSc standard zoom, and here you have it, even if its sharper than the full frame version, nobody buys it.
p.32 #15 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Can someone explain me why we saw the massive amount of CA in on first dpreview examples, but now it seems everybody agrees that there is none or very little? I hear people saying 'Adobe profile' but nobody seems to explain further why and how Adobe profile is related to this.
For example:
A. Is the massive amount of CA present in raw-files and then it gets corrected once you tick the 'Remove Chromatic Aberration' from the Lens Correction tab? If so, I still think the new GM is not so well corrected since, for example with the Batis 2/40 CF, I never remove the chromatic aberrations in LR and I rarely if ever see them at all.
B. The Adobe Profile is somehow 'broken' and it exaggerates the CA of the new GM.
C. CA corrections are baked in the raw-files already in the camera (for all modern lenses) and for some reasons (how does Adobe profile relate to this) Dpreview gallery shows the unbaked results.
p.32 #16 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Soooo... has anyone mentioned how the FL actually gets narrower as this lens gets closer to MFD? This is the most subtle flex on Sony's part with this lens and I love it, . Obviously I haven't measured it, but the 35 1.8 FE has almost no breathing and the magnification at 26cm is greater on the GM than at 22cm on the 1.8. The impact on the magnification is obviously notable, but portraits will also be slightly more flattering as well.
Might seem strange, but I think that was the tipping point for me. Was debating even with the amazing performance and construction of this lens as it was literally 1g under my do not consider limit, but finding out the lens is also well considered in terms of utility kinda just does it for me. Bit less funds than a lot of people here so it'll be a while before I pick it up, but I think the biggest challenge once I get this lens will be getting it off my camera
p.32 #17 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
nhsonyshooter wrote:
I wonder what the deal is Sony has with Zeiss. It's interesting Sony has chosen not to reduce the price of the Zeiss 35mm 1.4 (at least here in states). Reading between the lines is that them sticking it too Zeiss for some reason? Just seems odd. I'm struggling to come up with another answer other than Zeiss gets a percentage of every lens sale. Maybe Sony went to Zeiss to modify the agreement and they said "no". So Sony said "OK" here is your cut of nothing now?
Many of their lenses in recent years have been either Batis killers or now ZA killers in terms of price, size, availability, features, etc.
Zeiss puts out a popular 85? Ok, here's one that's almost as good for half the price. Zeiss puts out a great 135? Here's one that's even better for the same price, oh and it's a 1.8. Zeiss makes the Batis 40mm and touts its close focus abilities? "Let's make a much smaller 35 that focuses to 1:4, also it's half the price because we hate you" lol
p.32 #18 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Matt Grum wrote:
The UK price definitely does, I assume the price in Euros does too.
$1398 is £1025, add on 20% VAT and you get £1230, so we're paying £270 ($368) more, even taking tax into account
Again, you guys get a much better warranty and customer protection, which costs money. Also, I'm sure current trade agreements (or vice versa) and coronavirus have something to do with it.
p.32 #19 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Fred Miranda wrote:
If someone watched these youtube videos, please post a summary for us.
The big downsides are vignetting, which I was afraid of, and focus breathing. Hopefully when people here start getting their copies someone can test the true focal lengths at different distances.
Bokeh looks stellar, and even as much as people were complaining about CA in the DPReview photos, it looks much better than other options at 1.4 or 1.8. Coma correction is just as good as the 24 GM, although vignetting will hurt its astro performance.
Great price, great size, great rendering. Now I just have to figure out if it's actually small enough for a take anywhere lens or if I'm kidding myself because I just want those great results. lol
p.32 #20 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Kalainen wrote: Can someone explain me why we saw the massive amount of CA in on first dpreview examples, but now it seems everybody agrees that there is none or very little? I hear people saying 'Adobe profile' but nobody seems to explain further why and how Adobe profile is related to this.
For example:
A. Is the massive amount of CA present in raw-files and then it gets corrected once you tick the 'Remove Chromatic Aberration' from the Lens Correction tab? If so, I still think the new GM is not so well corrected since, for example with the Batis 2/40 CF, I never remove the chromatic aberrations in LR and I rarely if ever see them at all.
B. The Adobe Profile is somehow 'broken' and it exaggerates the CA of the new GM.
C. CA corrections are baked in the raw-files already in the camera (for all modern lenses) and for some reasons (how does Adobe profile relate to this) Dpreview gallery shows the unbaked results.
I don't think it has anything to do with the raw conversion.
It's just that later samples and tests don't show as much CA. And some reliable unbaked carefully done ones too.
No-one yet knows how to explain the difference. I'd love to know. Two possibilities are that what we saw in the DPR is a flukily extreme case, with a perfect storm of backlight, distance, location in frame etc that is very rare, or even that their sample was off. But these are pure speculations. I look forward to seeing more samples and tests, and might even get a review copy myself I'm so intrigued.
. They could have easily charged more like people have predicted here. Maybe sale of the GM 135 wasn't going as well as the GM 24 so they have zero'd down to their winning formula. I was thinking hard about adding the Canon R5 to use some of their excellent RF lenses, but this really extinguishes the desire. Already submit my pre-order to my local Sony store. Now waiting for 28, 50, 100 and that rumored 16.
. Obviously I haven't measured it, but the 35 1.8 FE has almost no breathing and the magnification at 26cm is greater on the GM than at 22cm on the 1.8. The impact on the magnification is obviously notable, but portraits will also be slightly more flattering as well. 