p.47 #3 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Gordon's video pretty well convinced me that the Sigma 35/1.2 is not the lens for me. The Sony has so much more going for it, and imaging is equivalent or better with the Sony. So, Sony 35/1.2 GM is on my wish list!
p.47 #7 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Makten wrote:
Seriously, how often is foreground bokeh important or even a thing to consider? I don't think I have shot one single image where it is important. Furthermore, smoothness on one side of the focus plane will often give harshness on the other side. At least if the lens is gonna be sharp (well corrected for SA). I don't think you can have all three.
I have not seen the harsh foreground bokeh sample mentioned yet but I prefer lenses with slightly harsher foreground rendering because that usually means smoother background. Still, not sure what to think about this lens' overall rendering. It does not seem to be harsh and at least it's homogeneous across the field. (Corners don't sharpen up)
So far, based on samples and without testing the lens, I see the FE 35/1.4 GM as having neutral rendering without any noticeable spherical aberration. Optical vignetting wide open is apparent but it seems less intense compared to many other lenses including the Sigma 35/2 DG DN and 35/1.2 Art. Resolution and contrast seems outstanding with optimal sharpness across the field already at f/2.8 without much astigmatism towards the corners. CA seems very low, especially lateral CA.
Does the Sony has moderate FC? Not sure yet but it does not seem to have a dip in resolution at mid-field like the Sigma 35/2 DG DN. I think the Sigma has wavy FC which is common with 35mm lenses. Hard to tell without testing the lenses.
The Sigma 35/2 may have smoother rendering at f/2 and f/2.8 compared to the GM as I clearly see residual SA on the former's samples. It does not seem as sharp as the Sony at f/2 or f/2.8 though, but I think both are sharp lenses. I guess we will know how big this difference in rendering and resolution are when they are tested side by side.
p.47 #8 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Can't wait for the 35 GM image thread on this forum. I hope it does better than Sigma/1.2 in rendering and feel of the image, so I don't struggle with selling my Sigma and replacing it with Sony.
p.47 #9 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Mystik wrote:
CPL's do nasty things to skin tones so it's not always an option
For the last 8 years I have done a lot of hi-desert model shoots that start early in the afternoon and end just after sunset, averaging about 15 per year. I actually use CPL filters to help with the skin tones, as the CPL will warm up the skin tones and the surrounding rocks as the harsh mid-day sun will wash out a models skin as well as the color of the rocks. Usually mounted on the lens from noon until 3 or 4pm depending upon the time of the year. In winter the CPL is not used as much as the sun is lower in the sky.
The 1st year I was using a couple of old Hoya single coated filters but found they did have some issue with color. I soon switched to B&W CPL filters, which I now have in 7 different lens thread sizes, as their color is much more consistent.
Other uses for a CPL, even with a wide 20mm lens, are photos around water and in forests/woodlands areas to cut down reflections as @LeeRatters said.
p.47 #10 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
I may need to give CPLs for portraiture another go, but having used them in the past, and possibly try better quality CPL's....but I haven't been a fan of the way the way they flatten the highlights on the subject. I suppose it depends on how you expose your subject? i.e. I tend to ensure that the brightest highlights are those on my subject....if natural light does not allow for it, reposition, or grab a light or reflector. So typically, wouldn't not want to use or need one, but as always...open to trying something new.
p.47 #11 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Mystik wrote:
I may need to give CPLs for portraiture another go, but having used them in the past, and possibly try better quality CPL's....but I haven't been a fan of the way the way they flatten the highlights on the subject. I suppose it depends on how you expose your subject? i.e. I tend to ensure that the brightest highlights are those on my subject....if natural light does not allow for it, reposition, or grab a light or reflector. So typically, wouldn't not want to use or need one, but as always...open to trying something new.
I think they're a bit of a double edged sword on people. On one hand, they can reduce hotspots and help you with a warmer, more even look. On the other hand, going too far can take away the sparkle and life from skin and leave something flat and a bit lifeless. I, like you, am a bit wary of polarizers and people but in the (slide) film days I definitely found times when they were beneficial. I think one has to be careful and pay careful attention as they rotate it. I really haven't done much portrait shooting with a polarizer in the digital era.
Hmmm...maybe I should drag someone out and do a series of shots with increasing/decreasing polarization and see what I like. During a Vancouver winter with covid restrictions, there is neither sun nor willing models...
p.47 #12 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
My situation in the hi-desert sun may be much different than yours as I am shooting at 3,400 to 4,000 feet elevation. The air is thinner and very clear with no smog and rarely any clouds, unfortunately. Near noon the sun will be beyond Sunny 16 (EV15) to EV 16, which really tends to wash things out.
Dave in Vancouver may never need to use a CPL with portraits because of clouds, heavy ocean air and sea level elevation. But for me it has worked out very well.
p.47 #13 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
SpecFoto wrote:
My situation in the hi-desert sun may be much different than yours as I am shooting at 3,400 to 4,000 feet elevation. The air is thinner and very clear with no smog and rarely any clouds, unfortunately. Near noon the sun will be beyond Sunny 16 (EV15) to EV 16, which really tends to wash things out.
Dave in Vancouver may never need to use a CPL with portraits because of clouds, heavy ocean air and sea level elevation. But for me it has worked out very well.
Ha, absolutely, Vancouver's weather acts like a big giant soft box most of the time
I can imagine the harsh sun and lack of any sort of diffusion makes for challenging conditions, especially with people...their skin would act like a reflector. I think sunny and snow covered mountains present similar problems. I'm going back, but with slide film especially, I found there was indeed a bit of a magic middle where the reflections died a bit and skin still had that pop.
p.47 #14 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
CPL at back light condition can be really poor for portrait. You lose about 1~1.5 stop light in shadow that difficult to recover, especially for subtle skin tonality. depend on situation, It will also add extra flare and reduce contrast.
If the light condition make skin exposure in the middle or up range of luminosity area, it will make skin color deeper to cut the flare out. I find CPL mostly does negative than help for my preference.
Back to topic, I like what I see in this GM, it seems Sony has found a formula of rendering for their lenses, it looks quite similar to 24GM to me. I am not saying this is the best approach or I prefer this to anything out there, but it seems works mostly especially for wide angle lens which are usually having problem on background rendering.
As for compare to Sigma, I think as long as Sigma offer f1.2, this will be unfair comparison as always, half stop doesn't sounds a lot, but when you compare f1.4 and f1.8 design, you will notice how much more challenge this half stop bring. If you still pixel PP its sharpness at f1.4 and compare to Sigma or any other lenses, I think you miss the point. I don't care record breaking resolution, it means nothing to me in real world use. However, This one do offer pretty good rendering to my eyes, even corner looks pretty good to me.
p.47 #15 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
zhangyue wrote:
CPL at back light condition can be really poor for portrait. You lose about 1~1.5 stop light in shadow that difficult to recover, especially for subtle skin tonality. depend on situation, It will also add extra flare and reduce contrast.
If the light condition make skin exposure in the middle or up range of luminosity area, it will make skin color deeper to cut the flare out. I find CPL mostly does negative than help for my preference.
Back to topic, I like what I see in this GM, it seems Sony has found a formula of rendering for their lenses, it looks quite similar to 24GM to me. I am not saying this is the best approach or I prefer this to anything out there, but it seems works mostly especially for wide angle lens which are usually having problem on background rendering.
As for compare to Sigma, I think as long as Sigma offer f1.2, this will be unfair comparison as always, half stop doesn't sounds a lot, but when you compare f1.4 and f1.8 design, you will notice how much more challenge this half stop bring. If you still pixel PP its sharpness at f1.4 and compare to Sigma or any other lenses, I think you miss the point. I don't care record breaking resolution, it means nothing to me in real world use. However, This one do offer pretty good rendering to my eyes, even corner looks pretty good to me. ...Show more →
That one eye in focus is really sharp though! lol. Of course it depends on how you frame the subject...particularly for a fast wide angle...frame loose to pull more of the background in and there is enough DOF to keep most the subject critically in focus even at f1.4.
That said, I'm not really losing sleep over f1.4 vs f2 as I don't personally find the difference to be too material unless the light gets low and we're talking ISO values. All in all bokeh and rendering RX1 sonnnar has a very pleasing look despite being "only" f2. I suspect both the Sigma and GM will be competently sharp enough....it all comes down to rendering for me . If the rendering of the Sigma f2 is pleasing, I'll pass on the GM, and save some room in my budget and my bag.
p.47 #16 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
zhangyue wrote:
CPL at back light condition can be really poor for portrait. You lose about 1~1.5 stop light in shadow that difficult to recover, especially for subtle skin tonality. depend on situation, It will also add extra flare and reduce contrast.
If the light condition make skin exposure in the middle or up range of luminosity area, it will make skin color deeper to cut the flare out. I find CPL mostly does negative than help for my preference.
Back to topic, I like what I see in this GM, it seems Sony has found a formula of rendering for their lenses, it looks quite similar to 24GM to me. I am not saying this is the best approach or I prefer this to anything out there, but it seems works mostly especially for wide angle lens which are usually having problem on background rendering.
As for compare to Sigma, I think as long as Sigma offer f1.2, this will be unfair comparison as always, half stop doesn't sounds a lot, but when you compare f1.4 and f1.8 design, you will notice how much more challenge this half stop bring. If you still pixel PP its sharpness at f1.4 and compare to Sigma or any other lenses, I think you miss the point. I don't care record breaking resolution, it means nothing to me in real world use. However, This one do offer pretty good rendering to my eyes, even corner looks pretty good to me. ...Show more →
Yep, I have a similar view. After a certain point, sharpness becomes second priority to me (especially on my 24 MPix, though uniformity is nice as you can still see some degradation towards corners).
I actually got used to lugging around the big Sigma most of the time (but not all the time), still the size/weight and subsequently the handling of the GM, while being close enough in rendering (and surpassing it in sharpness surprisingly) to the Sigma is its main draw for me. I just hope it's really as good as it looks right now .
p.47 #17 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
This new 35 GM is looking smaller and smaller every time I see it SAR posted this mapcamera comparison photo next to one of my personal favorite Sony lenses, the Sony Zeiss 35 F1.4. In the second photo next to the GM 24 means, I might have to pay extra attention when pulling one or the other out of my bag.
p.47 #18 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Mystik wrote:
That one eye in focus is really sharp though! lol. Of course it depends on how you frame the subject...particularly for a fast wide angle...frame loose to pull more of the background in and there is enough DOF to keep most the subject critically in focus even at f1.4.
That said, I'm not really losing sleep over f1.4 vs f2 as I don't personally find the difference to be too material unless the light gets low and we're talking ISO values. All in all bokeh and rendering RX1 sonnnar has a very pleasing look despite being "only" f2. I suspect both the Sigma and GM will be competently sharp enough....it all comes down to rendering for me . If the rendering of the Sigma f2 is pleasing, I'll pass on the GM, and save some room in my budget and my bag....Show more →
I was mainly talking about sigma f1.2 compare to f1.4 GM. People seem suddenly forget how special that f1.2 is/was
I don't really know how to compare New sigma contemporary f2 to this GM. I think GM will at least win on corner rendering of better performing on cat eye and vignette. Usually, it is not just vignette itself bother me, but alway a few rendering problems associated with such mechanical vignette, It is like stop down lens partial of the frame. Still, this sigma is very good at f2. At f2.8, it seems totally fine with corner. Size and weight is a significant merit for sigma. the performance and size ratio is a winning formula for me in this case and it doesn't change with this GM.
For 35mm, I think I would prefer neutral rendering than blur than harsh rendering. Neutral means not just blur quantity but keep background shape and rendering with smooth fade away, the next stage is smooth with lots of blur, this is mostly fine but just a little boring, and many time, stopdown a little may lead to better looking images, the worst one is harsh. This is not a hard definition but all 35mm lenses lie somewhere between. In this regard, lens speed of 35mm is really not a first priority for my use. (MY USE) That is why I still think none touch RX1 in my eyes. It is not just smoothness but everything as a package.
This GM is good. A surprise in term of size, I like what I see here, I assume it will offer another advantage over others: AF. That may be an important factor for pro who cover events. AF could be a big consideration in lens design in modern age. I just want to applaud good engineering here for a whole package offered: price, size, AF and optics. A pretty significant statement IMO.
p.47 #19 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
zhangyue wrote:
I was mainly talking about sigma f1.2 compare to f1.4 GM. People seem suddenly forget how special that f1.2 is/was
I don't really know how to compare New sigma contemporary f2 to this GM. I think GM will at least win on corner rendering of better performing on cat eye and vignette. Usually, it is not just vignette itself bother me, but alway a few rendering problems associated with such mechanical vignette, It is like stop down lens partial of the frame. Still, this sigma is very good at f2. At f2.8, it seems totally fine with corner. Size and weight is a significant merit for sigma. the performance and size ratio is a winning formula for me in this case and it doesn't change with this GM.
For 35mm, I think I would prefer neutral rendering than blur than harsh rendering. Neutral means not just blur quantity but keep background shape and rendering with smooth fade away, the next stage is smooth with lots of blur, this is mostly fine but just a little boring, and many time, stopdown a little may lead to better looking images, the worst one is harsh. This is not a hard definition but all 35mm lenses lie somewhere between. In this regard, lens speed of 35mm is really not a first priority for my use. (MY USE) That is why I still think none touch RX1 in my eyes. It is not just smoothness but everything as a package.
This GM is good. A surprise in term of size, I like what I see here, I assume it will offer another advantage over others: AF. That may be an important factor for pro who cover events. AF could be a big consideration in lens design in modern age. I just want to applaud good engineering here for a whole package offered: price, size, AF and optics. A pretty significant statement IMO. ...Show more →
You wrote: " I just want to applaud good engineering here for a whole package offered: price, size, AF and optics. A pretty significant statement IMO. "
Curious to see how both compare Sony GM 35 vs Leica SL 35. Already size is evident and then there is that DxOMark measurement comparing one of my current personal favorite 35's for Sony FE, the Sony Zeiss FE 35 F1.4 vs The One Leica SL 35/2 APO:
