p.50 #1 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
FJR1 wrote:
Yes, I knew all about Marc Galer's affiliation with Sony and his typical post processing before I looked at his 35mm GM Flickr samples, but I'm still impressed with the lens and the photos provided by him and others who post more OOC examples. It's a definite BUY for me.
Well, I didn't know that when I followed the link up-thread. Now I do.
I also realize it isn't obvious my recent post above is mainly sarcastic.
The lens is of interest to me. I have used the original RX1 as my main camera for over eight years. I expect a lot from a lens in this price range but I'm still not sure I care for saving up for the GM. I'm looking forward to more balanced reports here when the lens is available.
p.50 #2 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Marc processes pretty heavy. Great shooter regardless but I would not say his images are really of test bed comparative to go by because of his processing. As A Pro myself I do respect him regardless of him being a ambassador. Frankly the only guy I'll watch his videos or guidance on setup stuff.
p.50 #3 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Jonas B wrote:
Well, I didn't know that when I followed the link up-thread. Now I do.
I also realize it isn't obvious my recent post above is mainly sarcastic.
The lens is of interest to me. I have used the original RX1 as my main camera for over eight years. I expect a lot from a lens in this price range but I'm still not sure I care for saving up for the GM. I'm looking forward to more balanced reports here when the lens is available.
Plenty of time to see what this lens can and can't do. G Master has a very good reputation so far and seems to get even better with each new GM lens that comes out, so naturally people are expecting a lot out of this latest GM.
As you pointed out, Mark's GM 35's images are processed ( his prerogative of course) and the cyclist image shadows were pushed hard as well as pulled back hard on the highlights ( typical approach to deal with harsh light in a image) but not sure if the processing applied resulted in what you pointed out in that image or not.
p.50 #4 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
+1
Took me a while as well to sell my well balanced and sharp ZA at a discount and now waiting for the GM.
The ZA is a really nice lens, though now I have high expectations for the GM (and the reduced size and weight should be reason enough to switch seven if 5hr rendering is not quite as distinctive, the GM being more neutral).
Hodie wrote:
I finally sold my ZA 35mm 1.4 lens. This was a bear to sell. But, it's done and I can move on. I wish all the luck in the world to the others trying to sell the lens, too.
To be clear, though, I LOVED that lens and think it gets a bad rap. I think the issues were real, but let's be honest, every negative thing gets amplified on the internet and drowns the positives. For a first generation lens on Sony FF mirrorless, I think it's a fine lens that still has its uses today.
The retail price is ridiculous, but that's probably a contractual thing between Sony and Zeiss. I doubt anyone has bought that lens new in the last couple years anyway.
p.50 #5 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Hodie wrote:
What would turn you on? Just asking.
There are too many to talk about here. Do I need to go through detail ? I would say if I first see this set a few days ago, I will not interested in this lens. Either his process or something about this lens in some of this light condition totally changed my initially good impression about it. I don't want to be the one ruel the party.
Now I need see more images. The skin tone is quite disaster in this set, but don't get me wrong. I don't buy the generalization about Sony Skin tone have problem, I didn't have problems about it and have no such a complaint and so are many others. You can't expect more "digital" look images than these. I am not saying skin tone has anything to do with this lens. Just bring some hope that it is the process and harsh lighting.
p.50 #6 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
All good. My comment was more tongue-and-cheek. I was looking at Mark’s set from a phone and the only thing I was interested in was seeing how sharp the photos were, so I zoomed in for that. Probably not the best way to analyze a lens but then again, I’ve seen enough samples to preclude that the lens is going to be great, for me.
Apologies if my comment offended in anyway. Just having a little fun.
zhangyue wrote:
There are too many to talk about here. Do I need to go through detail ? I would say if I first see this set a few days ago, I will not interested in this lens. Either his process or something about this lens in some of this light condition totally changed my initially good impression about it. I don't want to be the one ruel the party.
Now I need see more images. The skin tone is quite disaster in this set, but don't get me wrong. I don't buy the generalization about Sony Skin tone have problem, I didn't have problems about it and have no such a complaint and so are many others. You can't expect more "digital" look images than these. ...Show more →
p.50 #7 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
zhangyue wrote:
There are too many to talk about here. Do I need to go through detail ? I would say if I first see this set a few days ago, I will not interested in this lens. Either his process or something about this lens in some of this light condition totally changed my initially good impression about it. I don't want to be the one ruel the party.
Now I need see more images. The skin tone is quite disaster in this set, but don't get me wrong. I don't buy the generalization about Sony Skin tone have problem, I didn't have problems about it and have no such a complaint and so are many others. You can't expect more "digital" look images than these. I am not saying skin tone has anything to do with this lens. Just bring some hope that it is the process and harsh lighting. ...Show more →
He's probably edited the images to this own taste but heavy post-processing is usually detrimental to rendering. Therefore, I don't think we should make assumptions here except that the lens is indeed very sharp.
Only "out of the camera" samples at mid-distance showing complex backgrounds can help us know more about the lens overall rendering. I say mid-distance because that's where the transition zone becomes part of the background and easier to see rendering quality without the interference of blur.
It's scary to me that the lens is so sharp at close distance though. This usually means Sony fully corrected spherical aberration for this lens and that's not good news for those looking for a 35mm with outstanding rendering. The more I see it, the more I think the new 35/1.4 GM has more in common with the 135/1.8's rendering than the 24/1.4 or 85/1.4 GM lenses. However, without testing the lens, it's hard to know for sure. It would be great if a reviewer posted a gallery showing subjects a mid-distance with minimal post-processing, so we can get more clarity on this.
Jan 23, 2021 at 03:40 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.50 #8 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Fred Miranda wrote:
He's probably edited the images to this own taste but heavy post-processing is usually detrimental to rendering. Therefore, I don't think we should make assumptions here except that the lens is indeed very sharp.
Only "out of the camera" samples at mid-distance showing complex backgrounds can help us know more about the lens overall rendering. I say mid-distance because that's where the transition zone becomes part of the background and easier to see rendering quality without the interference of blur.
It's scary to me that the lens is so sharp at close distance. This usually means Sony fully corrected spherical aberration for this lens and that's not good news for those looking for a 35mm with outstanding rendering. The more I see it, the more I think the new 35/1.4 GM has more in common with the 135/1.8's rendering than the 24/1.4 or 85/1.4 GM lenses. However, without testing the lens, it's hard to know for sure. It would be great if a reviewer posted a gallery showing subjects a mid-distance with minimal post-processing, so we can get more clarity on this....Show more →
It looks to me like the 35 GM makes some of the compromises of the 24 GM (e.g., small size for less than perfect correction of color aberrations) and some of the compromises of the 135 GM (maximizing sharpness for neutral rendering rather than a softer rendering). I can live with these compromises even though they are not what I prefer. My wife actually favors both of these compromises, and as she will be the primary user of this lens they work our well for us. Still I can see that people might like different ones.
Personally, I would like to sacrifice a bit of sharpness for rendering, and aperture for color correction maintaining a small size, but nobody asks me or seems to design lenses for what I want. The CV 50 f/2 APO comes close, but even there I would be willing to sacrifice a bit of sharpness for a bit better rendering. Even though I don't see many lenses that have the compromises I would really like, I see a lot of really nice lenses with different compromises and that are still attractive. The GM 35 f/1.4 is certainly one of them.
p.50 #9 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
I never ever cook images when I'm testing. I know Fred does not either and if did I'd say so. This actually may look to much like the 1.8. Not sure I would want that
Why keep saying forget these reviewers there really giving you bad data
p.50 #10 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Use a pro mist 1/2 or 1/4 filter and colorchecker and you'll get accurate skin tones and a film look and enjoy an awesome new lens. Though, yes, editing images in such a way doesn't provide much for a discussion about a new lens; images should be SOOC. The images I've seen from the GM seem much more neutral and without the "character" of the ZA, which is good on one hand (as it theoretically gives more range for postprocessing?) though the images from the ZA do appear quite striking out of camera (and it's not just the vignetting which is pronounced with the GM at 3.0 ev at 1.4).
The smaller size and weight are enough for an upgrade IMHO, even if the rendering isn't quite so "filmic".
zhangyue wrote:
There are too many to talk about here. Do I need to go through detail ? I would say if I first see this set a few days ago, I will not interested in this lens. Either his process or something about this lens in some of this light condition totally changed my initially good impression about it. I don't want to be the one ruel the party.
Now I need see more images. The skin tone is quite disaster in this set, but don't get me wrong. I don't buy the generalization about Sony Skin tone have problem, I didn't have problems about it and have no such a complaint and so are many others. You can't expect more "digital" look images than these. I am not saying skin tone has anything to do with this lens. Just bring some hope that it is the process and harsh lighting. ...Show more →
p.50 #11 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Steve Spencer wrote:
.....and some of the compromises of the 135 GM (maximizing sharpness for neutral rendering rather than a softer rendering). I can live with these compromises even though they are not what I prefer.
I would not be interested in this lens if this is indeed the case as I'm not willing to compromise on rendering.
I'd say we need to see more sample images at f/1.4 at mid-distance.
p.50 #12 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
The best examples, albeit processed, that i’ve seen come from this video at about the 8:50 mark. The 35/1.8 I had would not have handled the foliage in this manner, and I generally like the falloff seen in these examples. I won’t claim to have the eye many of you do, but I’ve seen enough to know this will stand a league above the distracting foreground/backgrounds seen in certain situations with the 1.8.
http://
p.50 #13 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
tbpeur01 wrote:
The best examples, albeit processed, that i’ve seen come from this video at about the 8:50 mark. The 35/1.8 I had would not have handled the foliage in this manner, and I generally like the falloff seen in these examples. I won’t claim to have the eye many of you do, but I’ve seen enough to know this will stand a league above the distracting foreground/backgrounds seen in certain situations with the 1.8.
http://
This is where I really want to test is up against my 35 1.8. If it’s close than I’ll grab a Voightlander 35 1.2. I want at least one great rendering lens for my personal work in around this focal length. Hate to have 2 35 lenses though
p.50 #14 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Steve Spencer wrote:
It looks to me like the 35 GM makes some of the compromises of the 24 GM (e.g., small size for less than perfect correction of color aberrations) and some of the compromises of the 135 GM (maximizing sharpness for neutral rendering rather than a softer rendering). I can live with these compromises even though they are not what I prefer. My wife actually favors both of these compromises, and as she will be the primary user of this lens they work our well for us. Still I can see that people might like different ones.
Personally, I would like to sacrifice a bit of sharpness for rendering, and aperture for color correction maintaining a small size, but nobody asks me or seems to design lenses for what I want. The CV 50 f/2 APO comes close, but even there I would be willing to sacrifice a bit of sharpness for a bit better rendering. Even though I don't see many lenses that have the compromises I would really like, I see a lot of really nice lenses with different compromises and that are still attractive. The GM 35 f/1.4 is certainly one of them....Show more →
Count me out if this doesn't render better than the Sigma 35 1.2.
There are plenty of sharp compact medium wide angles with so-so rendering if you're good with either f1.8 or MF.
135GM bokeh is not too much of an issue because of the compression of the focal length. Different story with a wide angle
p.50 #15 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Julia Trotti has a self-portrait on flickr that reminds me of the 24 GM. The grasses behind her present a challenge, but I like the falloff and how the background is simply a pretty backdrop vs a nervous cluster of lines and flowers.
http:/ /https://flic.kr/p/2ksLvCv
p.50 #16 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
That looks pretty good.
tbpeur01 wrote:
Julia Trotti has a self-portrait on flickr that reminds me of the 24 GM. The grasses behind her present a challenge, but I like the falloff and how the background is simply a pretty backdrop vs a nervous cluster of lines and flowers.
http:/ /https://flic.kr/p/2ksLvCv
p.50 #17 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Steve Spencer wrote:
It looks to me like the 35 GM makes some of the compromises of the 24 GM (e.g., small size for less than perfect correction of color aberrations) and some of the compromises of the 135 GM (maximizing sharpness for neutral rendering rather than a softer rendering). I can live with these compromises even though they are not what I prefer. My wife actually favors both of these compromises, and as she will be the primary user of this lens they work our well for us. Still I can see that people might like different ones.
Personally, I would like to sacrifice a bit of sharpness for rendering, and aperture for color correction maintaining a small size, but nobody asks me or seems to design lenses for what I want. The CV 50 f/2 APO comes close, but even there I would be willing to sacrifice a bit of sharpness for a bit better rendering. Even though I don't see many lenses that have the compromises I would really like, I see a lot of really nice lenses with different compromises and that are still attractive. The GM 35 f/1.4 is certainly one of them....Show more →
Just curious, what is your favorite rendering 35mm? Any format, speed or system and without sensitivity to usability, price and size.
p.50 #18 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Again, I don’t want ruel the party as I said. If I have nothing good to say then I just don’t say it.
Too sharp is the a new impression I have over past two link posted images. Even bokeh doesn’t look the same to me but I can wait for more to show up. It is still a great glass no matter how you look at it. Just may not be the chosen ONE
Nikon lens designer who charged for 105E mentioned that in one of interviews that they purposely turn down sharpness a little for optimize 3D rendering as they feel the perfect sharpness (perfect corrected lens) can only maximize 2d rendering. The senior lens designer told Him that if lens is too sharp, sharpness itself is one kind of aberration. I don’t want treat this as objective truth but with more and more experience handling more and more lenses. I personally agree this. I think over correct lens will make it virtually sharp and high contrast, almost like sharpen applied on hardware level than raw process. I treat this as An indirect way saying that under corrected SA will make images prettier, true to eyes. I find these treat in most of Leica S glasses that never in your face sharp. So are high end cinematic lenses in movie. They might loose in bench but win on images.
I don’t want draw any conclusion here or it may be totally unrelated, just want offer some food for thought.
Fred Miranda wrote:
He's probably edited the images to this own taste and post-processing is usually detrimental to rendering. Therefore, I don't think we should make assumptions here except that the lens is indeed very sharp.
Only "out of the camera" samples at mid-distance showing complex backgrounds can help us know more about the lens overall rendering. I say mid-distance because that's where the transition zone becomes part of the background and easier to see rendering quality without the interference of blur.
It's scary to me that the lens is so sharp at close distance. This usually means Sony fully corrected spherical aberration for this lens and that's not good news for those looking for a 35mm with outstanding rendering. The more I see it, the more I think the new 35/1.4 GM has more in common with the 135/1.8's rendering than the 24/1.4 or 85/1.4 GM lenses. However, without testing the lens, it's hard to know for sure. It would be great if a reviewer posted a gallery showing subjects a mid-distance with minimal post-processing, so we can get more clarity on this....Show more →
p.50 #19 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Fred Miranda wrote:
He's probably edited the images to this own taste and post-processing is usually detrimental to rendering. Therefore, I don't think we should make assumptions here except that the lens is indeed very sharp.
Only "out of the camera" samples at mid-distance showing complex backgrounds can help us know more about the lens overall rendering. I say mid-distance because that's where the transition zone becomes part of the background and easier to see rendering quality without the interference of blur.
It's scary to me that the lens is so sharp at close distance. This usually means Sony fully corrected spherical aberration for this lens and that's not good news for those looking for a 35mm with outstanding rendering. The more I see it, the more I think the new 35/1.4 GM has more in common with the 135/1.8's rendering than the 24/1.4 or 85/1.4 GM lenses. However, without testing the lens, it's hard to know for sure. It would be great if a reviewer posted a gallery showing subjects a mid-distance with minimal post-processing, so we can get more clarity on this....Show more →
have you seen gordan's youtube comparison with the sigma 35mm f1.2? around 7:40 mark.
There is mid distance transistional bokeh and it looks pretty decent. I think the sigma is slightly better but the sony gm is not bad.
I will probably pre order it and try to get it on day one and compare it with my sigma 35mm f1.2. I think the AF speed itself will be the deciding factor as long as the rendering is not like the sigma 40mm f1.4...
Jan 24, 2021 at 03:30 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.50 #20 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Fred Miranda wrote:
I would not be interested in this lens if this is indeed the case as I'm not willing to compromise on rendering.
I'd say we need to see more sample images at f/1.4 at mid-distance.
Personally, I am willing to compromise on some color aberration correction for rendering, and I am will to compromise on sharpness for rendering, and I am willing to compromise on aperture for rendering, but I am not willing to compromise on size for rendering. The 35 GM is about as big as I am willing to go for a 35mm lens. If I were willing to go with a larger lens the Sigma 35 f/1.2 makes very few compromises other than size, although its rendering is still only pretty good and not great, IMO.
I am betting after following the thread thus far, and of course without actual experience at this point, that I would have preferred that Sony would have compromised sharpness for rendering. I don't think the 35 GM will be a bad rendering lens (which I consider the Sony 35 f/1.8 to be), but I don't think it will be great. As far as rendering I expect it to be in the same league as the Sigma 35 f/1.2, pretty good but not great, but it will have more axial CA. That would still make it according to my preferences the top choice for an AF fast 35mm. Could it have been better? According to my preference, sure, but that is true of almost all lenses. Very few strike all the compromises just the way I like them, but that doesn't make any of those bad lenses, just not my ideal. I still think this is a great offering from Sony, I just wished they would have put some of the effort they put into making it incredibly sharp into making the rendering especially lovely.
? I would say if I first see this set a few days ago, I will not interested in this lens. Either his process or something about this lens in some of this light condition totally changed my initially good impression about it. I don't want to be the one ruel the party. 