p.68 #1 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
My retailer contacted me to let me know I could pick mine up on Saturday locally. Pretty excited about that. Only a month delayed, and hopefully now everything has been double checked by QA. I’ll still be checking for dust.
p.68 #2 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
I wish someone provides brief summarized comparison (at least 2 or 3) between the following lenses:
Sony 35mm F1.4 GM,
Sigma 35mm F1.2 Art,
Sigma 35mm F2 DC DN,
Voigtlander 35mm F2 APO-Lantahr
Leica Summicron-SL 35mm F2 APO Asph
Sony 35mm F1.8 FE
Samyang 35mm F1.8 FE
Loxia 35mm F2
----------------------------------------------------------
p.68 #3 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
junglialoh wrote:
I wish someone provides brief summarized comparison (at least 2 or 3) between the following lenses:
Sony 35mm F1.4 GM,
Sigma 35mm F1.2 Art,
Sigma 35mm F2 DC DN,
Voigtlander 35mm F2 APO-Lantahr
Leica Summicron-SL 35mm F2 APO Asph
Sony 35mm F1.8 FE
Samyang 35mm F1.8 FE
Loxia 35mm F2
----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------
It seems rather obvious depends on what you're looking for... The Cron SL is the least compromised optic out of these, but it's designed for, probably, a more compromised camera system (well, you certainly can't use it on E-mount). The two Sony lenses have the best native support with the fastest AF speed. Samyang is the cheapest and likely the most compromised optic out of these. The two Sigma are great Sony AF alternatives that offer slightly nicer rendering. Voigtlander is likely the least compromised optic for the E-mount. If you're a huge fan of Zeiss rendering and you don't care about value, then the Loxia is for you. Otherwise, I don't see anyone would pick the Loxia over the others.
You pick Sony GM or Sigma Art for the faster speed. Otherwise, it's tougher to decide among the rest. It really depends on what you're looking for...
p.68 #4 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Thanks to your comment. I think hiepphotog explained very well the key points. Actually I was happy with Sony 35mm F1.8 but sold out for debt. Then i purchased Rokinon due to lower price and it is still very good for me. I was very impressed with Voigtlander 50mm F2 APO-lanthar, so I am attracted by 35mm APO-Lantahr because other Voigtlanthar APO leses are very good manual lenses.
p.68 #5 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
junglialoh wrote:
Thanks to your comment. I think hiepphotog explained very well the key points. Actually I was happy with Sony 35mm F1.8 but sold out for debt. Then i purchased Rokinon due to lower price and it is still very good for me. I was very impressed with Voigtlander 50mm F2 APO-lanthar, so I am attracted by 35mm APO-Lantahr because other Voigtlanthar APO leses are very good manual lenses.
I actually plan on using both the CV APO 35 and the GM (or the Sigma 35 1.2 depending on how they compare). For black and white conversions I've always found that APO lenses produce sharper images with more contrast/microcontrast. I'll take the Sigma/GM for events, portraits, etc, but for slower, more composed photography I'll pretty much use the CV APO 35.
p.68 #6 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
saxguy wrote:
I actually plan on using both the CV APO 35 and the GM (or the Sigma 35 1.2 depending on how they compare). For black and white conversions I've always found that APO lenses produce sharper images with more contrast/microcontrast. I'll take the Sigma/GM for events, portraits, etc, but for slower, more composed photography I'll pretty much use the CV APO 35.
I think it makes sense. In a way it's kind of similar to my personal approach, which combines the 35 GM used on an A7RIII to my Hasselblad kit (the X system focuses on "slower and more composed photography", and values colors, contrast, microcontrast and sharpness; while an Alpha body used with the 35 GM is faster, more responsive, and offers in almost any kind of situation a quick and easy balance between sharpness and beautiful smooth rendering).
p.68 #7 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
PhilG21 wrote:
I think it makes sense. In a way it's kind of similar to my personal approach, which combines the 35 GM used on an A7RIII to my Hasselblad kit (the X system focuses on "slower and more composed photography", and values colors, contrast, microcontrast and sharpness; while an Alpha body used with the 35 GM is faster, more responsive, and offers in almost any kind of situation a quick and easy balance between sharpness and beautiful smooth rendering).
I'm still on the fence about getting the a1 for everything or getting the medium format GFX 100S for product, fashion, portrait and event photography and just using the a9ii/200-600 for wildlife/sports/BIF.
p.68 #8 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
saxguy wrote:
I'm still on the fence about getting the a1 for everything or getting the medium format GFX 100S for product, fashion, portrait and event photography and just using the a9ii/200-600 for wildlife/sports/BIF.
Don't want to go too far into this digression, but... IMHO you should really rent the GFX for a few days before making any decision. I know it has IBIS and continuous AF, but it's still medium format, so I wouldn't expect a heavily versatile system, although it will undoubtly perform better than an X1D in some situations. But I'm not even sure it would fit to event photography... I may be wrong but I suspect you'll need a tripod more often than you think, if you know what I mean ;-)
p.68 #9 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
saxguy wrote:
I'm still on the fence about getting the a1 for everything or getting the medium format GFX 100S for product, fashion, portrait and event photography and just using the a9ii/200-600 for wildlife/sports/BIF.
You can’t go wrong either way which is a good place to be. If I were in your place, I would just get the A1 and have ONE supercamera that can use all the wonderful glass from Sony, Voigtlander, Sigma, Tamron, Zeiss, and all the other wonderful lenses that can work with an adapter. I’m not sure how different your images would look in real life uses between the Sony and the Fuji. 50mp is enough for any possible use, except maybe landscape where you want to make room-sized prints. And even then I’m guessing the difference will be undetectable at most viewing distances.
Again, nothing wrong with either choice. But that Fuji and its lenses are still much heavier than the Sony system. I wish I could have both!
p.68 #10 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
junglialoh wrote:
I wish someone provides brief summarized comparison (at least 2 or 3) between the following lenses:
Sony 35mm F1.4 GM,
Sigma 35mm F1.2 Art,
Sigma 35mm F2 DC DN,
Voigtlander 35mm F2 APO-Lantahr
Leica Summicron-SL 35mm F2 APO Asph
Sony 35mm F1.8 FE
Samyang 35mm F1.8 FE
Loxia 35mm F2
----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------
This German review of 4 of the lenses might help. Turn on subs.
p.68 #14 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Just a quick summary of the conclusion from my phone:
GM sharpness and contrast are excellent, he found little to no CA.
GM is sharpest with most contrast, less axial CA than Sigma 1.2.
Sigma 1.2 is runner up in contrast and sharpness, calls sharpness and contrast comparable but has more CA. Twice the weight and size is the main difference.
Check out both lenses if you want ultimate IQ and decide based on weight and (local) price difference.
All 4 lenses are good in terms of AF, the reigning FE 35/1.8 is beaten by the GM though, not only faster but also more often on target.
In terms of look, Sigma has a tad more bokeh and blur but he personally thought he'd see more of a difference from 1.4 to 1.2.
He only negatively noted the Sony zeiss in terms of bokeh rendering, outlining and onion rings. But he didn't really notice in most normal situations and likes the general rendering often.
In terms of flare the Sony Zeiss did best in his photos.
p.68 #18 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
lora_to wrote:
Just a quick summary of the conclusion from my phone:
GM sharpness and contrast are excellent, he found little to no CA.
GM is sharpest with most contrast, less axial CA than Sigma 1.2.
Sigma 1.2 is runner up in contrast and sharpness, calls sharpness and contrast comparable but has more CA. Twice the weight and size is the main difference.
Check out both lenses if you want ultimate IQ and decide based on weight and (local) price difference.
All 4 lenses are good in terms of AF, the reigning FE 35/1.8 is beaten by the GM though, not only faster but also more often on target.
In terms of look, Sigma has a tad more bokeh and blur but he personally thought he'd see more of a difference from 1.4 to 1.2.
He only negatively noted the Sony zeiss in terms of bokeh rendering, outlining and onion rings. But he didn't really notice in most normal situations and likes the general rendering often.
In terms of flare the Sony Zeiss did best in his photos.
Also, he noted that ymmv at 24mpix or 42mpix....Show more →
Thanks.re. AF- DPreview must have had a bad copy or bad tecnhique when they tested the GM.
To me, it's a no brainer which lens you'd choose if you had the money - even between the sigma 1.2 and the GM, it's the GM all the way.
Wonder what the new 50 1.2 will be like - if it's a good size, it may be spectacular compared to the competition.
Hope to see more. A really sweet lens for sure.