p.9 #2 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
GMPhotography wrote:
The biggest problem with these forums is the total underestimated value of buying camera equipment. I personally produced 30 workshops for people just like this on a photo forum. Mostly medium format digital. The gear they showed up with made me look like a street rat. They would happily show up with 60 grand worth of gear and that's about 80 percent of them. I laugh every time some one mentions money on this forum. Photography is not my hobby golf is. You know how much my clubs cost. I can't say wife is close by. Rotflmao
Wish people give this money BS a rest. No one cares
You ever go back to the other forum are you completely reformed? I see your posts (and numerous stickies all the time)!
And I agree.. It does skew perception quite a bit when you're used to paying Honda Civic sized sums and you come back to the mirrorless full frame world.
p.9 #3 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
The other forum I actually started with a friend . It’s called GetDPI we started quite awhile ago. We started it for our workshop members than went public. We did about 30 workshops than I had to quit and stay home to take care of my wife. Than I sold my shares plus all that high end gear too. Wife is healthy today. Now I’m close to home as COVID would most likely be deadly to me. So I have to be careful
But yes I’ve been around a long time and very involved in the industry and really try and help others.
p.9 #4 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
I have been following Guy for many years and have learned a lot from his frequent posts and experience. Getdpi was a great resource to me as an amateur hobbyist. I joined in April 2008 and then moved over here, also related to equipment downsizing (from Contax 645 digital with P25, P65, IQ260). There were great photographers at getdpi at the time, professional and inspiring. Guy has been very generous with sharing his knowledge and experience.
Dec 08, 2020 at 12:37 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.9 #5 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
ShootPDX wrote:
I'll bite. What's it about?
As I said above you really can't say it is about anything other than the 52 people who happened to take the survey.
p.9 #6 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Steve Spencer wrote:
A major problem with this "study" is you can't take 52 people as say that the results from those 52 when you just take whoever fills out your survey describe what the average person thinks. You need more people and you have to select the people to fill out your survey with a lot more care if you want to talk about people in general. It is great he added disclaimers, but the first major disclaimer should have been that doing it the way he did means that he can't say anything about the average person or people in general. He really can only talk about the 52 people he had fill out the survey.
I could say a lot more about how the "study" doesn't test ideas about bokeh and whether people like more or less blur, but suffice it to say the "study" doesn't really say anything about what people in general (or even the 52 people he surveyed) think about bokeh....Show more →
Well, there are enough people who give workshops and enough who shoot clients and communicate a lot with clients at a shoot or wedding guests to learn what people think and want (we have many thousand of those experiences made literally).
Our experience is Bokeh is overrated. That doesn't mean they don't like blurry background. But clients don't care as much as people on enthusiast forums do regarding the details: whether you use f1.2 or f1.4 doesn't interest any of them (they would not see a difference), whether the bokeh is a tiny bit smoother or harsher, etc.
They want to see emotion in the images. They want them to look pleasing, to think they were photographed favorably. Whether one used f2 or f1.2 is absolutely irrelevant to them. Everybody who says otherwise should give me some proof not based on cherry picking.
Our most used aperture is f2, for example. I like f1.4/f1.2 for certain situations to bring iso down. But the difference even in the Sigma f1.2 vs. f1.4 is too small to make this a decisive lens decision in real life. It is more for armchair photographers (;-), my opinion).
p.9 #7 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
InFocus2014 wrote:
Not an f1.2?? Perhaps the rumors are not accurate. Looks like I will more than likely be keeping my outstanding Sigma 35mm f1.2 ART. After shooting this lens, it would be tough to go back to an f1.4 - there is a big difference in wide-open rendering.
Also, Canon seems to be releasing some great f1.2 RF lenses and I expect that a 35mm f1.2 R will be next, so Sony might immediately be behind if this new GM lens is actually an f1.4.
On a positive note, its good that Sony finally addressed their 35mm f1.4 deficiency (I went through four of their current 35mm f1.4's and didn't find any of them to be excellent or worth the price). Also, it seems like all of the latest Sony offerings have been really excellent, so I expect this new lens to be world-class.
Jeff...Show more →
I don't find the difference that huge, if I weren't aware beforehand, I would mostly not know whether it was shot at f1.2 or f1.4. Wide open rendering can be super pleasing with f1.4, too, f1.2 wouldn't be needed per se.
"so Sony might immediately be behind if this new GM lens is actually an f1.4."
From a marketing POV, yes. But if it is optically superb, cheaper (all the R- lenses are quite expensive), small and light, it can compensate for "only" being f1.4. I know more and more fellow photographers telling us they would prefer lighter and smaller and rave the 24GM in that regard. I would not underestimate that group of photographers.
"Also, it seems like all of the latest Sony offerings have been really excellent, so I expect this new lens to be world-class."
That I expect (and hope for), too.
p.9 #8 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Holger wrote:
Well, there are enough people who give workshops and enough who shoot clients and communicate a lot with clients at a shoot or wedding guests to learn what people think and want (we have many thousand of those experiences made literally).
Our experience is Bokeh is overrated. That doesn't mean they don't like blurry background. But clients don't care as much as people on enthusiast forums do regarding the details: whether you use f1.2 or f1.4 doesn't interest any of them (they would not see a difference), whether the bokeh is a tiny bit smoother or harsher, etc.
They want to see emotion in the images. They want them to look pleasing, to think they were photographed favorably. Whether one used f2 or f1.2 is absolutely irrelevant to them. Everybody who says otherwise should give me some proof not based on cherry picking.
Our most used aperture is f2, for example. I like f1.4/f1.2 for certain situations to bring iso down. But the difference even in the Sigma f1.2 vs. f1.4 is too small to make this a decisive lens decision in real life. It is more for armchair photographers (;-), my opinion). ...Show more →
No I agree the gear means nothing to them but it is how we get there to produce such imagery. I’m personally not the bokeh prince of the universe either, it is overrated in many ways.
Like a fisheye lens after a token 3 images I had enough.
Really what I can’t stand is onion rings. More the point though as the shooter what you like to achieve is more important as long as there writing the checks
Dec 08, 2020 at 06:30 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.9 #9 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Holger wrote:
Well, there are enough people who give workshops and enough who shoot clients and communicate a lot with clients at a shoot or wedding guests to learn what people think and want (we have many thousand of those experiences made literally).
Our experience is Bokeh is overrated. That doesn't mean they don't like blurry background. But clients don't care as much as people on enthusiast forums do regarding the details: whether you use f1.2 or f1.4 doesn't interest any of them (they would not see a difference), whether the bokeh is a tiny bit smoother or harsher, etc.
They want to see emotion in the images. They want them to look pleasing, to think they were photographed favorably. Whether one used f2 or f1.2 is absolutely irrelevant to them. Everybody who says otherwise should give me some proof not based on cherry picking.
Our most used aperture is f2, for example. I like f1.4/f1.2 for certain situations to bring iso down. But the difference even in the Sigma f1.2 vs. f1.4 is too small to make this a decisive lens decision in real life. It is more for armchair photographers (;-), my opinion). ...Show more →
I actually totally agree with your perspective here. I personally also shoot at f/2 a lot more than f/1.2 or f/1.4 even though I have several f/1.2 lenses. I also think that basing your opinion on your extensive experience with clients is quite reasonable. What I don't think is reasonable is basing such an opinion on the sort of "study" that was reported in the petapixel link. I maintain the it tells us not much at all about what the average person thinks and actually does little to test even what the people they studied think about bokeh.
With regard to the Sony 35 f/1.4 vs. competitors like the Sigma 35 f/1.2 I personally would place very little value on the wider aperture of the Sigma. I agree with you there as well and as I said above I am very likely to get the Sony 35 f/1.4 GM over the Sigma because I do value the smaller size of the Sony. So when I criticize the "study" in that link it does not mean that I disagree with the arguments that are made in the link, just that I don't think the "study" provides much at all in the way of evidence for those arguments.
p.9 #11 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
It be a rare day I actually shot a 1.2 lens at 1.2 . Through lots of testing over the years if you stop down a touch your far better off. We have proven that with both the Sony 50/35/85 1.4 lenses . Now the 241.4 I contend is better at 1.4
p.9 #12 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Steve Spencer wrote:
As I said above you really can't say it is about anything other than the 52 people who happened to take the survey.
Bokeh is overrated. That’s from my own experience, and that of others I know. People can waste their money on their f/1.2, but it’s very likely not providing the ROI they think it is. You’re buying a boat anchor, and for what?
p.9 #14 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Well there is a reason to buy a 1.2 lens but its no so much for the bokeh unless you love fuzzy images.
Really there are two reasons. Noticed I said the 50/85 1.4 lenses are spectacular really at 1.8. So now its a perfect 1.8 lens. Always have found any very wide lens a touch of stopping down in improves it a great deal. The other is someone locks you in a room and turns off the lights. . Really its more about a focusing aid that can get you out of trouble. So there are good solid reasons not just bokeh. Im usually need it for this reason more than anything else is the speed issue
I know one thing for sure here , my donuts are on the line but the Sony will render better than the Sigma but the Sigma most likely sharper. Here is a pick your poison. We have seen this somewhat consistently
p.9 #15 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Mixed emotions!
I like 35mm FL but I also have a good copy of the Sony FE 35 F1.4. My copy is razor sharp on the 61MP A7rIV, to the point where I find myself having to edit out moire in some situations. *Not that super sharp is the only quality I look for in a lens.
Supposedly the new GM will be smaller than the FE but probably not dramatically smaller than the FE. I am sure the GM 35 will use similar special glass to the GM 24's two XA (extreme aspherical) elements and three ED (Extra-low Dispersion) glass elements, Nano AR coatings and the new Direct Drive SSM motor tech they used in the GM 24 e.g. to achieve impressive IQ in a smaller form factor without leaving very offensive optical trade -offs. I am sure there will be no onion rings in the new GM either which in my case, I usually edit out highlighted bokeh balls in my images anyway regardless of onion ring, smooth or shape.
But because I like 35mm I do tend to buy the best 35mm for whatever system I am using, so if the GM 35 rumor comes to reality--I'm already getting sweaty palms ha ha.
As far as new lens price complaints go--I've read that complaint "maybe more than a thousand times" on multiple forums already. It is what it is. 3rd party manufacturers will almost always be far less expensive than OEM. That's the 3rd Party business model usually but not always, in return for some other tradeoffs compared to native.
And then again price and "expensive" is relative to what?
Here is an interesting comment posted about the cost of the GM 24 when it first came out:
"Perhaps the most interesting feature of this lens is its price point, despite its designation and specs as a top-tier G Master lens. While the Nikon and Canon equivalents (released in 2010 and 2008, respectively) retail at around $1,600 - $2,000, the Sony lens is aggressively priced at $1,400. https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/sony/fe-24mm-f1.4-gm-sel24f14gm/review/
p.9 #17 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
I hesitate to beat a dead horse, but the Petapixel article about bokeh makes some valid points, and the authors' qualitative study, though imperfect, provides some decent insight. Understand that the survey respondents were non-photographers and the authors indicate that their study was not totally "scientific." However, their 50+ sample size, for a qualitative study, was big enough based on "saturation" theory.
The most widely used principle for determining sample size and evaluating its sufficiency in a qualitative study is that of saturation. The notion of saturation originates in grounded theory – a qualitative methodological approach explicitly concerned with empirically-derived theory development – and is inextricably linked to theoretical sampling. Theoretical sampling describes an iterative process of data collection, data analysis and theory development whereby data collection is governed by emerging theory (saturation) rather than predefined characteristics of the studied population.
In a nutshell, the two authors concluded that bokeh was not a huge issue to non-photographers based on their (the non-photographers') responses skewed heavily toward their preferences for photos of a smaller (slower) aperture. Individuals may disagree, but the article provided some valid and fairly reliable food for thought.
p.9 #18 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
GMPhotography wrote:
Well there is a reason to buy a 1.2 lens but its no so much for the bokeh unless you love fuzzy images.
Really there are two reasons. Noticed I said the 50/85 1.4 lenses are spectacular really at 1.8. So now its a perfect 1.8 lens. Always have found any very wide lens a touch of stopping down in improves it a great deal. The other is someone locks you in a room and turns off the lights. . Really its more about a focusing aid that can get you out of trouble. So there are good solid reasons not just bokeh. Im usually need it for this reason more than anything else is the speed issue
I know one thing for sure here , my donuts are on the line but the Sony will render better than the Sigma but the Sigma most likely sharper. Here is a pick your poison. We have seen this somewhat consistently...Show more →
Understood. And I agree if you need the light gathering capability then the wider the better, but be warned that not all 1.2s actually allow for more light transmission. I saw a another test where the Sigma 1.4 transmitted more light than the 1.2.
And even where 1.2 allows higher transmission, you’re talking still such a minor improvement that it still may not be worth it.
All that to say, I’ll be fine with a 35 1.4 GM. I don’t think Sony would be selling themselves short by not releasing a 1.2.
p.9 #19 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
GMPhotography wrote:
The Sony 24mm I always felt it was a steal of a price. Its also maybe one of there best
The Sony GM line seems to be getting better and better overall with each new release. I have the original GM 85 to compare. But these latest GM primes are jaw-dropping in many respects even as Sony always tries to find a way to shave off a bit of weight and/or size:
GM 24
GM 135
GM 400
GM 600
Even the GM 100-400 zoom IQ is noteworthy IMO for what it is.
I am sure the GM 35 will be stunning too, but some have stated a fast 35mm optical design can be challenge never mind adding a smaller form factor to the complexity. Very exciting. Sony will pull this off too.
p.9 #20 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
ShootPDX wrote:
Bokeh is overrated. That’s from my own experience, and that of others I know. People can waste their money on their f/1.2, but it’s very likely not providing the ROI they think it is. You’re buying a boat anchor, and for what?
In the realm of the overrated I would say that sharpness wins over bokeh.
Never had an image fail over sharpness (assuming the image is in focus) but I have had images let down by ugly or distracting bokeh.
Of course there are two interconnected dimensions to photography:
Commercial work for the masses and fine art photography for the more discriminating.
Since I shoot for me I look at both sharpness and bokeh.
At f/8 my priority is sharpness; at/near wide open it is bokeh.
I see your posts (and numerous stickies all the time)!
