p.85 #1 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
In my post "LoCA and some water" (here) there were a couple of swans swimming around. While taking the images with the reflections in the water the swans approached me.
I took a couple of images just for the hell of it, much like a happy kid with a new cell phone.
The camera settings were my usual ones: AF in DMF mode, Expand flexible spot and single image mode. Not the best for moving targets... Anyway, I pushed the focus area to the left and down and took two images.
But - it was taken by me not having any idea at all really about how to shoot a bird, autofocused close to the corner and taken at f/1.4. All things considered not bad.
I have since tried the AF a little more and I'm super happy with it. The lens focuses fast, spot on and most of the time nearly without a sound. I haven't checked AF-C and fast stuff coming in my direction. Walking people and slow bikers are not a problem.
It really is an AF lens. Manual focusing could have been a joy thanks to great contrast and lack of SA. The focus throw is very short though making exact focus at longer distances a bit finicky to dial in.
So, in short:
Super sharp. Very good AF. Excellent flare resistance. For the most of the time OK or even good bokeh.
OTOH: I wish there had been less LoCA, the focusing ring is too sensitive when touching it, the focusing throw is too short and sometimes the bokeh, or transition zone if you like, is a little disturbing.
I'm pretty sure this will be a kind of classic performer!
p.85 #2 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Jonas B wrote:
In my post "LoCA and some water" (here) there were a couple of swans swimming around. While taking the images with the reflections in the water the swans approached me.
I took a couple of images just for the hell of it, much like a happy kid with a new cell phone.
The camera settings were my usual ones: AF in DMF mode, Expand flexible spot and single image mode. Not the best for moving targets... Anyway, I pushed the focus area to the left and down and took two images.
But - it was taken by me not having any idea at all really about how to shoot a bird, autofocused close to the corner and taken at f/1.4. All things considered not bad.
I have since tried the AF a little more and I'm super happy with it. The lens focuses fast, spot on and most of the time nearly without a sound. I haven't checked AF-C and fast stuff coming in my direction. Walking people and slow bikers are not a problem.
It really is an AF lens. Manual focusing could have been a joy thanks to great contrast and lack of SA. The focus throw is very short though making exact focus at longer distances a bit finicky to dial in.
So, in short:
Super sharp. Very good AF. Excellent flare resistance. For the most of the time OK or even good bokeh.
OTOH: I wish there had been less LoCA, the focusing ring is too sensitive when touching it, the focusing throw is too short and sometimes the bokeh, or transition zone if you like, is a little disturbing.
I'm pretty sure this will be a kind of classic performer!...Show more →
p.85 #4 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
j4nu wrote:
Ok, let the battle begin .
Bigma and the new GM, I'm not telling which is which yet. Not exactly the same focus, but I think comparable enough. These are embedded jpegs, so not representative of quality but I just wanted to show the difference between the two lenses.
p.85 #5 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
j4nu wrote:
And this time with exif intact, as one lens was capturing the other .
I think in this case Sony's better MFD actually magnifies the LoCA impression...
p.85 #6 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
rainio wrote:
Can I ask your opinion of a 35mm GM that I received this week.
Here are the four corners (focused with AF to at the object when in the center of the frame then manual focus and not touched):
The top right corner seems a bit soft (I tested it like this many times and the top right always looks a touch soft)
Here are the corners using Fred's method where you turn the camera upside down to test the top right and bottom right corners:
Now the top right corner doesn't seem too bad.
Would you keep this lens?
Thank you
I think it's acceptable, now how much is personal of course...
Are you sure top-right and bottom-left are not switched in the 2nd set?
I'd also repeat the test when the light gets a bit better at least to emphasize the differences (on the other hand too much light/reflection on the buildings also makes matters worse...).
p.85 #7 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
abadger wrote:
LoCA is much better controlled on the Sony...I mean, it’s obvious, yes?
The remaining issue is the more well defined OOF areas. And I think the Sigma wins there but it’s a trade off I suppose given the size difference.
Well, what I meant is that the magnification is higher when using the GM (so the photo with the Sigma lens in it) and that makes the color changes in front of and behind the focus plane (LoCA) more evident.
I'd say the Bigma is better corrected, at least in these examples I tried...
...and I don't mean to bash either, I've just started my evaluation . It's really hard to put them in the same basket due to the size & weight difference...
p.85 #8 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
j4nu wrote:
Well, what I meant is that the magnification is higher when using the GM (so the photo with the Sigma lens in it) and that makes the color changes in front of and behind the focus plane (LoCA) more evident.
I'd say the Bigma is better corrected, at least in these examples I tried...
...and I don't mean to bash either, I've just started my evaluation . It's really hard to put them in the same basket due to the size & weight difference...
I appreciate the comparison, definitely. But if you are saying you don’t notice the clear purple and green fringing all over the Sigma image and think the subtle LoCA on the Sony image is worse, I definitely feel like I am taking crazy pills. Or maybe I have been way off when evaluating CA in general...? But I immediately notice the color fringing on the Sigma and the Sony seems much harder to notice. Maybe just me? I’m not even attached to either brand, to be honest. Just trying to verify what I’m seeing.
p.85 #9 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
abadger wrote:
I appreciate the comparison, definitely. But if you are saying you don’t notice the clear purple and green fringing all over the Sigma image and think the subtle LoCA on the Sony image is worse, I definitely feel like I am taking crazy pills. Or maybe I have been way off when evaluating CA in general...? But I immediately notice the color fringing on the Sigma and the Sony seems much harder to notice. Maybe just me? I’m not even attached to either brand, to be honest. Just trying to verify what I’m seeing.
I noticed the same thing so it's not just you . At this distance, the Sony won hand down in term of CA suppression. However, to me, it matters more at longer distance, half body to infinity.
p.85 #10 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
abadger wrote:
I appreciate the comparison, definitely. But if you are saying you don’t notice the clear purple and green fringing all over the Sigma image and think the subtle LoCA on the Sony image is worse, I definitely feel like I am taking crazy pills. Or maybe I have been way off when evaluating CA in general...? But I immediately notice the color fringing on the Sigma and the Sony seems much harder to notice. Maybe just me? I’m not even attached to either brand, to be honest. Just trying to verify what I’m seeing.
Maybe I'm the one with the pills ...
I think this crop shows what I'm talking about better than the aperture scale:
So, the letters S and A show some color (LoCA I think)...
So, the letters S and A show some color (LoCA I think)...
Oh, you’re not wrong at all about that. There is some color there, but from my eye the color is significantly more pronounced in the images taken with the Sigma. And I really like the Sigma, a lot. But just being honest, if you zoom in on the remote button for example, you see a clear delineation of purple to green from one end of the button to the other. Seems like a clear case of LoCA, and then if you look at the Sony image it is there, but very muted by comparison. So I guess what I’m saying is that if you are choosing solely based on CA correction between the two, my choice would certainly be the Sony. And if it was fully up to OOF smoothness, the Sigma wins, I think. But at the cost of size and weight.
And if we are being real here, if the image taken is halfway decent, I’m not sure many people are going to care about the differences between the two lenses unless you pixel peep (I am guilty of this at times). Both have good rendering in general, both are well corrected in general. Just one does a better job than the other with their respective strengths. The GM is sharper, ok, but who will really notice at the end of the day. I guess if we are talking corner to corner, yes, that is a plus for some types of photography. But I digress.
p.85 #12 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
I'm with abadger and hiepphotog. In the pictures of the lens taken with the other lens, the loca are definitely way more noticeable in the sample taken with the Sigma than with the Sony, it seems obvious to me.
p.85 #13 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
I guess I'm the one taking crazy pills then .
Anyways, the 2nd set (lens pictures) is a worse test because the target is different, but I included them because I thought they show the same trend as the tv remote pictures. I was wrong apparently.
To me especially the tv remote picture looks better on the Sigma (so the 2nd picture and right side of the comparison), as the coloring is more muted compared to more satured on the Sony (1st picture and left side of the comparison). Well, I guess if we see this differently even on this level we won't agree on that one .
On the other hand, I agree - these are details that contribute to the overall picture "look" but rarely make or break the picture itself. I like checking stuff like this as it shows how different lenses behave.
... and fringing is one of the things I notice (and hate) most in the pictures I take. Luckily, I'm happy in that regard as I took some snaps yesterday that included heavy backlight and branches against sunny sky. All of them look very good to me and I'm happy with the correction level there. It was a short walk so I didn't take my Sigma to compare but I don't think it would do visibly better.
As for sharpness, I also think the Bigma is sharp enough, I'll post a couple of pictures in a minute though .
p.85 #14 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
j4nu wrote:
I guess I'm the one taking crazy pills then .
Anyways, the 2nd set (lens pictures) is a worse test because the target is different, but I included them because I thought they show the same trend as the tv remote pictures. I was wrong apparently.
To me especially the tv remote picture looks better on the Sigma (so the 2nd picture and right side of the comparison), as the coloring is more muted compared to more satured on the Sony (1st picture and left side of the comparison). Well, I guess if we see this differently even on this level we won't agree on that one .
On the other hand, I agree - these are details that contribute to the overall picture "look" but rarely make or break the picture itself. I like checking stuff like this as it shows how different lenses behave.
... and fringing is one of the things I notice (and hate) most in the pictures I take. Luckily, I'm happy in that regard as I took some snaps yesterday that included heavy backlight and branches against sunny sky. All of them look very good to me and I'm happy with the correction level there. It was a short walk so I didn't take my Sigma to compare but I don't think it would do visibly better.
As for sharpness, I also think the Bigma is sharp enough, I'll post a couple of pictures in a minute though . ...Show more →
I think the biggest issue I am seeing is actually the transition zone. The buttons on the remote are more well defined on the Sony, and I prefer the smoother falloff of the Sigma. At the end of the day, I am still happy with the GM as it performs at a high level in a smallish form factor.
Regardless of how one interprets it, I am very interested in comparisons of the Sigma to the GM, so feel free to keep those coming if it’s not too much trouble
p.85 #15 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
Ok, so a quick sharpness comparison using my decentering scene (happy to report my GM seems to be perfectly centered, that is always the worse test to make).
I'm using f1.4 for both lenses in all shots (previous posts too), unless stated otherwise.
First, center at 100% :
Second, corners at 100%.
One note though, my Bigma is a bit decentered, so the left side is better than the right. As posting the weaker side would not add anything to an already clear (imho) comparison, I'll post only the left side. I think this also means that the left side of my Sigma is a bit better than the left side of a perfectly centered Bigma.
p.85 #19 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
The availability here is very poor, at least compared to the rumours I read about the size of shipments to bhp... so not sure if that's a good idea.
Unless you mean the Bigma, then yes I always sell my used lenses with a discount.
vdo1 wrote:
I'm sure some people would love to see your lens on the sell board, especially with a *deep* discount. Because "de-centering" or something
p.85 #20 · Pre-order: Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM ($1,399)
j4nu wrote:
The availability here is very poor, at least compared to the rumours I read about the size of shipments to bhp... so not sure if that's a good idea.
Unless you mean the Bigma, then yes I always sell my used lenses with a discount.
It's a very good idea for those looking to get a scarce, good lens at a discount. For you not so much. So be careful with the detractors, they may be biased......
.
.
