I'm going out soon and will take a photo of the same subject with the 35 GM and the Sigma but I have to pack up the lens soon as I already sold it online.
I stood in roughly the same spot and both lenses are shot at MFD in the second photos.
I think the difference between f/1.4 and f/2 is not that large by itself, but when considering it's a 35mm lens, the extra bit does give quite a bit more separation. The biggest difference is at MFD, where the Sony gets closer and is much sharper due to the lack of SA.
GMPhotography wrote:
I never use OEM hoods. I buy cheap metal ones. Been doing that trick a really long time. Usually the OEM hoods are too big.
I just checked my order . Looks I got caught in the PAssover closing at BH not till like the 8th.
Looking forward to reading your feedback on the 35/2.
Just got my A7C with kit lens and my 20/1.8 shows up tomorrow.
Looking for a prime in the 35 range ... considering Sigma 35/2 and CV 35 APO/2. FE35GM is unfortunately heavier then I want on the A7C
The Sigma uses the same filter as my CV15 and is just 0.5oz more in weight so I have a good idea how it will feel on the A7C ... and I really like how the A7C+CV15 balances.
offtraildog wrote:
Looking forward to reading your feedback on the 35/2.
Just got my A7C with kit lens and my 20/1.8 shows up tomorrow.
Looking for a prime in the 35 range ... considering Sigma 35/2 and CV 35 APO/2. FE35GM is unfortunately heavier then I want on the A7C
The Sigma uses the same filter as my CV15 and is just 0.5oz more in weight so I have a good idea how it will feel on the A7C ... and I really like how the A7C+CV15 balances.
Have you considered the new Sony 40 f/2.5? It might work out better for you depending on how close it gets and if it has any SA, as the Sigma does struggle with close up resolution which might make up for the FL difference with the Sony
I have noticed in reviews the issue with the Sigma and close-ups. I have considered the FE40G. My other prime would be a 50 or 65 depending on if I have a 35 or 40
Sigma 35m f/2 DG DN vs Sony FE 24mm f/1.4 GM in crop mode (~35/2): Rendering comparison
I've had the opportunity to compare the Sigma 35/2 DG DN vs the Sony FE 24/1.4 GM cropped to the same FOV as the Sigma. Many shooters are curious about how the new Sigma compares to a lens I consider to have very pleasant rendering. (Similar to RX1)
The scenes were shot at same distance: Sony at f/1.4 and Sigma at f/2.
In post, the Sony was cropped to match the exact same FOV of the Sigma while the latter was normalized for a side by side comparison. (downsampled to 30MP)
The results didn't surprise me. The Sigma's rendering is very similar to the Sony around the center area but sharpens up towards the corners due to its higher optical vignetting.
Off-axis, it's not really a fair comparison because of the ~1.5x crop which removes any of Sony's rendering unevenness even though it has much lower optical vignetting to begin with, compared to the Sigma
ReleaseDrive wrote:
I mean, I'd be perfectly happy covering these two focal lengths with the 24mm 1.4 and skipping the Sigma.
Keep in mind that when you use the 24 f/1.4 in crop mode, you will lose resolution and high ISO ability. It really will function like a 37 f/2.2, so it would act just a bit longer (especially since the Sigma seems to be a bit wider than 35mm, that's why Fred had to crop the Sigma a little above it has a bit wider FOV) and a bit slower in addition to having less resolution when put into crop mode. For some this could be a reasonable trade off for taking just one lens, for other it may be more compromise than they are willing to make.
Like Steve wrote, there will be resolution loss, decrease in DR and increase in noise (about 1 stop) when cropping the full-frame image in-camera or in-post (it's the same thing).
I believe it's more like ~36/2.1 in crop mode using the 1.5x multiplier but let's just approximate to an equiv. 35/2.
In regards to resolution: When Sony releases a 100MP body, the "crop-mode" will be ~45MP and this will make things even more interesting. Even now, 26MP is no slouch for most applications.
With the Sigma it was tricky to do this comparison since it's noticeable wider than 35mm. Usually the crop mode for the A7R IV means ~26MP but in the case of cropping the FE 24/1.4 to match the Sigma 35/2's FOV, I ended up with 30MP.
For most things crop mode is just a little to little with MPX. But hey better than nothing. I do use it for a specific job but it’s not a substitute for a focal length. Unless in my case no bloody 300mm
I have this and the Sony 35 1.4 coming . Going to be fun seeing which one I keep
I have an a6400 with 24gm and a7c with the sigma 35/2 to compare. so in this case the resolution remains the same, it is only DR and noise levels taking a hit when using the a6400/24gm combo. in terms of rendering, i do as well prefer the 24gm on the apsc body. but then the a7c/sigma combo weighs about the same, but has ibis and the larger battery. on the other hand, f1.4 of the 24gm will allow for faster shutter speeds all other things equal. well, i do not have to live with that difficult choice too long, hopefully the 35gm will arrive later this month and the sigma 35/2 will be up for sale, even though i really like it, especially on my silver a7c.
So perhaps a dumb question, but if you're shooting the 24 in APS-C mode, are the distortion characteristics of the cropped file the same as a FF 35? Do you still get big noses and distorted heads or is that effect mitigated by being able to shoot at a 35mm distance?
mjk115 wrote:
So perhaps a dumb question, but if you're shooting the 24 in APS-C mode, are the distortion characteristics of the cropped file the same as a FF 35? Do you still get big noses and distorted heads or is that effect mitigated by being able to shoot at a 35mm distance?
by cropping you eliminate the areas close to the edges that cause distortion and to fill the frame with a face, you do not have to get as close as with a 24mm, so the noses tend to be more normal (not as normal as with a 135mm though). so yes, its field of view and perspective is like a FF35 mm then (actually 36mm as has been pointed out before)
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes, that was just a rendering comparison.
Like Steve wrote, there will be resolution loss, decrease in DR and increase in noise (about 1 stop) when cropping the full-frame image in-camera or in-post (it's the same thing).
I believe it's more like ~36/2.1 in crop mode using the 1.5x multiplier but let's just approximate to an equiv. 35/2.
In regards to resolution: When Sony releases a 100MP body, the "crop-mode" will be ~45MP and this will make things even more interesting. Even now, 26MP is no slouch for most applications.
With the Sigma it was tricky to do this comparison since it's noticeable wider than 35mm. Usually the crop mode for the A7R IV means ~26MP but in the case of cropping the FE 24/1.4 to match the Sigma 35/2's FOV, I ended up with 30MP....Show more →
"With the Sigma it was tricky to do this comparison since it's noticeable wider than 35mm"
It would be interesting to see it compared to the 20mm 1.8 then in crop mode?
Even now, 26MP is no slouch for most applications.