yeah, it looks like the transition zone is a little rough too. Good bokeh is hard on a small lens, especially if you clean up all the spherical aberrations, so not too surprising.
Mar 23, 2021 at 10:59 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.19 #2 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
Fred Miranda wrote:
Is it the case? Sorry didn't watch the video. That's one strength of the Sigma 45/2.8 which has very low axial CA.
I haven't looked extensively, but it seems axial CA and bokeh are not going to be a strength of these lenses. I think we will see a tradeoff compared to the Sigma 45 f/2.8. The Sigma design leaves some spherical aberrations, which improves the rendering and bokeh a lot and hides the remaining axial CA. The cost is PDAF doesn't work very well with the residual SA.
The Sony approach I am thinking probably cleans up the SA well, which isn't so good for the rendering and especially the bokeh and lets us see all the axial CA, but you will get better sharpness and better AF.
Personally, I have a pretty strong preference for the Sigma approach, but I bet I am very much in the minority for that preference.
p.19 #3 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
Jochenb wrote:
I still own the Canon 40/2.8 pancake. A good lens optically. It only costs around 200 euro.
Seeing the price of this Sony 40mm makes me laugh in disbelief.
Hey, I'm all for lower prices too, but that lens was launched in 2012. Camera gear prices have gone way up since then, in general. Also, the 40/2.8 wasn't built to any "G", "L" or similar/equivalent, standard.
Maybe I'm just resigned to it. Sonys camera and lens prices have always been extra expensive in the Nordic region for some reason. I remember the same was true when I was shopping around for the recently released A77. I only had to travel to anywhere south of Denmark to shave, from memory, 2-300€.
p.19 #4 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
Steve Spencer wrote:
yeah, it looks like the transition zone is a little rough too. Good bokeh is hard on a small lens, especially if you clean up all the spherical aberrations, so not too surprising.
Don't forget Mark's hardcore postprecessing style though. I don't think you can judge the bokeh from his pictures.
As usual, his pictures are not advertising, but rather the opposite.
(His pictures with the combination A1 + 50mm GM really make me doubt whether you can track a cyclist with them.)
Jochenb wrote:
Indeed, the same goes for the 40mm:
p.19 #6 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
Maybe Sony released these just to increase the perceived value of the GM lenses. I was really excited about the 40 as my fav focal length but maybe the extra few hundred grams and thousand plus dollars is worth it for the 35 GM rendering, speed and extra sharpness. I have the 24GM and it is a very manageable size and weight, with pleasing IQ making for a really optimal mix of attributes for me.
p.19 #7 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
Steve Spencer wrote:
I haven't looked extensively, but it seems axial CA and bokeh are not going to be a strength of these lenses. I think we will see a tradeoff compared to the Sigma 45 f/2.8. The Sigma design leaves some spherical aberrations, which improves the rendering and bokeh a lot and hides the remaining axial CA. The cost is PDAF doesn't work very well with the residual SA.
The Sony approach I am thinking probably cleans up the SA well, which isn't so good for the rendering and especially the bokeh and lets us see all the axial CA, but you will get better sharpness and better AF.
Personally, I have a pretty strong preference for the Sigma approach, but I bet I am very much in the minority for that preference....Show more →
I saw a few samples too and agree with your assessment. It looks like they will render similarly to the Sony 35/2.8 which many shooters like.
p.19 #8 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
darrellc wrote:
Maybe Sony released these just to increase the perceived value of the GM lenses. I was really excited about the 40 as my fav focal length but maybe the extra few hundred grams and thousand plus dollars is worth it for the 35 GM rendering, speed and extra sharpness. I have the 24GM and it is a very manageable size and weight, with pleasing IQ making for a really optimal mix of attributes for me.
Lenstip reviews show that the 40mm is very close to the 35mm GM in image quality - comparable to the Sigma 35mm f2 but in a smaller package and better than the Sigma 45mm overall (especially factoring in AF and wide open performance) unless you're looking for "character" or an acceptable country of final assembly.
p.19 #9 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
tzhang4284 wrote:
Lenstip reviews show that the 40mm is very close to the 35mm GM in image quality - comparable to the Sigma 35mm f2 but in a smaller package and better than the Sigma 45mm overall (especially factoring in AF and wide open performance) unless you're looking for "character" or an acceptable country of final assembly.
p.19 #10 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
Steve Spencer wrote:
Personally, I have a pretty strong preference for the Sigma approach, but I bet I am very much in the minority for that preference.
I very much agree with this. Honestly, the more I see from the new Sony lenses, the more my feeling is solidified, that Sigma have done something pretty special with the I series.
p.19 #11 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
twelveish wrote:
I very much agree with this. Honestly, the more I see from the new Sony lenses, the more my feeling is solidified, that Sigma have done something pretty special with the I series.
No you're quite right. In my opinion there wasn't even a need for Sony to release these. If you have an open ecosystem and one of the brands in your system already has really solid options out there, why not focus R&D elsewhere?
p.19 #13 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
zz wrote:
No you're quite right. In my opinion there wasn't even a need for Sony to release these. If you have an open ecosystem and one of the brands in your system already has really solid options out there, why not focus R&D elsewhere?
Perhaps, but I assume the total time for R&D, design and production is vastly longer than most of the I series lenses have been on the market. I'm just glad about this direction and all the options available.
p.19 #14 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
j4nu wrote:
What is close?
Definitely not sharpness...
Stopped down sharpness it's very close at f5.6. At f2.8, it's well within the margin of error for me in terms of actual usable resolution based on my experiences with various Loxia primes, GM zooms, Batis 40mm, and the Sigma 45mm.
The 35mm f1.4 is better for sure but if the Sigma 45mm is a contender, then the 40mm blows that out of the water and is close to the 35mm f1.4 and probably on par with the Batis and Sigma 35mm f2.
p.19 #15 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
Hard to release a compact camera, promise compact lenses, and then say....well.....third parties have it covered.
Just playing the role of devil's advocate here.....
zz wrote:
No you're quite right. In my opinion there wasn't even a need for Sony to release these. If you have an open ecosystem and one of the brands in your system already has really solid options out there, why not focus R&D elsewhere?
p.19 #16 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
twelveish wrote:
Hmm, no. Professional photographers, i e simply those who shoot for a living, tend to need gear they can trust, that will perform well and not crap out on them. So things like a solid build and fast, reliable AF is "pro" for sure. But the rest is really preference and needs. As in, do you need to shoot in low light (not everyone does), will you rely on blurring out your backgrounds a lot (not everone wants to).
I'd be happy to take any of these on paid assignments, where suitable, as long as I can rely on them to get the job done.
Fully agree, I referenced pro lenses as those which might have more bells and whistles not particularly found on consumer lenses. Not that an aperture ring = pro. Never saw one on any of the pro canon or nikon DSLR lenses and somehow we managed.
p.19 #18 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
j4nu wrote:
What is close?
Definitely not sharpness...
And the bokeh looks bad (nervous + onion rings) as well in comparison.
Mar 23, 2021 at 11:47 AM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.19 #19 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
tzhang4284 wrote:
Lenstip reviews show that the 40mm is very close to the 35mm GM in image quality - comparable to the Sigma 35mm f2 but in a smaller package and better than the Sigma 45mm overall (especially factoring in AF and wide open performance) unless you're looking for "character" or an acceptable country of final assembly.
I wouldn't call what Lenstip reviews image quality. I would call it sharpness. Image quality for me captures a lot more than just sharpness and suppression of CA both lateral and axial are to me important parts of image quality as is bokeh. It is early but it looks to me like the Sony 40 f/2.5 is a very sharp lens but does not suppress axial CA well and does not have a very pleasing bokeh (typical for a smaller lens). The Sigma 45 f/2.8 in contrast isn't as sharp--especially at closer distances--but suppresses axial CA well and has wonderful bokeh. We know with the Sigma 45 f/2.8 this is because it doesn't suppress spherical aberrations (SA), but not suppressing SA means PDAF doesn't work as well, but there is less affect on CDAF. So there are tradeoffs between the lenses. I wouldn't say one has a better image quality. They emphasize different aspects of image quality.
p.19 #20 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
Beni wrote:
Fully agree, I referenced pro lenses as those which might have more bells and whistles not particularly found on consumer lenses. Not that an aperture ring = pro. Never saw one on any of the pro canon or nikon DSLR lenses and somehow we managed.
We have run the aperture rings in the past . More with film and bracketing, I know shooting transparency film . I would bracket a lot with the aperture ring. Today not as really needed but many like them still. As mentioned I have more need for the custom function button far more preferences and needs are the rule of today and digital
zz wrote: