p.21 #1 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
From what I've seen so far, these remind me a lot of the fujicrons that so many folks rave about. Including the LoCa issues. I rather enjoyed those lenses for being small, despite the issues, but I agree that so far I think I'd prefer the Sigma I series over these.
p.21 #2 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
stuuke wrote:
Is there any reason they can't do a small and cheap 50 1.8? Coming from DSLRs that was pretty common.
I want a small and cheap 50mm 1.4, the sony version of the Canon EF 50mm 1.4, I don't care if it's softish wide open and only gets nicely sharp at f2.8, like the canon was. The Sony 50mm 1.8 sucked, or at least my friends copy does. It doesn't even sharpen up in the corners by f8. An updated version of the Sony would have been very welcome.
p.21 #3 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
realVivek wrote:
Bokeh and objectivity. Nah.
Can you put some numbers if it is “obejective”?
Maybe you cannot easily put numbers but I think 95% would come to the same conclusion what "smooth" or "good" bokeh looks like. Most people don't like Nisen Bokeh / double outlining, LoCA / onion rings, swirling or other imperfections. I think Gaussian blur without color fringing is the definition of perfect bokeh.
p.21 #4 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
That would make it subjective.
Put some numbers to be objective. keepcoding wrote:
Maybe you cannot easily put numbers but I think 95% would come to the same conclusion what "smooth" or "good" bokeh looks like. Most people don't like Nisen Bokeh / double outlining, LoCA / onion rings, swirling or other imperfections.
p.21 #5 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
realVivek wrote:
Bokeh and objectivity. Nah.
Can you put some numbers if it is “obejective”?
One doesn't need numbers for something to be objective, though true, I was using the term to be provocative
Japanese lens designers have always had ways to categorize what they thought was 'good' and 'bad'...nissen bokeh for doubling, hard outlines, cluttered disks, onion rings, etc. Those are categorized as undesirable, but there are always trade offs. The trade off on the Sigma, as we all now know, was residual SA, but it doesn't exhibit any of the traditional 'bad bokeh' characteristics. The new Sony 40 does. 'Like' and 'Don't like'? That's a different story.
p.21 #7 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
chez wrote:
I just sold my Canon 70-200 f4 IS and about to sell my 300 f4 that I used for my landscape telephoto options. Would love to pick up a nice small Sony 200 2.8 and 300 f4...but in the mean time I'm looking at the Sigma 100-400.
The Sigma 100-400 has piqued my interested as well. It looks pretty solid in Dustin Abbot's review, and the truth is I'd mostly use it in the f/8 range. Back in the pre-pixel peeping, film days I was very happy with my Minolta 100-300 APO which was, rather atypically for the time, sharp at 300mm.
I was a big fan of the Canon 70-200/4L when I had my 5D...how did the IS version perform on Sony? As I've waited for a longer option that I like, I've often tossed round the idea of a Sigma MC11 and a Canon 70-200L of some sort.
p.21 #8 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
My initial excitement has definitely gone away after reading about that 700€/600$ price tag. Sure, aperture ring, focus hold button and the tiny price/weight are great.
At least the 40G seems to set a new record in the class of 40mm/50mm lenses - in terms of highest asking price in relation to the total mass of glass being used !
p.21 #9 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
realVivek wrote:
If that affects the price, I am all for it. I am buying these lenses (to use) and not the Sigmas.
Is the 50 G in your plans? That's the one that has my attention. I always find that I have to watch the normal reviewers to see the sharpness and aberration side of performance, then look here on FM to see actual pictures that I'd actually take.
I know it's only 0.10m, but the 0.35m MFD is a small but nice improvement over the typical 0.45 of most 50s.
p.21 #10 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
Meh, disappointing. Wanted a small pancake 40mm like the Canon, which for $200 you can overlook its shortcomings...but for $600 and f2.5 I'd expect better performance. The 40G just doesn't really blow me away with the heavy focus breathing, a good bit of LoCA, and so-so bokeh *sigh*
On the bright side it is nice that they're finally releasing smaller semi-fast lenses, although I think they should have been f2 like the 28mm.
Maybe I'll rethink these if they bring out a 100mm f2.5 (similarly sized to the old Canon f2) and an A7cR (with redone layout ie. more buttons/controls) one day, but for now I don't think they're for me.
p.21 #11 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
I will be buying the 50, Dave . But, I am far from the preordering type. I will wait for Amazon Spain to put it on sale in a few months like they did with the 35/1.8. I do not like to throw money away. I have made too many mistakes to learn that.
Dave Sanders wrote:
Is the 50 G in your plans? That's the one that has my attention. I always find that I have to watch the normal reviewers to see the sharpness and aberration side of performance, then look here on FM to see actual pictures that I'd actually take.
I know it's only 0.10m, but the 0.35m MFD is a small but nice improvement over the typical 0.45 of most 50s.
p.21 #12 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
realVivek wrote:
I will be buying the 50, Dave . But, I am far from the preordering type. I will wait for Amazon Spain to put it on sale in a few months like they did with the 35/1.8. I do not like to throw money away. I have made too many mistakes to learn that.
Hahaha me neither...I usually wait for our fellow FMers to preorder and then test like crazy. Very helpful community service, I think
Gordon Laing's review on Camera Labs is good, lens looks like it fills a nice niche. I really think Sony nailed the look and feel of theses lenses. Great ergonomics for the small size.
p.21 #13 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
Dave Sanders wrote:
The Sigma 100-400 has piqued my interested as well. It looks pretty solid in Dustin Abbot's review, and the truth is I'd mostly use it in the f/8 range. Back in the pre-pixel peeping, film days I was very happy with my Minolta 100-300 APO which was, rather atypically for the time, sharp at 300mm.
I was a big fan of the Canon 70-200/4L when I had my 5D...how did the IS version perform on Sony? As I've waited for a longer option that I like, I've often tossed round the idea of a Sigma MC11 and a Canon 70-200L of some sort. ...Show more →
I used the 70-200 f4 IS with the mc-11 adapter without issue. Never had the IS on, shot off a tripod. I don't take many telephoto landscape shots, mainly stick to the wide end, so I'm thinking the Sigma 100-400 would do pretty good for me, and I can use it to cover Ironman events.
Still I'd love to see how small Sony could make a 200 2.8 and 300 f4.
p.21 #14 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
Beni wrote:
I want a small and cheap 50mm 1.4, the sony version of the Canon EF 50mm 1.4, I don't care if it's softish wide open and only gets nicely sharp at f2.8, like the canon was. The Sony 50mm 1.8 sucked, or at least my friends copy does. It doesn't even sharpen up in the corners by f8. An updated version of the Sony would have been very welcome.
Yes, I meant 1.4. The Canon 1.4 was still very compact.
p.21 #15 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
Beni wrote:
I want a small and cheap 50mm 1.4, the sony version of the Canon EF 50mm 1.4, I don't care if it's softish wide open and only gets nicely sharp at f2.8, like the canon was. The Sony 50mm 1.8 sucked, or at least my friends copy does. It doesn't even sharpen up in the corners by f8. An updated version of the Sony would have been very welcome.
p.21 #16 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
alphanumeric wrote:
Just buy a used Zony 55 1.8.
At least here in Vancouver, used prices are high and the market is strong. New price is $1150 CDN and used runs $850-950...so it doesn't hit the 'cheap' mark. If it did, I'd likely have copy #4...doh!
p.21 #17 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
alphanumeric wrote:
Just buy a used Zony 55 1.8.
It's double the price, f1.8 and personally I really don't like Sonnar rendering.
Mar 23, 2021 at 01:47 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.21 #18 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
realVivek wrote:
That would make it subjective.
Put some numbers to be objective.
All cats puke up fur balls. Nellie is a cat. I think I can objectively state that Nellie pukes up fur balls, and I can do so even though I can't (and certainly would never want to) measure a puked up fur ball or a cat. Simply put object judgments are not always measured. I am not sure why you would want to say that only things that are measured are objective. And yes, I can extend this example to bokeh, but please do make me do so .
p.21 #19 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
Steve Spencer wrote:
All cats puke up fur balls. Nellie is a cat. I think I can objectively state that Nellie pukes up fur balls, and I can do so even though I can't (and certainly would never want to) measure a puked up fur ball or a cat. Simply put object judgments are not always measured. I am not sure why you would want to say that only things that are measured are objective. And yes, I can extend this example to bokeh, but please do make me do so .
Haha that made me chuckle because now I'm thinking of bokeh, particularly the bad kind, as puked up fur balls....
p.21 #20 · Pre-order Sony G lenses: FE 24mm f/2.8, 40mm f/2.5, 50mm f/2.5
PCMag Reviews shows better resolution for 50mm on A7R4, editor's choice... Both has visible focus breathing and missing anti-smudge protection as cons:
