I guess this goes beyond my bokeh sensitivity threshold as I don't find either the porshe or swings offensive in any area...
A few pages before though, there was another car pic where the lights in the background were pretty intense, but I think it was post-processed this way...
The Dustin Abbott review is out, glowing marks all over. I'm really loving the samples in his video, and also here. A true standout among the (frankly huge) 35mm space. It keeps impressing me more and more.
I really hate that I'm mostly a 50mm guy. I like the 35 GM more than the 24 and even though it makes no sense to always carry a 35 and 50 (to me), I can't see letting this lens go after owning it for a few weeks -even when the 50 1.2 arrives.
j4nu wrote:
I guess this goes beyond my bokeh sensitivity threshold as I don't find either the porshe or swings offensive in any area...
A few pages before though, there was another car pic where the lights in the background were pretty intense, but I think it was post-processed this way...
I assume you're talking about the photos I posted. If you'd like I can send you the RAW files to see what they look like.
saxguy wrote:
I really hate that I'm mostly a 50mm guy. I like the 35 GM more than the 24 and even though it makes no sense to always carry a 35 and 50 (to me), I can't see letting this lens go after owning it for a few weeks -even when the 50 1.2 arrives.
Exactly the same boat (but I did get rid of my 24 GM in favor of a 20/1.8 - I use either lens/focal length very little so I figured it made more sense to have a smaller, lighter and cheaper lens like the 20/1.8 for the very occasional use).
The focus speed/accuracy the 35 GM on an A1 is very satisfying.
Thanks, I just remember the photo had its own distinct look, which I assumed was the matter of processing .
saxguy wrote: j4nu wroteI guess this goes beyond my bokeh sensitivity threshold as I don't find either the porshe or swings offensive in any area...
A few pages before though, there was another car pic where the lights in the background were pretty intense, but I think it was post-processed this way...I assume you're talking about the photos I posted. If you'd like I can send you the RAW files to see what they look like.
patotts wrote: saxguy wroteI really hate that I'm mostly a 50mm guy. I like the 35 GM more than the 24 and even though it makes no sense to always carry a 35 and 50 (to me), I can't see letting this lens go after owning it for a few weeks -even when the 50 1.2 arrives.Exactly the same boat (but I did get rid of my 24 GM in favor of a 20/1.8 - I use either lens/focal length very little so I figured it made more sense to have a smaller, lighter and cheaper lens like the 20/1.8 for the very occasional use).
The focus speed/accuracy the 35 GM on an A1 is very satisfying.
Yep, I have similar feelings. No matter what output 50GM produces, it will not handle as nicely as 35GM due to its sheer size & weight...
patotts wrote: saxguy wroteI really hate that I'm mostly a 50mm guy. I like the 35 GM more than the 24 and even though it makes no sense to always carry a 35 and 50 (to me), I can't see letting this lens go after owning it for a few weeks -even when the 50 1.2 arrives.Exactly the same boat (but I did get rid of my 24 GM in favor of a 20/1.8 - I use either lens/focal length very little so I figured it made more sense to have a smaller, lighter and cheaper lens like the 20/1.8 for the very occasional use).
The focus speed/accuracy the 35 GM on an A1 is very satisfying.
I actually went with the 12-24GM for those lengths. I lose a little bit of DOF and low light advantage, but the lens really is amazing and my bag will always have the 12-24GM, 35GM, 50 1.2GM and My 100 STF, which I use for detail photos that have contextual backgrounds. If Sony makes a 100 1.4 GM I'll probably swap the 100 STF GM out for that lens and keep it for specialty photography.
saxguy wrote: patotts wrotesaxguy wroteI really hate that I'm mostly a 50mm guy. I like the 35 GM more than the 24 and even though it makes no sense to always carry a 35 and 50 (to me), I can't see letting this lens go after owning it for a few weeks -even when the 50 1.2 arrives.Exactly the same boat (but I did get rid of my 24 GM in favor of a 20/1.8 - I use either lens/focal length very little so I figured it made more sense to have a smaller, lighter and cheaper lens like the 20/1.8 for the very occasional use).
The focus speed/accuracy the 35 GM on an A1 is very satisfying.I actually went with the 12-24GM for those lengths. I lose a little bit of DOF and low light advantage, but the lens really is amazing and my bag will always have the 12-24GM, 35GM, 50 1.2GM and My 100 STF, which I use for detail photos that have contextual backgrounds. If Sony makes a 100 1.4 GM I'll probably swap the 100 STF GM out for that lens and keep it for specialty photography.
saxguy wrote:
I really hate that I'm mostly a 50mm guy. I like the 35 GM more than the 24 and even though it makes no sense to always carry a 35 and 50 (to me), I can't see letting this lens go after owning it for a few weeks -even when the 50 1.2 arrives.
I'm keeping both of my GM 35 and GM 50. I personally don't see much overlap between these two focal lengths except both are extremely versatile for most uses. I do question my need for a GM 28 atm cause I can't find anything to dislike about the GM 35. I can see myself growing old with these GM lenses cause I don't see myself wanting more unless Sony can make significantly smaller and lighter replacements. Any differences beyond these lenses can provide is quite academic. Of course, I'm still waiting for that GM 100/1.4 and 200/2 .
scalanc2 wrote: saxguy wrotepatotts wrotesaxguy wroteI really hate that I'm mostly a 50mm guy. I like the 35 GM more than the 24 and even though it makes no sense to always carry a 35 and 50 (to me), I can't see letting this lens go after owning it for a few weeks -even when the 50 1.2 arrives.Exactly the same boat (but I did get rid of my 24 GM in favor of a 20/1.8 - I use either lens/focal length very little so I figured it made more sense to have a smaller, lighter and cheaper lens like the 20/1.8 for the very occasional use).
The focus speed/accuracy the 35 GM on an A1 is very satisfying.I actually went with the 12-24GM for those lengths. I lose a little bit of DOF and low light advantage, but the lens really is amazing and my bag will always have the 12-24GM, 35GM, 50 1.2GM and My 100 STF, which I use for detail photos that have contextual backgrounds. If Sony makes a 100 1.4 GM I'll probably swap the 100 STF GM out for that lens and keep it for specialty photography.Did you never try the 135 GM?
I just sold my 135 GM. It was an incredible lens, but the focal length is longer than I like to use.
Neither of those shots is a good one from which to judge bokeh, due to the subject matter. The background of the Proshce photo is a building with large dark windows and large pillars, both rectangular. No way to make those look less blocky, with any lens. The tree in the shot is turned to impressionistic blur, but it still sits on top of those geometric objects.
The swing photo is tricky, as it has in its background skinny pine trees and open space...again highly geometric, not able to blur well. Pine needles themselves diffract. Not easy subjects against which to judge bokeh.
There are a growing number of images on the Flickr groups devoted to this lens that have backgrounds more typical of what one would seek for portraits as well as environmental shots where the creaminess of the bokeh is obvious. Everyone's mileage may vary, but this is not a lens with Rokkor 58/1.2 nervous bokeh.
scalanc2 wrote:
Great lens, no discussion.
We all know the resolution and contrast can in some way be increased in post.
As they can be decreased.
What is hardly possible to do in post are bokeh and rendering.
This is where I see some limitation in the use of this lens compared to Bigma GM 1.2.
Possibly just because one is 1.2.and the other 1.4, I don’t know.
In direct comparison I see this GM very good in general but bokeh is sometimes harsh and not smooth enough. If you correctly study distance of main subject and foreground good results can be achieved but this not always the case for more casual shots.
I’m in process to buy a new 35MM and all these considerations are important to me.
Ideal is Bigma but I cannot accept it’s weight/dimensions.
I live in a country where if you buy a lens you cannot return it and as the cost is quite relevant I do not want replicate the mistake I did on buying other lenses under the pressure of good reviews which systematically changed after 6 months.
Other people may have different opinion.
PS: I do not understand the reason why Sony did a 35 GM 1.4 and a 50 GM 1.2.
To me a more logical move was the opposite. The only rationale I see is commercial....Show more →
For sure for a buyng decision I will try myself.
Non because I’m more competent of others but because I know my main fields of application.
In the mean time I ‘m perplexed looking at some bokeh pictures here.
Don’t you.
Take the Porsche picture, do you really like the bokeh?
Or the one withe swings.
But to be honest a lot of others seems to me pretty nice in regard of bokeh.
Razeus wrote:
I really need to see real world Sigma 35 1.4 DG DN photos. I'm on edge!
The best comparison I've seen so far is Dustin Abbott's 35GM review, so I recommend reading/watching it.
He pinpoints all the small differences you pay the extra for in 35GM...
Yes, it's a tricky scene - that's why I chose it.
Spoiler alert, the bigma would not really render it much better...
Grenache wrote:
Neither of those shots is a good one from which to judge bokeh, due to the subject matter. The background of the Proshce photo is a building with large dark windows and large pillars, both rectangular. No way to make those look less blocky, with any lens. The tree in the shot is turned to impressionistic blur, but it still sits on top of those geometric objects.
The swing photo is tricky, as it has in its background skinny pine trees and open space...again highly geometric, not able to blur well. Pine needles themselves diffract. Not easy subjects against which to judge bokeh.
There are a growing number of images on the Flickr groups devoted to this lens that have backgrounds more typical of what one would seek for portraits as well as environmental shots where the creaminess of the bokeh is obvious. Everyone's mileage may vary, but this is not a lens with Rokkor 58/1.2 nervous bokeh. ...Show more →