Grenache wrote:
Cursed with morning low lying marine layer and afternoon blank sky, I did not have ideal conditions to check out the 35GM for landscape and architecture shots today. However, the conditions were fine for putting it through its paces in infrared. Sony lenses, the GM line in particular, have not been friendly to infrared historically, the 24GM being quite good at 590nm and below and the ZA 16-35/4 being exceptions.
I was delighted with the performance of the 35GM at 590nm as well as with the Kolari IR-Chrome filters. No hot spots at any aperture (YAY!!!...surprisingly tough to find in a 35mm lens). At the more challenging 720nm filter, it was fine through f/8 with essentially no hot spot. At f/9-11, you pick up a little diffuse one, easy to correct. Between f/13 and 16, there is a real but small hot spot (see below) but still likely in the realm of correctable without high skill level.
While no one is likely to buy this lens for this particular feature, the 35GM handily outperforms the 35ZA in IR and is also far better than my beloved Zeiss ZE/ZF 35/1.4 in infrared.
For this one, ignore the concentric rings, as that is a flare issue with my inability to use a hood with the filter configuration I have. I have MASSIVELY accentuated the contrast (LR contrast = 100) to make the hot spot more visible. It is pretty marginal...even at f/16...Show more →
I for one, really appreciate this info. I have a full spectrum a7r pretty much relegated to IR Chrome use, so it’s good to know that this lens performs well for that task. I was sort of disappointed by the 24 GM for IR Chrome, its very well centered on my a7r4 but weirdly not centered shooting in infrared (none of my other lenses show this same tilt).
Another lens I’ve found to be excellent for IR Chrome is the 28-60. Still maintains the sharpness it has on visible light, and I didn’t have any hot spot troubles. Much lighter than any legacy primes in the range and I’m sure it’ll outperform them in many cases
Behavior of your 24 and other lenses with IR-Chrome sounds odd. Have you looked at the filter itself and how the glass resin sits in the holder? Is it in there even/flat? The IR-Chrome is a really thick filter, and I could easily imagine issues if it is in the holder at an angle. The 24GM and 16-35/4 both work perfectly with IR-Chrome for me.
Any imperfections looking at the filter. I bought a small one from Kolari that was discounted in price that I use on smaller lenses. It had a lower density region that was less blue. It works fine, but I could imagine larger differences could be problematic.
Jim
trogdon wrote:
I for one, really appreciate this info. I have a full spectrum a7r pretty much relegated to IR Chrome use, so it’s good to know that this lens performs well for that task. I was sort of disappointed by the 24 GM for IR Chrome, its very well centered on my a7r4 but weirdly not centered shooting in infrared (none of my other lenses show this same tilt).
Another lens I’ve found to be excellent for IR Chrome is the 28-60. Still maintains the sharpness it has on visible light, and I didn’t have any hot spot troubles. Much lighter than any legacy primes in the range and I’m sure it’ll outperform them in many cases ...Show more →
Even though I can't read the text I like their reviews for all the pictures which are, in many cases, self-explanatory. I guess Google translate can translate the text for anyone interested.
Thanks!
Fully electronic, though the sun was really strong so there was no way around the background busyness in the last photo I think. I should have just stepped in a lot closer, that would make it closer to Julia's flower shots .
j4nu wrote:
Thanks!
Fully electronic, though the sun was really strong so there was no way around the background busyness in the last photo I think. I should have just stepped in a lot closer, that would make it closer to Julia's flower shots .
The last photo was why I asked, but beautiful regardless! Mine comes Wednesday
While my intent from the weekend was to take some landscape photos, but the skies were either blank or foggy, so I turned to ground and was astonded by both the sharpness and bokeh of this lens. Not bad 3D either, in my opinion, even though I shot wide open for the BW shot of the chair and table...f/3.6 or so would have been better to maximize the look.
Worth noting that as I was shooting, I was not sure these would be all that sharp. Even fully zoomed in with the EVF during composing, the image in the eyepiece looked almost blurry. The problem is that the lens massively out-resolves the a7Riii viewfinder. Nice!
Grenache wrote:
While my intent from the weekend was to take some landscape photos, but the skies were either blank or foggy, so I turned to ground and was astonded by both the sharpness and bokeh of this lens. Not bad 3D either, in my opinion, even though I shot wide open for the BW shot of the chair and table...f/3.6 or so would have been better to maximize the look.
Worth noting that as I was shooting, I was not sure these would be all that sharp. Even fully zoomed in with the EVF during composing, the image in the eyepiece looked almost blurry. The problem is that the lens massively out-resolves the a7Riii viewfinder. Nice!
.
And has cat teapot and cups