Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
p.20 #1Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Haida is closer to the last lens and Kase is closer to CMOS，maybe this difference will cause interesting results ？
Fred Miranda wrote:
Die Sigma is a bit more flat field while the Sony has a slightly stronger FC. Focusing in the center is often not sufficient with the Sony, you need to focus on the corners or halfway between center and corner to get the best overall sharpness. This is often not necessary with the Sigma.
My 14GM is at f/1.8 practically as sharp as at f/2.8, even in the extreme corners (if focused on the corners). My sample is also perfectly centered. Compared to the Sigma you gain about one stop of light which can be useful for nightscapes, aurora, bioluminescence, glow worms etc., and reduce the size and weight but lose the zoom range. I will keep both lenses for different use cases.
In addition, I bought and installed the Haida rear filter kit for the Sony. Luckily the reduction in sharpness is absolutely minimal with these filters, despite they are 0,5mm thick. I would use them even for very critical work without any hesitation.
But as a side effect, they have a really interesting and strange influence on DOF and FC.
By using the rear filter the FC is reduced and changes its direction.
In addition, the DOF with rear filters installed extends from the focus point mainly to the foreground while without rear filters it extends mainly to the background. If you focus for example at 10m. Without the filter, the first couple of meters are unsharp while everything beyond 10m is sharp. With the rear filter installed and again focused at 10m, nearly everything in the foreground is sharp but objects at 20m are already getting unsharp.
Strangely this changed FC/DOF behavior often helps and the images shot with the filter often look better than without, especially shot wide open.
Maybe someone else with this lens and the Haida kit can try to reproduce the behavior.
AF is also very fast and completely silent.
Altogether I can really recommend the lens and the Haida kit (although the installation of the Haida adapter is a bit nerve-wracking). My new lightweight travel kit is now 14GM, 20G, 35GM (+200-600 if I expect to see wildlife).That's interesting since the Kase is already causing a lot of FC and astigmatism issues when used with the FE 14/1.8 and it's way thinner than the Haida.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Bobu wrote
I received my 1.8/14GM today and did a quick comparison with the Sigma 14-24 DG DN. Regarding resolution, sharpness, contrast at f/2.8 there is zero difference between the two lenses (tested at 200m and 10m @50MP with the A1). The main difference is that the Sigma has a bit warmer color rendition and the Sony a bit cooler. But this can be easily adjusted in LR and color resolution is very good with both lenses (and much better than for example with the Sony 12-24 f/4).Die Sigma is a bit more flat field while the Sony has a slightly stronger FC. Focusing in the center is often not sufficient with the Sony, you need to focus on the corners or halfway between center and corner to get the best overall sharpness. This is often not necessary with the Sigma.
My 14GM is at f/1.8 practically as sharp as at f/2.8, even in the extreme corners (if focused on the corners). My sample is also perfectly centered. Compared to the Sigma you gain about one stop of light which can be useful for nightscapes, aurora, bioluminescence, glow worms etc., and reduce the size and weight but lose the zoom range. I will keep both lenses for different use cases.
In addition, I bought and installed the Haida rear filter kit for the Sony. Luckily the reduction in sharpness is absolutely minimal with these filters, despite they are 0,5mm thick. I would use them even for very critical work without any hesitation.
But as a side effect, they have a really interesting and strange influence on DOF and FC.
By using the rear filter the FC is reduced and changes its direction.
In addition, the DOF with rear filters installed extends from the focus point mainly to the foreground while without rear filters it extends mainly to the background. If you focus for example at 10m. Without the filter, the first couple of meters are unsharp while everything beyond 10m is sharp. With the rear filter installed and again focused at 10m, nearly everything in the foreground is sharp but objects at 20m are already getting unsharp.
Strangely this changed FC/DOF behavior often helps and the images shot with the filter often look better than without, especially shot wide open.
Maybe someone else with this lens and the Haida kit can try to reproduce the behavior.
AF is also very fast and completely silent.
Altogether I can really recommend the lens and the Haida kit (although the installation of the Haida adapter is a bit nerve-wracking). My new lightweight travel kit is now 14GM, 20G, 35GM (+200-600 if I expect to see wildlife).
Jun 06, 2021 at 11:16 AM
p.20 #2Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
olalafoto wrote:
Haida is closer to the last lens and Kase is closer to CMOS，maybe this difference will cause interesting results ？
Die Sigma is a bit more flat field while the Sony has a slightly stronger FC. Focusing in the center is often not sufficient with the Sony, you need to focus on the corners or halfway between center and corner to get the best overall sharpness. This is often not necessary with the Sigma.
My 14GM is at f/1.8 practically as sharp as at f/2.8, even in the extreme corners (if focused on the corners). My sample is also perfectly centered. Compared to the Sigma you gain about one stop of light which can be useful for nightscapes, aurora, bioluminescence, glow worms etc., and reduce the size and weight but lose the zoom range. I will keep both lenses for different use cases.
In addition, I bought and installed the Haida rear filter kit for the Sony. Luckily the reduction in sharpness is absolutely minimal with these filters, despite they are 0,5mm thick. I would use them even for very critical work without any hesitation.
But as a side effect, they have a really interesting and strange influence on DOF and FC.
By using the rear filter the FC is reduced and changes its direction.
In addition, the DOF with rear filters installed extends from the focus point mainly to the foreground while without rear filters it extends mainly to the background. If you focus for example at 10m. Without the filter, the first couple of meters are unsharp while everything beyond 10m is sharp. With the rear filter installed and again focused at 10m, nearly everything in the foreground is sharp but objects at 20m are already getting unsharp.
Strangely this changed FC/DOF behavior often helps and the images shot with the filter often look better than without, especially shot wide open.
Maybe someone else with this lens and the Haida kit can try to reproduce the behavior.
AF is also very fast and completely silent.
Altogether I can really recommend the lens and the Haida kit (although the installation of the Haida adapter is a bit nerve-wracking). My new lightweight travel kit is now 14GM, 20G, 35GM (+200-600 if I expect to see wildlife).That's interesting since the Kase is already causing a lot of FC and astigmatism issues when used with the FE 14/1.8 and it's way thinner than the Haida.
That's my guess too. The Haida sits directly behind the last lens element, probably only 2 mm away. Maybe this helps to avoid astigmatism issues.
Haida is closer to the last lens and Kase is closer to CMOS，maybe this difference will cause interesting results ？
Fred Miranda wrote
Bobu wrote
I received my 1.8/14GM today and did a quick comparison with the Sigma 14-24 DG DN. Regarding resolution, sharpness, contrast at f/2.8 there is zero difference between the two lenses (tested at 200m and 10m @50MP with the A1). The main difference is that the Sigma has a bit warmer color rendition and the Sony a bit cooler. But this can be easily adjusted in LR and color resolution is very good with both lenses (and much better than for example with the Sony 12-24 f/4).Die Sigma is a bit more flat field while the Sony has a slightly stronger FC. Focusing in the center is often not sufficient with the Sony, you need to focus on the corners or halfway between center and corner to get the best overall sharpness. This is often not necessary with the Sigma.
My 14GM is at f/1.8 practically as sharp as at f/2.8, even in the extreme corners (if focused on the corners). My sample is also perfectly centered. Compared to the Sigma you gain about one stop of light which can be useful for nightscapes, aurora, bioluminescence, glow worms etc., and reduce the size and weight but lose the zoom range. I will keep both lenses for different use cases.
In addition, I bought and installed the Haida rear filter kit for the Sony. Luckily the reduction in sharpness is absolutely minimal with these filters, despite they are 0,5mm thick. I would use them even for very critical work without any hesitation.
But as a side effect, they have a really interesting and strange influence on DOF and FC.
By using the rear filter the FC is reduced and changes its direction.
In addition, the DOF with rear filters installed extends from the focus point mainly to the foreground while without rear filters it extends mainly to the background. If you focus for example at 10m. Without the filter, the first couple of meters are unsharp while everything beyond 10m is sharp. With the rear filter installed and again focused at 10m, nearly everything in the foreground is sharp but objects at 20m are already getting unsharp.
Strangely this changed FC/DOF behavior often helps and the images shot with the filter often look better than without, especially shot wide open.
Maybe someone else with this lens and the Haida kit can try to reproduce the behavior.
AF is also very fast and completely silent.
Altogether I can really recommend the lens and the Haida kit (although the installation of the Haida adapter is a bit nerve-wracking). My new lightweight travel kit is now 14GM, 20G, 35GM (+200-600 if I expect to see wildlife).
That's my guess too. The Haida sits directly behind the last lens element, probably only 2 mm away. Maybe this helps to avoid astigmatism issues.
Jun 06, 2021 at 12:55 PM
p.20 #3Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Bobu wrote:
Die Sigma is a bit more flat field while the Sony has a slightly stronger FC. Focusing in the center is often not sufficient with the Sony, you need to focus on the corners or halfway between center and corner to get the best overall sharpness. This is often not necessary with the Sigma.
My 14GM is at f/1.8 practically as sharp as at f/2.8, even in the extreme corners (if focused on the corners). My sample is also perfectly centered. Compared to the Sigma you gain about one stop of light which can be useful for nightscapes, aurora, bioluminescence, glow worms etc., and reduce the size and weight but lose the zoom range. I will keep both lenses for different use cases.
In addition, I bought and installed the Haida rear filter kit for the Sony. Luckily the reduction in sharpness is absolutely minimal with these filters, despite they are 0,5mm thick. I would use them even for very critical work without any hesitation.
But as a side effect, they have a really interesting and strange influence on DOF and FC.
By using the rear filter the FC is reduced and changes its direction.
In addition, the DOF with rear filters installed extends from the focus point mainly to the foreground while without rear filters it extends mainly to the background. If you focus for example at 10m. Without the filter, the first couple of meters are unsharp while everything beyond 10m is sharp. With the rear filter installed and again focused at 10m, nearly everything in the foreground is sharp but objects at 20m are already getting unsharp.
Strangely this changed FC/DOF behavior often helps and the images shot with the filter often look better than without, especially shot wide open.
Maybe someone else with this lens and the Haida kit can try to reproduce the behavior.
AF is also very fast and completely silent.
Altogether I can really recommend the lens and the Haida kit (although the installation of the Haida adapter is a bit nerve-wracking). My new lightweight travel kit is now 14GM, 20G, 35GM (+200-600 if I expect to see wildlife).That's interesting since the Kase is already causing a lot of FC and astigmatism issues when used with the FE 14/1.8 and it's way thinner than the Haida.That's my guess too. The Haida sits directly behind the last lens element, probably only 2 mm away. Maybe this helps to avoid astigmatism issues.
Can you post a 100% crop sample showing the extreme corner from an image focused on center with and without the Haida filter at f/1.8? I would definitely not recommend using the Kase (0.3m) with this lens and I'm very curious to see the results from the thicker Haida rear filter.
olalafoto wrote
Haida is closer to the last lens and Kase is closer to CMOS，maybe this difference will cause interesting results ？Fred Miranda wrote
Bobu wrote
I received my 1.8/14GM today and did a quick comparison with the Sigma 14-24 DG DN. Regarding resolution, sharpness, contrast at f/2.8 there is zero difference between the two lenses (tested at 200m and 10m @50MP with the A1). The main difference is that the Sigma has a bit warmer color rendition and the Sony a bit cooler. But this can be easily adjusted in LR and color resolution is very good with both lenses (and much better than for example with the Sony 12-24 f/4).Die Sigma is a bit more flat field while the Sony has a slightly stronger FC. Focusing in the center is often not sufficient with the Sony, you need to focus on the corners or halfway between center and corner to get the best overall sharpness. This is often not necessary with the Sigma.
My 14GM is at f/1.8 practically as sharp as at f/2.8, even in the extreme corners (if focused on the corners). My sample is also perfectly centered. Compared to the Sigma you gain about one stop of light which can be useful for nightscapes, aurora, bioluminescence, glow worms etc., and reduce the size and weight but lose the zoom range. I will keep both lenses for different use cases.
In addition, I bought and installed the Haida rear filter kit for the Sony. Luckily the reduction in sharpness is absolutely minimal with these filters, despite they are 0,5mm thick. I would use them even for very critical work without any hesitation.
But as a side effect, they have a really interesting and strange influence on DOF and FC.
By using the rear filter the FC is reduced and changes its direction.
In addition, the DOF with rear filters installed extends from the focus point mainly to the foreground while without rear filters it extends mainly to the background. If you focus for example at 10m. Without the filter, the first couple of meters are unsharp while everything beyond 10m is sharp. With the rear filter installed and again focused at 10m, nearly everything in the foreground is sharp but objects at 20m are already getting unsharp.
Strangely this changed FC/DOF behavior often helps and the images shot with the filter often look better than without, especially shot wide open.
Maybe someone else with this lens and the Haida kit can try to reproduce the behavior.
AF is also very fast and completely silent.
Altogether I can really recommend the lens and the Haida kit (although the installation of the Haida adapter is a bit nerve-wracking). My new lightweight travel kit is now 14GM, 20G, 35GM (+200-600 if I expect to see wildlife).
Can you post a 100% crop sample showing the extreme corner from an image focused on center with and without the Haida filter at f/1.8? I would definitely not recommend using the Kase (0.3m) with this lens and I'm very curious to see the results from the thicker Haida rear filter.
Jun 06, 2021 at 01:00 PM
p.20 #4Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Fred Miranda wrote:
Die Sigma is a bit more flat field while the Sony has a slightly stronger FC. Focusing in the center is often not sufficient with the Sony, you need to focus on the corners or halfway between center and corner to get the best overall sharpness. This is often not necessary with the Sigma.
My 14GM is at f/1.8 practically as sharp as at f/2.8, even in the extreme corners (if focused on the corners). My sample is also perfectly centered. Compared to the Sigma you gain about one stop of light which can be useful for nightscapes, aurora, bioluminescence, glow worms etc., and reduce the size and weight but lose the zoom range. I will keep both lenses for different use cases.
In addition, I bought and installed the Haida rear filter kit for the Sony. Luckily the reduction in sharpness is absolutely minimal with these filters, despite they are 0,5mm thick. I would use them even for very critical work without any hesitation.
But as a side effect, they have a really interesting and strange influence on DOF and FC.
By using the rear filter the FC is reduced and changes its direction.
In addition, the DOF with rear filters installed extends from the focus point mainly to the foreground while without rear filters it extends mainly to the background. If you focus for example at 10m. Without the filter, the first couple of meters are unsharp while everything beyond 10m is sharp. With the rear filter installed and again focused at 10m, nearly everything in the foreground is sharp but objects at 20m are already getting unsharp.
Strangely this changed FC/DOF behavior often helps and the images shot with the filter often look better than without, especially shot wide open.
Maybe someone else with this lens and the Haida kit can try to reproduce the behavior.
AF is also very fast and completely silent.
Altogether I can really recommend the lens and the Haida kit (although the installation of the Haida adapter is a bit nerve-wracking). My new lightweight travel kit is now 14GM, 20G, 35GM (+200-600 if I expect to see wildlife).That's interesting since the Kase is already causing a lot of FC and astigmatism issues when used with the FE 14/1.8 and it's way thinner than the Haida.That's my guess too. The Haida sits directly behind the last lens element, probably only 2 mm away. Maybe this helps to avoid astigmatism issues.Can you post a 100% crop sample showing the extreme corner from an image focused on center with and without the Haida filter at f/1.8? I would definitely not recommend using the Kase (0.3m) with this lens and I'm very curious to see the results from the thicker Haida rear filter.
Sure:
Extreme corner crop, with rear filter, focus on center
Extreme corner crop, without filter, focus on center
Bobu wrote
olalafoto wrote
Haida is closer to the last lens and Kase is closer to CMOS，maybe this difference will cause interesting results ？Fred Miranda wrote
Bobu wrote
I received my 1.8/14GM today and did a quick comparison with the Sigma 14-24 DG DN. Regarding resolution, sharpness, contrast at f/2.8 there is zero difference between the two lenses (tested at 200m and 10m @50MP with the A1). The main difference is that the Sigma has a bit warmer color rendition and the Sony a bit cooler. But this can be easily adjusted in LR and color resolution is very good with both lenses (and much better than for example with the Sony 12-24 f/4).Die Sigma is a bit more flat field while the Sony has a slightly stronger FC. Focusing in the center is often not sufficient with the Sony, you need to focus on the corners or halfway between center and corner to get the best overall sharpness. This is often not necessary with the Sigma.
My 14GM is at f/1.8 practically as sharp as at f/2.8, even in the extreme corners (if focused on the corners). My sample is also perfectly centered. Compared to the Sigma you gain about one stop of light which can be useful for nightscapes, aurora, bioluminescence, glow worms etc., and reduce the size and weight but lose the zoom range. I will keep both lenses for different use cases.
In addition, I bought and installed the Haida rear filter kit for the Sony. Luckily the reduction in sharpness is absolutely minimal with these filters, despite they are 0,5mm thick. I would use them even for very critical work without any hesitation.
But as a side effect, they have a really interesting and strange influence on DOF and FC.
By using the rear filter the FC is reduced and changes its direction.
In addition, the DOF with rear filters installed extends from the focus point mainly to the foreground while without rear filters it extends mainly to the background. If you focus for example at 10m. Without the filter, the first couple of meters are unsharp while everything beyond 10m is sharp. With the rear filter installed and again focused at 10m, nearly everything in the foreground is sharp but objects at 20m are already getting unsharp.
Strangely this changed FC/DOF behavior often helps and the images shot with the filter often look better than without, especially shot wide open.
Maybe someone else with this lens and the Haida kit can try to reproduce the behavior.
AF is also very fast and completely silent.
Altogether I can really recommend the lens and the Haida kit (although the installation of the Haida adapter is a bit nerve-wracking). My new lightweight travel kit is now 14GM, 20G, 35GM (+200-600 if I expect to see wildlife).
Sure:
Extreme corner crop, with rear filter, focus on center
Extreme corner crop, without filter, focus on center
Jun 06, 2021 at 01:58 PM
p.20 #5Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
And if you focus on the corner:
Extreme corner crop, with rear filter, focus on corner
Extreme corner crop, without filter, focus on corner
Extreme corner crop, with rear filter, focus on corner
Extreme corner crop, without filter, focus on corner
Jun 06, 2021 at 02:00 PM
p.20 #6Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Focus distance was about 10m. At infinity, the FC effect without a filter is not as strong and corner sharpness further improves.
Jun 06, 2021 at 02:03 PM
p.20 #7Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
I’m debating between this lens or the Sigma 14-24 2.8. I have the 24 and 35 GM’s and would love to go to a prime setup . For those who have both, what are your thoughts between the two?
Jun 06, 2021 at 10:44 PM
p.20 #8Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
The corners of 14GM is forward FC, maybe Haida makes the corners enhance the backward FC, so the foreground corners looks better, and the infinity corners becomes worse.
Bobu wrote:
Die Sigma is a bit more flat field while the Sony has a slightly stronger FC. Focusing in the center is often not sufficient with the Sony, you need to focus on the corners or halfway between center and corner to get the best overall sharpness. This is often not necessary with the Sigma.
My 14GM is at f/1.8 practically as sharp as at f/2.8, even in the extreme corners (if focused on the corners). My sample is also perfectly centered. Compared to the Sigma you gain about one stop of light which can be useful for nightscapes, aurora, bioluminescence, glow worms etc., and reduce the size and weight but lose the zoom range. I will keep both lenses for different use cases.
In addition, I bought and installed the Haida rear filter kit for the Sony. Luckily the reduction in sharpness is absolutely minimal with these filters, despite they are 0,5mm thick. I would use them even for very critical work without any hesitation.
But as a side effect, they have a really interesting and strange influence on DOF and FC.
By using the rear filter the FC is reduced and changes its direction.
In addition, the DOF with rear filters installed extends from the focus point mainly to the foreground while without rear filters it extends mainly to the background. If you focus for example at 10m. Without the filter, the first couple of meters are unsharp while everything beyond 10m is sharp. With the rear filter installed and again focused at 10m, nearly everything in the foreground is sharp but objects at 20m are already getting unsharp.
Strangely this changed FC/DOF behavior often helps and the images shot with the filter often look better than without, especially shot wide open.
Maybe someone else with this lens and the Haida kit can try to reproduce the behavior.
AF is also very fast and completely silent.
Altogether I can really recommend the lens and the Haida kit (although the installation of the Haida adapter is a bit nerve-wracking). My new lightweight travel kit is now 14GM, 20G, 35GM (+200-600 if I expect to see wildlife).That's interesting since the Kase is already causing a lot of FC and astigmatism issues when used with the FE 14/1.8 and it's way thinner than the Haida.That's my guess too. The Haida sits directly behind the last lens element, probably only 2 mm away. Maybe this helps to avoid astigmatism issues.
Bobu wrote:
olalafoto wrote
Haida is closer to the last lens and Kase is closer to CMOS，maybe this difference will cause interesting results ？Fred Miranda wrote
Bobu wrote
I received my 1.8/14GM today and did a quick comparison with the Sigma 14-24 DG DN. Regarding resolution, sharpness, contrast at f/2.8 there is zero difference between the two lenses (tested at 200m and 10m @50MP with the A1). The main difference is that the Sigma has a bit warmer color rendition and the Sony a bit cooler. But this can be easily adjusted in LR and color resolution is very good with both lenses (and much better than for example with the Sony 12-24 f/4).Die Sigma is a bit more flat field while the Sony has a slightly stronger FC. Focusing in the center is often not sufficient with the Sony, you need to focus on the corners or halfway between center and corner to get the best overall sharpness. This is often not necessary with the Sigma.
My 14GM is at f/1.8 practically as sharp as at f/2.8, even in the extreme corners (if focused on the corners). My sample is also perfectly centered. Compared to the Sigma you gain about one stop of light which can be useful for nightscapes, aurora, bioluminescence, glow worms etc., and reduce the size and weight but lose the zoom range. I will keep both lenses for different use cases.
In addition, I bought and installed the Haida rear filter kit for the Sony. Luckily the reduction in sharpness is absolutely minimal with these filters, despite they are 0,5mm thick. I would use them even for very critical work without any hesitation.
But as a side effect, they have a really interesting and strange influence on DOF and FC.
By using the rear filter the FC is reduced and changes its direction.
In addition, the DOF with rear filters installed extends from the focus point mainly to the foreground while without rear filters it extends mainly to the background. If you focus for example at 10m. Without the filter, the first couple of meters are unsharp while everything beyond 10m is sharp. With the rear filter installed and again focused at 10m, nearly everything in the foreground is sharp but objects at 20m are already getting unsharp.
Strangely this changed FC/DOF behavior often helps and the images shot with the filter often look better than without, especially shot wide open.
Maybe someone else with this lens and the Haida kit can try to reproduce the behavior.
AF is also very fast and completely silent.
Altogether I can really recommend the lens and the Haida kit (although the installation of the Haida adapter is a bit nerve-wracking). My new lightweight travel kit is now 14GM, 20G, 35GM (+200-600 if I expect to see wildlife).
Jun 06, 2021 at 11:39 PM
p.20 #9Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
switcher wrote:
I’m debating between this lens or the Sigma 14-24 2.8. I have the 24 and 35 GM’s and would love to go to a prime setup . For those who have both, what are your thoughts between the two?
Having the same internal debate, but also considering the Sony 12-24/4 G
I’m debating between this lens or the Sigma 14-24 2.8. I have the 24 and 35 GM’s and would love to go to a prime setup . For those who have both, what are your thoughts between the two?
Having the same internal debate, but also considering the Sony 12-24/4 G
Jun 07, 2021 at 07:55 AM
p.20 #10Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
For a photographer who does not love the UWA milky way/environmental astro image, which UWA option makes more sense - the Sony 14/1.8 GM or the Sony 12-24/4 G? Both are small-ish and light.
The Sigma 14-24 is heavier than I would like, and the Sony 12-24 GM costs more than my first three cars, combined. It's also heavier than I'd like.
The Sigma 14-24 is heavier than I would like, and the Sony 12-24 GM costs more than my first three cars, combined. It's also heavier than I'd like.
Jun 07, 2021 at 08:03 AM
|
p.20 #11Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
smpetty wrote:
For a photographer who does not love the UWA milky way/environmental astro image, which UWA option makes more sense - the Sony 14/1.8 GM or the Sony 12-24/4 G? Both are small-ish and light.
The Sigma 14-24 is heavier than I would like, and the Sony 12-24 GM costs more than my first three cars, combined. It's also heavier than I'd like.
Hmmm. Interesting comment. I like ultra wide, even hyper wide, and small and light.
Maybe I better stick with my CV 10/5.6 E, “Choppy” CV 15/4.5 III VM, and Leica-M WATE 16-18-21/4.
The latter two used with the TechArt Pro autofocus adapter. Also got Batis 25/2 and 35/1.4 GM.
K-H.
For a photographer who does not love the UWA milky way/environmental astro image, which UWA option makes more sense - the Sony 14/1.8 GM or the Sony 12-24/4 G? Both are small-ish and light.
The Sigma 14-24 is heavier than I would like, and the Sony 12-24 GM costs more than my first three cars, combined. It's also heavier than I'd like.
Hmmm. Interesting comment. I like ultra wide, even hyper wide, and small and light.
Maybe I better stick with my CV 10/5.6 E, “Choppy” CV 15/4.5 III VM, and Leica-M WATE 16-18-21/4.
The latter two used with the TechArt Pro autofocus adapter. Also got Batis 25/2 and 35/1.4 GM.
K-H.
Jun 07, 2021 at 10:32 AM
p.20 #12Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
I would think the 12-24 vs. 14 + 25 prime debate comes down to:
- whether you need the 12-14mm range
- whether or not you mind cropping
- how important it is to you to frame the shot while you're taking it, vs. framing it via cropping after the fact
No? Personally I'd rather go with the two primes, knowing that the 14 could easily be used as a 14-21mm with cropping.
- whether you need the 12-14mm range
- whether or not you mind cropping
- how important it is to you to frame the shot while you're taking it, vs. framing it via cropping after the fact
No? Personally I'd rather go with the two primes, knowing that the 14 could easily be used as a 14-21mm with cropping.
Jun 07, 2021 at 10:46 AM
p.20 #13Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
olalafoto wrote:
The corners of 14GM is forward FC, maybe Haida makes the corners enhance the backward FC, so the foreground corners looks better, and the infinity corners becomes worse.
Die Sigma is a bit more flat field while the Sony has a slightly stronger FC. Focusing in the center is often not sufficient with the Sony, you need to focus on the corners or halfway between center and corner to get the best overall sharpness. This is often not necessary with the Sigma.
My 14GM is at f/1.8 practically as sharp as at f/2.8, even in the extreme corners (if focused on the corners). My sample is also perfectly centered. Compared to the Sigma you gain about one stop of light which can be useful for nightscapes, aurora, bioluminescence, glow worms etc., and reduce the size and weight but lose the zoom range. I will keep both lenses for different use cases.
In addition, I bought and installed the Haida rear filter kit for the Sony. Luckily the reduction in sharpness is absolutely minimal with these filters, despite they are 0,5mm thick. I would use them even for very critical work without any hesitation.
But as a side effect, they have a really interesting and strange influence on DOF and FC.
By using the rear filter the FC is reduced and changes its direction.
In addition, the DOF with rear filters installed extends from the focus point mainly to the foreground while without rear filters it extends mainly to the background. If you focus for example at 10m. Without the filter, the first couple of meters are unsharp while everything beyond 10m is sharp. With the rear filter installed and again focused at 10m, nearly everything in the foreground is sharp but objects at 20m are already getting unsharp.
Strangely this changed FC/DOF behavior often helps and the images shot with the filter often look better than without, especially shot wide open.
Maybe someone else with this lens and the Haida kit can try to reproduce the behavior.
AF is also very fast and completely silent.
Altogether I can really recommend the lens and the Haida kit (although the installation of the Haida adapter is a bit nerve-wracking). My new lightweight travel kit is now 14GM, 20G, 35GM (+200-600 if I expect to see wildlife).That's interesting since the Kase is already causing a lot of FC and astigmatism issues when used with the FE 14/1.8 and it's way thinner than the Haida.That's my guess too. The Haida sits directly behind the last lens element, probably only 2 mm away. Maybe this helps to avoid astigmatism issues.
Yes, that's the case and explains the results. Still an interesting and unusual effect.
The corners of 14GM is forward FC, maybe Haida makes the corners enhance the backward FC, so the foreground corners looks better, and the infinity corners becomes worse.
Bobu wrote
olalafoto wrote
Haida is closer to the last lens and Kase is closer to CMOS，maybe this difference will cause interesting results ？Fred Miranda wrote
Bobu wrote
I received my 1.8/14GM today and did a quick comparison with the Sigma 14-24 DG DN. Regarding resolution, sharpness, contrast at f/2.8 there is zero difference between the two lenses (tested at 200m and 10m @50MP with the A1). The main difference is that the Sigma has a bit warmer color rendition and the Sony a bit cooler. But this can be easily adjusted in LR and color resolution is very good with both lenses (and much better than for example with the Sony 12-24 f/4).Die Sigma is a bit more flat field while the Sony has a slightly stronger FC. Focusing in the center is often not sufficient with the Sony, you need to focus on the corners or halfway between center and corner to get the best overall sharpness. This is often not necessary with the Sigma.
My 14GM is at f/1.8 practically as sharp as at f/2.8, even in the extreme corners (if focused on the corners). My sample is also perfectly centered. Compared to the Sigma you gain about one stop of light which can be useful for nightscapes, aurora, bioluminescence, glow worms etc., and reduce the size and weight but lose the zoom range. I will keep both lenses for different use cases.
In addition, I bought and installed the Haida rear filter kit for the Sony. Luckily the reduction in sharpness is absolutely minimal with these filters, despite they are 0,5mm thick. I would use them even for very critical work without any hesitation.
But as a side effect, they have a really interesting and strange influence on DOF and FC.
By using the rear filter the FC is reduced and changes its direction.
In addition, the DOF with rear filters installed extends from the focus point mainly to the foreground while without rear filters it extends mainly to the background. If you focus for example at 10m. Without the filter, the first couple of meters are unsharp while everything beyond 10m is sharp. With the rear filter installed and again focused at 10m, nearly everything in the foreground is sharp but objects at 20m are already getting unsharp.
Strangely this changed FC/DOF behavior often helps and the images shot with the filter often look better than without, especially shot wide open.
Maybe someone else with this lens and the Haida kit can try to reproduce the behavior.
AF is also very fast and completely silent.
Altogether I can really recommend the lens and the Haida kit (although the installation of the Haida adapter is a bit nerve-wracking). My new lightweight travel kit is now 14GM, 20G, 35GM (+200-600 if I expect to see wildlife).
Yes, that's the case and explains the results. Still an interesting and unusual effect.
Jun 07, 2021 at 12:26 PM
p.20 #14Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
switcher wrote:
I’m debating between this lens or the Sigma 14-24 2.8. I have the 24 and 35 GM’s and would love to go to a prime setup . For those who have both, what are your thoughts between the two?
As written above sharpness is very similar, the Sony is lighter and smaller and has f/1.8 (which is nearly as good as at f/2.8), the Sigma is slightly more flat field. If you need the zoom range take the Sigma, if not take the Sony. You can't go wrong with either of these lenses. They are both excellent.
I’m debating between this lens or the Sigma 14-24 2.8. I have the 24 and 35 GM’s and would love to go to a prime setup . For those who have both, what are your thoughts between the two?
As written above sharpness is very similar, the Sony is lighter and smaller and has f/1.8 (which is nearly as good as at f/2.8), the Sigma is slightly more flat field. If you need the zoom range take the Sigma, if not take the Sony. You can't go wrong with either of these lenses. They are both excellent.
Jun 07, 2021 at 12:30 PM
p.20 #15Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
smpetty wrote:
Having the same internal debate, but also considering the Sony 12-24/4 G
Between the Sony 12-24/4 and the Sigma / Sony GM there are a couple of important differences. The Sigma and Sony GM have a better color differentiation and without additional adjustments more pleasing colors. In addition, the corner sharpness of the 12-24/4 is wide open not on the same level as the Sigma / Sony GM (at least not with the 5 samples I tried). Also, the flare resistance of the 12-24/4 is not as good as the Sigma / Sony GM. Unless you absolutely need 12mm, I would get either the Sigma or the Sony GM. And even if you need 12mm I would rather get the expensive 12-24GM instead of the 12-24/4.
switcher wrote
I’m debating between this lens or the Sigma 14-24 2.8. I have the 24 and 35 GM’s and would love to go to a prime setup . For those who have both, what are your thoughts between the two?Between the Sony 12-24/4 and the Sigma / Sony GM there are a couple of important differences. The Sigma and Sony GM have a better color differentiation and without additional adjustments more pleasing colors. In addition, the corner sharpness of the 12-24/4 is wide open not on the same level as the Sigma / Sony GM (at least not with the 5 samples I tried). Also, the flare resistance of the 12-24/4 is not as good as the Sigma / Sony GM. Unless you absolutely need 12mm, I would get either the Sigma or the Sony GM. And even if you need 12mm I would rather get the expensive 12-24GM instead of the 12-24/4.
Jun 07, 2021 at 12:36 PM
p.20 #16Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Update on my decentered copy & astro test.
I was able to test it on some stars last night, with an A7Riv, and whilst the top 2 corners are still softer than the bottom 2, it's less of an issue than it was on a distant tree for daytime infinity testing.
At f1.8 (and focused towards the 'bad' corners), there is minimal coma. Bright stars do appear as small crosses towards the edges, but no obvious/ugly wings like my Sigma 14mm f1.8 had. By f2.5, these clean up completely. F1.8 is easily usable, you can just tidy up those bright corner stars in editing if need be.
To compare to my Sigma 14-24 DG DN, the centre is at least as sharp on my 14mm GM at f1.8 as my Sigma is at f2.8. Corners on them are comparable at f2.8 for stars, with the Sony having better light transmission and far less distortion & vignette.
The 14mm GM also doesn't suffer from the fairly obvious 'red/magenta' ring issue that the 12-24 GM exhibits in heavily pushed files in the 12-14mm range.
Long story short, this has gotta be the best UWA lens for astro on the market, even with my sub-optimal copy.
I was able to test it on some stars last night, with an A7Riv, and whilst the top 2 corners are still softer than the bottom 2, it's less of an issue than it was on a distant tree for daytime infinity testing.
At f1.8 (and focused towards the 'bad' corners), there is minimal coma. Bright stars do appear as small crosses towards the edges, but no obvious/ugly wings like my Sigma 14mm f1.8 had. By f2.5, these clean up completely. F1.8 is easily usable, you can just tidy up those bright corner stars in editing if need be.
To compare to my Sigma 14-24 DG DN, the centre is at least as sharp on my 14mm GM at f1.8 as my Sigma is at f2.8. Corners on them are comparable at f2.8 for stars, with the Sony having better light transmission and far less distortion & vignette.
The 14mm GM also doesn't suffer from the fairly obvious 'red/magenta' ring issue that the 12-24 GM exhibits in heavily pushed files in the 12-14mm range.
Long story short, this has gotta be the best UWA lens for astro on the market, even with my sub-optimal copy.
Jun 07, 2021 at 12:52 PM
p.20 #17Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Bobu wrote:
Die Sigma is a bit more flat field while the Sony has a slightly stronger FC. Focusing in the center is often not sufficient with the Sony, you need to focus on the corners or halfway between center and corner to get the best overall sharpness. This is often not necessary with the Sigma.
My 14GM is at f/1.8 practically as sharp as at f/2.8, even in the extreme corners (if focused on the corners). My sample is also perfectly centered. Compared to the Sigma you gain about one stop of light which can be useful for nightscapes, aurora, bioluminescence, glow worms etc., and reduce the size and weight but lose the zoom range. I will keep both lenses for different use cases.
In addition, I bought and installed the Haida rear filter kit for the Sony. Luckily the reduction in sharpness is absolutely minimal with these filters, despite they are 0,5mm thick. I would use them even for very critical work without any hesitation.
But as a side effect, they have a really interesting and strange influence on DOF and FC.
By using the rear filter the FC is reduced and changes its direction.
In addition, the DOF with rear filters installed extends from the focus point mainly to the foreground while without rear filters it extends mainly to the background. If you focus for example at 10m. Without the filter, the first couple of meters are unsharp while everything beyond 10m is sharp. With the rear filter installed and again focused at 10m, nearly everything in the foreground is sharp but objects at 20m are already getting unsharp.
Strangely this changed FC/DOF behavior often helps and the images shot with the filter often look better than without, especially shot wide open.
Maybe someone else with this lens and the Haida kit can try to reproduce the behavior.
AF is also very fast and completely silent.
Altogether I can really recommend the lens and the Haida kit (although the installation of the Haida adapter is a bit nerve-wracking). My new lightweight travel kit is now 14GM, 20G, 35GM (+200-600 if I expect to see wildlife).That's interesting since the Kase is already causing a lot of FC and astigmatism issues when used with the FE 14/1.8 and it's way thinner than the Haida.That's my guess too. The Haida sits directly behind the last lens element, probably only 2 mm away. Maybe this helps to avoid astigmatism issues.Yes, that's the case and explains the results. Still an interesting and unusual effect.
This is puzzling to me but I take comfort that you are testing it properly. Could you run a test showing the subject at infinity distance? It would be hard to believe the extreme corners will look OK (or better) at f/1.8 when focusing at center.
With the Kase (0.3m), extreme corners are almost unusable at f/1.8.
olalafoto wrote
The corners of 14GM is forward FC, maybe Haida makes the corners enhance the backward FC, so the foreground corners looks better, and the infinity corners becomes worse.Bobu wrote
olalafoto wrote
Haida is closer to the last lens and Kase is closer to CMOS，maybe this difference will cause interesting results ？Fred Miranda wrote
Bobu wrote
I received my 1.8/14GM today and did a quick comparison with the Sigma 14-24 DG DN. Regarding resolution, sharpness, contrast at f/2.8 there is zero difference between the two lenses (tested at 200m and 10m @50MP with the A1). The main difference is that the Sigma has a bit warmer color rendition and the Sony a bit cooler. But this can be easily adjusted in LR and color resolution is very good with both lenses (and much better than for example with the Sony 12-24 f/4).Die Sigma is a bit more flat field while the Sony has a slightly stronger FC. Focusing in the center is often not sufficient with the Sony, you need to focus on the corners or halfway between center and corner to get the best overall sharpness. This is often not necessary with the Sigma.
My 14GM is at f/1.8 practically as sharp as at f/2.8, even in the extreme corners (if focused on the corners). My sample is also perfectly centered. Compared to the Sigma you gain about one stop of light which can be useful for nightscapes, aurora, bioluminescence, glow worms etc., and reduce the size and weight but lose the zoom range. I will keep both lenses for different use cases.
In addition, I bought and installed the Haida rear filter kit for the Sony. Luckily the reduction in sharpness is absolutely minimal with these filters, despite they are 0,5mm thick. I would use them even for very critical work without any hesitation.
But as a side effect, they have a really interesting and strange influence on DOF and FC.
By using the rear filter the FC is reduced and changes its direction.
In addition, the DOF with rear filters installed extends from the focus point mainly to the foreground while without rear filters it extends mainly to the background. If you focus for example at 10m. Without the filter, the first couple of meters are unsharp while everything beyond 10m is sharp. With the rear filter installed and again focused at 10m, nearly everything in the foreground is sharp but objects at 20m are already getting unsharp.
Strangely this changed FC/DOF behavior often helps and the images shot with the filter often look better than without, especially shot wide open.
Maybe someone else with this lens and the Haida kit can try to reproduce the behavior.
AF is also very fast and completely silent.
Altogether I can really recommend the lens and the Haida kit (although the installation of the Haida adapter is a bit nerve-wracking). My new lightweight travel kit is now 14GM, 20G, 35GM (+200-600 if I expect to see wildlife).
This is puzzling to me but I take comfort that you are testing it properly. Could you run a test showing the subject at infinity distance? It would be hard to believe the extreme corners will look OK (or better) at f/1.8 when focusing at center.
With the Kase (0.3m), extreme corners are almost unusable at f/1.8.
Jun 07, 2021 at 12:53 PM
p.20 #18Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Fred Miranda wrote:
That's my guess too. The Haida sits directly behind the last lens element, probably only 2 mm away. Maybe this helps to avoid astigmatism issues.Yes, that's the case and explains the results. Still an interesting and unusual effect.This is puzzling to me but I take comfort that you are testing it properly. Could you run a test showing the subject at infinity distance? It would be hard to believe the extreme corners will look OK (or better) at f/1.8 when focusing at center.
With the Kase (0.3m), extreme corners are almost unusable at f/1.8.
So far I've only tested the lens without rear filters at infinity and with and without rear filters at 10m. If the weather is good enough I can do another test at infinity with the rear filters next weekend.
Bobu wrote
olalafoto wrote
The corners of 14GM is forward FC, maybe Haida makes the corners enhance the backward FC, so the foreground corners looks better, and the infinity corners becomes worse.Bobu wrote
olalafoto wrote
Haida is closer to the last lens and Kase is closer to CMOS，maybe this difference will cause interesting results ？Fred Miranda wrote
That's interesting since the Kase is already causing a lot of FC and astigmatism issues when used with the FE 14/1.8 and it's way thinner than the Haida.With the Kase (0.3m), extreme corners are almost unusable at f/1.8.
So far I've only tested the lens without rear filters at infinity and with and without rear filters at 10m. If the weather is good enough I can do another test at infinity with the rear filters next weekend.
Jun 07, 2021 at 01:49 PM
p.20 #19Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Bobu wrote:
Focus distance was about 10m. At infinity, the FC effect without a filter is not as strong and corner sharpness further improves.
Still, I'm a bit shocked at how unsharp that corner looks, at 10m focus distance without filter.
Or am I missing something?
Focus distance was about 10m. At infinity, the FC effect without a filter is not as strong and corner sharpness further improves.
Still, I'm a bit shocked at how unsharp that corner looks, at 10m focus distance without filter.
Or am I missing something?
Jun 07, 2021 at 04:11 PM
p.20 #20Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Maximilian wrote:
Still, I'm a bit shocked at how unsharp that corner looks, at 10m focus distance without filter.
Or am I missing something?
So far, I've only compared it to the Sigma 14-24 DG DN and the Sony 14 is not as sharp as the Sigma at the very corners at f/2.8 and f/4. It could be copy variation but my loan is well centered. It's not absurd to think that's not possible since the Sigma is optimal @14mm and performs similarly to the 12-24 GM at this FL.
These two zoom lenses have way more corrective elements compared to the prime which usually means less aberrations and higher resolution. The Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM is not a bad performer but it needs some stopping down for the corners. It's also capable of f/1.8 and that's the main differential along with the smaller size and lower weight.
Bobu wrote
Focus distance was about 10m. At infinity, the FC effect without a filter is not as strong and corner sharpness further improves.Or am I missing something?
So far, I've only compared it to the Sigma 14-24 DG DN and the Sony 14 is not as sharp as the Sigma at the very corners at f/2.8 and f/4. It could be copy variation but my loan is well centered. It's not absurd to think that's not possible since the Sigma is optimal @14mm and performs similarly to the 12-24 GM at this FL.
These two zoom lenses have way more corrective elements compared to the prime which usually means less aberrations and higher resolution. The Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM is not a bad performer but it needs some stopping down for the corners. It's also capable of f/1.8 and that's the main differential along with the smaller size and lower weight.
Jun 07, 2021 at 04:39 PM