Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
p.8 #1Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
The Laowa 15 is a nice lens, it just left a lot to be desired for astro, and if you're not interested in that the CV 15 could be more compelling.
Apr 22, 2021 at 12:09 PM
p.8 #2Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
So here is a few reviews with a comparison between the Sony GM 14/1.8 and others:
vs. Sigma 14/1.8
vs. Sony GM 12-24 and Sigma 14-24 (with Raw files)
vs. Sigma 14/1.8
vs. Sony GM 12-24 and Sigma 14-24 (with Raw files)
Apr 22, 2021 at 04:40 PM
p.8 #3Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
HelBen85 wrote:
When I compare lensrentals measurements against other lenses, then it is _clearly_ better than Batis 18, certainly better than Sigma 14-24 DN (raved about here at FM) at equal apertures, for example, too (extreme corners over 10 lp/mm better at f5.6).
I don't see where sharpness wouldn't convince you, center, corner? It certainly doesn't break a resolution record, that would be expecting a bit too much. It likely is a bit trickier to design, too, compared to a 50mm or 35mm GM. But being even better than the Sigma 14-24DN and being small, light and f1.8 is a big selling point to me.
I would like to see lensrentals measurements, too, for better comparison against other lenses, but sharpness should be easily fine for almost everything.In my experience, Lenstip is one of the better websites and I consider the results as understandable when I look at my lenses. Therefore I take theire results quite seriously. In addition, Lenstip seems to me to be quite objective.
For me, the test results look disappointing at 14mm, for example at f4 and f5.6.
https://www.lenstip.com/606.4-Lens_review-Sony_FE_14_mm_f_1.8_GM_Image_resolution.html
https://www.lenstip.com/572.4-Lens_review-Sigma_A_14-24_mm_f_2.8_DG_DN_Image_resolution.html
Here e.g. the measurements of the 35mm GM, which looks really very sharp: https://www.lenstip.com/598.4-Lens_review-Sony_FE_35_mm_f_1.4_GM_Image_resolution.html.
And when I had a look at appropriate samples on the internet (DPreview/Lenstip/...), I could easily see that this is not true: "The forthcoming SONY 14mm 1.8 will be 1600€. It is a stellar lens, and performs (on the paper) like a beast, neat perfect."(Sonyalpharumors).
From a brand new 1600 Euro primo, I expect that it clearly surpasses the older zooms in this focal length in terms of resolution.
But I'm obviously also a more critical person than you regarding Sony gear. As far as I read here on FM, you are very impressed with every new high-priced Sony lens / camera.
So you will probably buy it and even if not, you will find it extremely good, but I will not buy it, I will keep my Laowa 15mm f2.
By the way, I think it's pointless to compare a much older lens (for example the Batis you mentioned) with a more expensive lens which has a completely different focal length.The new GM 35/1.4 and 50/1.2 are absolutely insane here. But I tested now 3 copies of the 35 GM against the Sigma DN 1.2 and although measurements show a clear advantage, I need to go to 200% at 61MP to see a clear difference in perfectly controlled images. The main difference being field curvature, here.
I think the lens will perform clearly better at infinity shots instead of photographing close flat test targets like lenstip does, esp. field curvature should be considered, too. Nevertheless, a tradeoff possibly was being made and people need to ask themselves whether f1.8 at 14mm is important to their photography (not for me).
Regarding corner sharpness, Cameralabs shows a nice aperture series and this looks quite good.
Fototrainer (German), too
performance unsurprisingly is clearly better than the 14/1.8 Sigma.
Here is another nice test
https://petapixel.com/2021/04/20/sony-14mm-f-1-8-g-master-review-an-impossibly-good-lens/Sorry, but regarding sample images I prefer to have a look at the raws and the raws of DPreview look good, but not outstanding. But our personal standards might be different.
The term 100 percent crop / 100 percent view is used inflationarily. Among other things, it depends on the resolution and size of the respective display.
For example: On my 27 inch 5k screen everything looks very sharp in the 100 percent view, on my 24 inch full HD screen the 100 percent view is much more critical. This means that I use the 200 percent view on the 5k screen to assess sharpness, just as I used to use the 100 percent view on the Full HD screens.
Because I can't check it, I'm skeptical about 100 percent crops in general.
Furthermore, the Sigma 14mm is four years old. We can then compare the Sony lens with future competition lenses. At the moment, the image sharpness should be compared with the Sigma 14-24mm or the Sony 12-24mm and as a newer fixed focal length the 14mm GM should actually surpass both at 14mm.Performance in the corners of many lenses test lower at Lenstip, than on other review sites, in my experience: this is because they use dcraw to demosaic the camera raws, rather than Adobe: this is to normalize conversions and avoid Adobe's 'baked-in' sharpening with their conversions, which I suspect varies from lens to lens, center to corner - depending on how much 'help' it needs.
Also, it seems that the 14GM has pronounced rear field curvature at closer distances, although I'm not sure if LensTip refocuses the lens at the aps-c corner or full-frame corner when measuring (I assume they do, but they never respond to any of my emails). As Roger Circala has noted, field curvature can depend on subject distance, and I assume - as an astro-specific lens, that Sony has designed it to flatten at infinity.
Zooms like the Sigma 14-24mm f2.8 DGDN are optimized for their wide end, and have four more elements than the Sony 14mm f1.8 GM, so its not that surprising that its edges and corners may be a bit sharper than the 14GM; the Sony is sharper in the center though, as you would expect in a prime.
Relative to its size and weight, the Sony 14mmF1.8GM looks to be an excellent performer. I have no doubt that Sony had the ability to build a lens with razer-sharp corners wide open, but they chose not too, because that would of increased the size and weight too much and narrowed the lens' appeal for uses other than astro.
Also, judging images at 200% on-screen can be a bit dodgy, as you are including another software variable in the equationThank you, interesting.
But as I have said several times, according to this review, not only do the FE edges fall off, but also the AFC edges, and that with at all f-stops.
Accordingly, the resolution in large parts of the picture would not be outstanding.
I will continue to have a look at the reviews and my mind may change, but so far I am disappointed. I was expecting a 16mm GM, with a front filter thread and classleading sharpness over the entire frame from about f2.8.
For the price and what I've read and seen so far, it's not enough for me....Show more →
'I was expecting a 16mm GM, with a front filter thread and classleading sharpness over the entire frame from about f2.8' - as Roger Circala likes to say 'expectations are a down payment on future dissapointment'
Petegh wrote
HelBen85 wrote
Holger wrote
HelBen85 wrote
Holger wrote
The question is what is defined as outstanding. Focus distance is certainly another issue which needs to be considered. Lenstip tests differently than lensrentals.com, for example.When I compare lensrentals measurements against other lenses, then it is _clearly_ better than Batis 18, certainly better than Sigma 14-24 DN (raved about here at FM) at equal apertures, for example, too (extreme corners over 10 lp/mm better at f5.6).
I don't see where sharpness wouldn't convince you, center, corner? It certainly doesn't break a resolution record, that would be expecting a bit too much. It likely is a bit trickier to design, too, compared to a 50mm or 35mm GM. But being even better than the Sigma 14-24DN and being small, light and f1.8 is a big selling point to me.
I would like to see lensrentals measurements, too, for better comparison against other lenses, but sharpness should be easily fine for almost everything.
For me, the test results look disappointing at 14mm, for example at f4 and f5.6.
https://www.lenstip.com/606.4-Lens_review-Sony_FE_14_mm_f_1.8_GM_Image_resolution.html
https://www.lenstip.com/572.4-Lens_review-Sigma_A_14-24_mm_f_2.8_DG_DN_Image_resolution.html
Here e.g. the measurements of the 35mm GM, which looks really very sharp: https://www.lenstip.com/598.4-Lens_review-Sony_FE_35_mm_f_1.4_GM_Image_resolution.html.
And when I had a look at appropriate samples on the internet (DPreview/Lenstip/...), I could easily see that this is not true: "The forthcoming SONY 14mm 1.8 will be 1600€. It is a stellar lens, and performs (on the paper) like a beast, neat perfect."(Sonyalpharumors).
From a brand new 1600 Euro primo, I expect that it clearly surpasses the older zooms in this focal length in terms of resolution.
But I'm obviously also a more critical person than you regarding Sony gear. As far as I read here on FM, you are very impressed with every new high-priced Sony lens / camera.
So you will probably buy it and even if not, you will find it extremely good, but I will not buy it, I will keep my Laowa 15mm f2.
By the way, I think it's pointless to compare a much older lens (for example the Batis you mentioned) with a more expensive lens which has a completely different focal length.
I think the lens will perform clearly better at infinity shots instead of photographing close flat test targets like lenstip does, esp. field curvature should be considered, too. Nevertheless, a tradeoff possibly was being made and people need to ask themselves whether f1.8 at 14mm is important to their photography (not for me).
Regarding corner sharpness, Cameralabs shows a nice aperture series and this looks quite good.
Fototrainer (German), too
performance unsurprisingly is clearly better than the 14/1.8 Sigma.
Here is another nice test
https://petapixel.com/2021/04/20/sony-14mm-f-1-8-g-master-review-an-impossibly-good-lens/
The term 100 percent crop / 100 percent view is used inflationarily. Among other things, it depends on the resolution and size of the respective display.
For example: On my 27 inch 5k screen everything looks very sharp in the 100 percent view, on my 24 inch full HD screen the 100 percent view is much more critical. This means that I use the 200 percent view on the 5k screen to assess sharpness, just as I used to use the 100 percent view on the Full HD screens.
Because I can't check it, I'm skeptical about 100 percent crops in general.
Furthermore, the Sigma 14mm is four years old. We can then compare the Sony lens with future competition lenses. At the moment, the image sharpness should be compared with the Sigma 14-24mm or the Sony 12-24mm and as a newer fixed focal length the 14mm GM should actually surpass both at 14mm.
Also, it seems that the 14GM has pronounced rear field curvature at closer distances, although I'm not sure if LensTip refocuses the lens at the aps-c corner or full-frame corner when measuring (I assume they do, but they never respond to any of my emails). As Roger Circala has noted, field curvature can depend on subject distance, and I assume - as an astro-specific lens, that Sony has designed it to flatten at infinity.
Zooms like the Sigma 14-24mm f2.8 DGDN are optimized for their wide end, and have four more elements than the Sony 14mm f1.8 GM, so its not that surprising that its edges and corners may be a bit sharper than the 14GM; the Sony is sharper in the center though, as you would expect in a prime.
Relative to its size and weight, the Sony 14mmF1.8GM looks to be an excellent performer. I have no doubt that Sony had the ability to build a lens with razer-sharp corners wide open, but they chose not too, because that would of increased the size and weight too much and narrowed the lens' appeal for uses other than astro.
Also, judging images at 200% on-screen can be a bit dodgy, as you are including another software variable in the equation
But as I have said several times, according to this review, not only do the FE edges fall off, but also the AFC edges, and that with at all f-stops.
Accordingly, the resolution in large parts of the picture would not be outstanding.
I will continue to have a look at the reviews and my mind may change, but so far I am disappointed. I was expecting a 16mm GM, with a front filter thread and classleading sharpness over the entire frame from about f2.8.
For the price and what I've read and seen so far, it's not enough for me....Show more →
'I was expecting a 16mm GM, with a front filter thread and classleading sharpness over the entire frame from about f2.8' - as Roger Circala likes to say 'expectations are a down payment on future dissapointment'
Apr 23, 2021 at 04:33 AM
p.8 #4Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
hiepphotog wrote:
So here is a few reviews with a comparison between the Sony GM 14/1.8 and others:
vs. Sigma 14/1.8
vs. Sony GM 12-24 and Sigma 14-24 (with Raw files)
Thanks for finding these, the raws are great! Unfortunately 14GM @f2.8 is missing in the comparison shots but you can't have it all
.
Anyways, in wide open shots 12-24GM seems the sharpest overall in my eyes, with the caveat that the center area is actually worse than the 14-24DN and 14GM for some reason.
I think by f2.8 14GM might catch up in the corners...
So here is a few reviews with a comparison between the Sony GM 14/1.8 and others:
vs. Sigma 14/1.8
vs. Sony GM 12-24 and Sigma 14-24 (with Raw files)
Thanks for finding these, the raws are great! Unfortunately 14GM @f2.8 is missing in the comparison shots but you can't have it all
.Anyways, in wide open shots 12-24GM seems the sharpest overall in my eyes, with the caveat that the center area is actually worse than the 14-24DN and 14GM for some reason.
I think by f2.8 14GM might catch up in the corners...
Apr 23, 2021 at 04:54 AM
p.8 #5Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
HelBen85 wrote:
I have a pretty good Laowa 15mm f2.
It may be less sharp than the GM at open apertures, but at the latest at f8 my copy is really very good over the entire image including the full frame corners.
And according to this test report https://www.lenstip.com/525.4-Lens_review-Venus_Optics_LAOWA_15_mm_f_2_ZERO-D_Image_resolution.html, the difference to the GM should hardly exist, at least at f8 (resolution-wise).
In addition, it is relatively small and light, almost a macro lens and has a front filter thread. Only the missing electronic contacts are annoying.
I've been tempted by used copies of the Laowa 15, at 37% the cost of the GM and especially as I love astro but don't do a lot of it as there so much light pollution in SE England. 72mm filter is a bonus too
FJR1 wrote
Thank you, 14mm GM and those selling their current wide angle primes. I just picked up a Laowa 15mm f/2 on the B&S Board for less than a third of the GM cost. I acknowledge the Laowa isn't in the same league as the GM, but these new releases give us some real bargains at FM Buy and Sell.It may be less sharp than the GM at open apertures, but at the latest at f8 my copy is really very good over the entire image including the full frame corners.
And according to this test report https://www.lenstip.com/525.4-Lens_review-Venus_Optics_LAOWA_15_mm_f_2_ZERO-D_Image_resolution.html, the difference to the GM should hardly exist, at least at f8 (resolution-wise).
In addition, it is relatively small and light, almost a macro lens and has a front filter thread. Only the missing electronic contacts are annoying.
I've been tempted by used copies of the Laowa 15, at 37% the cost of the GM and especially as I love astro but don't do a lot of it as there so much light pollution in SE England. 72mm filter is a bonus too
Apr 23, 2021 at 06:41 AM
p.8 #6Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
HelBen85 wrote:
I was expecting a 16mm GM, with a front filter thread and classleading sharpness over the entire frame from about f2.8.
I was hoping for the samething too. But I suspect Sony tried 16mm, and couldn't fit a front filter on it. So decided what the heck, might as well go for 14mm on the design.
I was expecting a 16mm GM, with a front filter thread and classleading sharpness over the entire frame from about f2.8.
I was hoping for the samething too. But I suspect Sony tried 16mm, and couldn't fit a front filter on it. So decided what the heck, might as well go for 14mm on the design.
Apr 23, 2021 at 10:05 AM
p.8 #7Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
tctmp wrote:
I was hoping for the samething too. But I suspect Sony tried 16mm, and couldn't fit a front filter on it. So decided what the heck, might as well go for 14mm on the design.
Why wouldn't they manage that? Pretty unlikely.
I think the lenstip test is only telling half the story, as field curvature isn't taken into account. DPReviewTV showed by focussing on the corner how sharp the lens is even at f1.8. So I think for optimum sharpness across the frame this needs to be taken into account, something R. Cicala talked about extensively in his articles.
https://www.dpreview.com/videos/2382471386/dpreview-tv-sony-fe-14mm-f1-8-gm-review
R.Cicala on field curvature
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/1351719699/roger-cicala-field-curvature-for-fun-and-profit
HelBen85 wrote
I was expecting a 16mm GM, with a front filter thread and classleading sharpness over the entire frame from about f2.8.Why wouldn't they manage that? Pretty unlikely.
I think the lenstip test is only telling half the story, as field curvature isn't taken into account. DPReviewTV showed by focussing on the corner how sharp the lens is even at f1.8. So I think for optimum sharpness across the frame this needs to be taken into account, something R. Cicala talked about extensively in his articles.
https://www.dpreview.com/videos/2382471386/dpreview-tv-sony-fe-14mm-f1-8-gm-review
R.Cicala on field curvature
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/1351719699/roger-cicala-field-curvature-for-fun-and-profit
Apr 23, 2021 at 11:07 AM
p.8 #8Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Holger wrote:
Why wouldn't they manage that?
Are you aware of any 16mm f/1.8 that takes front filters? The Rokinon 16mm T2.6 certainly can't. Laowa 15mm f/2 can, but it's not f/1.8 and already has very bad vignetting from my understanding, so it's not even close to a f/2 lens, granted it's 1mm wider.
Was hoping Sony can be the first to manage to do it.
Why wouldn't they manage that?
Are you aware of any 16mm f/1.8 that takes front filters? The Rokinon 16mm T2.6 certainly can't. Laowa 15mm f/2 can, but it's not f/1.8 and already has very bad vignetting from my understanding, so it's not even close to a f/2 lens, granted it's 1mm wider.
Was hoping Sony can be the first to manage to do it.
Apr 23, 2021 at 06:08 PM
p.8 #9Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Definitely excited about this lens especially after watching Gerald Undones video on it. I like that it has fairly minimal distortion even with with the wide field of view.
Apr 23, 2021 at 07:24 PM
p.8 #10Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
tctmp wrote:
Are you aware of any 16mm f/1.8 that takes front filters? The Rokinon 16mm T2.6 certainly can't. Laowa 15mm f/2 can, but it's not f/1.8 and already has very bad vignetting from my understanding, so it's not even close to a f/2 lens, granted it's 1mm wider.
Was hoping Sony can be the first to manage to do it.
As you say, there is a 15/2 to take front filters (Laowa, https://phillipreeve.net/blog/rolling-review-laowa-15mm-2-0-zero-d/), so this shows that there is a big chance that it is possible for a 16/1.8 as well. Difference between f1.8 and f2 isn't huge and offset in part by 16mm vs. 15mm. Whether it would lead to strong vignetting must be a guess from our side, now. But strong vignetting is part of many newly introduced lenses. So I think it should be possible for Sony, if Laowa can manage something like this.
Holger wrote
Why wouldn't they manage that?Was hoping Sony can be the first to manage to do it.
As you say, there is a 15/2 to take front filters (Laowa, https://phillipreeve.net/blog/rolling-review-laowa-15mm-2-0-zero-d/), so this shows that there is a big chance that it is possible for a 16/1.8 as well. Difference between f1.8 and f2 isn't huge and offset in part by 16mm vs. 15mm. Whether it would lead to strong vignetting must be a guess from our side, now. But strong vignetting is part of many newly introduced lenses. So I think it should be possible for Sony, if Laowa can manage something like this.
Apr 24, 2021 at 12:29 AM
|
p.8 #11Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Holger wrote:
Are you aware of any 16mm f/1.8 that takes front filters? The Rokinon 16mm T2.6 certainly can't. Laowa 15mm f/2 can, but it's not f/1.8 and already has very bad vignetting from my understanding, so it's not even close to a f/2 lens, granted it's 1mm wider.
Was hoping Sony can be the first to manage to do it.As you say, there is a 15/2 to take front filters (Laowa, https://phillipreeve.net/blog/rolling-review-laowa-15mm-2-0-zero-d/), so this shows that there is a big chance that it is possible for a 16/1.8 as well. Difference between f1.8 and f2 isn't huge and offset in part by 16mm vs. 15mm. Whether it would lead to strong vignetting must be a guess from our side, now. But strong vignetting is part of many newly introduced lenses. So I think it should be possible for Sony, if Laowa can manage something like this.
I never said it's impossible since I'm certainly hoping for it. But it's apparent to me that it's difficult.
If Sony designed a lens like Laowa 15mm f/2 or even slightly better, I'm certain it won't get released since it will do damage to the brand. The vignetting is really bad (almost doesn't cover the full sensor) even considering it's a wide angle lens. The corner sharpness, coma, etc are far from GM quality. So far, none of Canon, Nikon, Sony, Sigma, Tamron has been willing to put their name behind some a lens. I'm sure they have tried and likely are still trying, but seems to me that they haven't got to a point of good enough quality that they are happy with to release it.
tctmp wrote
Holger wrote
Why wouldn't they manage that?Was hoping Sony can be the first to manage to do it.
I never said it's impossible since I'm certainly hoping for it. But it's apparent to me that it's difficult.
If Sony designed a lens like Laowa 15mm f/2 or even slightly better, I'm certain it won't get released since it will do damage to the brand. The vignetting is really bad (almost doesn't cover the full sensor) even considering it's a wide angle lens. The corner sharpness, coma, etc are far from GM quality. So far, none of Canon, Nikon, Sony, Sigma, Tamron has been willing to put their name behind some a lens. I'm sure they have tried and likely are still trying, but seems to me that they haven't got to a point of good enough quality that they are happy with to release it.
Apr 24, 2021 at 10:05 AM
p.8 #12Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
tctmp wrote:
Are you aware of any 16mm f/1.8 that takes front filters? The Rokinon 16mm T2.6 certainly can't. Laowa 15mm f/2 can, but it's not f/1.8 and already has very bad vignetting from my understanding, so it's not even close to a f/2 lens, granted it's 1mm wider.
Was hoping Sony can be the first to manage to do it.As you say, there is a 15/2 to take front filters (Laowa, https://phillipreeve.net/blog/rolling-review-laowa-15mm-2-0-zero-d/), so this shows that there is a big chance that it is possible for a 16/1.8 as well. Difference between f1.8 and f2 isn't huge and offset in part by 16mm vs. 15mm. Whether it would lead to strong vignetting must be a guess from our side, now. But strong vignetting is part of many newly introduced lenses. So I think it should be possible for Sony, if Laowa can manage something like this.I never said it's impossible since I'm certainly hoping for it. But it's apparent to me that it's difficult.
If Sony designed a lens like Laowa 15mm f/2 or even slightly better, I'm certain it won't get released since it will do damage to the brand. The vignetting is really bad (almost doesn't cover the full sensor) even considering it's a wide angle lens. The corner sharpness, coma, etc are far from GM quality. So far, none of Canon, Nikon, Sony, Sigma, Tamron has been willing to put their name behind some a lens. I'm sure they have tried and likely...Show more →
You could be right of course. I recently read that the new Canon 15-30/2.8 for R-mount has 5 stops of vignetting according to Dustin Abbot. I didn't expect Canon to accept that, but sometimes even big manufacturers accept compromises.
https://dustinabbott.net/2020/10/canon-rf-15-35mm-f2-8l-is-review/
Holger wrote
tctmp wrote
Holger wrote
Why wouldn't they manage that?Was hoping Sony can be the first to manage to do it.
If Sony designed a lens like Laowa 15mm f/2 or even slightly better, I'm certain it won't get released since it will do damage to the brand. The vignetting is really bad (almost doesn't cover the full sensor) even considering it's a wide angle lens. The corner sharpness, coma, etc are far from GM quality. So far, none of Canon, Nikon, Sony, Sigma, Tamron has been willing to put their name behind some a lens. I'm sure they have tried and likely...Show more →
You could be right of course. I recently read that the new Canon 15-30/2.8 for R-mount has 5 stops of vignetting according to Dustin Abbot. I didn't expect Canon to accept that, but sometimes even big manufacturers accept compromises.
https://dustinabbott.net/2020/10/canon-rf-15-35mm-f2-8l-is-review/
Apr 24, 2021 at 10:37 AM
p.8 #13Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Holger wrote:
Are you aware of any 16mm f/1.8 that takes front filters? The Rokinon 16mm T2.6 certainly can't. Laowa 15mm f/2 can, but it's not f/1.8 and already has very bad vignetting from my understanding, so it's not even close to a f/2 lens, granted it's 1mm wider.
Was hoping Sony can be the first to manage to do it.As you say, there is a 15/2 to take front filters (Laowa, https://phillipreeve.net/blog/rolling-review-laowa-15mm-2-0-zero-d/), so this shows that there is a big chance that it is possible for a 16/1.8 as well. Difference between f1.8 and f2 isn't huge and offset in part by 16mm vs. 15mm. Whether it would lead to strong vignetting must be a guess from our side, now. But strong vignetting is part of many newly introduced lenses. So I think it should be possible for Sony, if Laowa can manage something like this.I never said it's impossible since I'm certainly hoping for it. But it's apparent to me that it's difficult.
If Sony designed a lens like Laowa 15mm f/2 or even slightly better, I'm certain it won't get released since it will do damage to the brand. The vignetting is really bad (almost doesn't cover the full sensor) even considering it's a wide angle lens. The corner sharpness, coma, etc are far from GM quality. So far, none of Canon, Nikon, Sony, Sigma, Tamron has been willing to put their name behind some a lens. I'm sure they have tried and likely are still trying, but seems to me that they haven't got to a point of good enough quality that they are happy with to release it.You could be right of course. I recently read that the new Canon 15-30/2.8 for R-mount has 5 stops of vignetting according to Dustin Abbot. I didn't expect Canon to accept that, but sometimes even big manufacturers accept compromises.
https://dustinabbott.net/2020/10/canon-rf-15-35mm-f2-8l-is-review/
Probably because most people want the front filters and marketing wants to have its say on sticking the extra 1mm on the spec. The vignetting on that Canon lens is indeed very bad.
tctmp wrote
Holger wrote
tctmp wrote
Holger wrote
Why wouldn't they manage that?Was hoping Sony can be the first to manage to do it.
If Sony designed a lens like Laowa 15mm f/2 or even slightly better, I'm certain it won't get released since it will do damage to the brand. The vignetting is really bad (almost doesn't cover the full sensor) even considering it's a wide angle lens. The corner sharpness, coma, etc are far from GM quality. So far, none of Canon, Nikon, Sony, Sigma, Tamron has been willing to put their name behind some a lens. I'm sure they have tried and likely are still trying, but seems to me that they haven't got to a point of good enough quality that they are happy with to release it.
https://dustinabbott.net/2020/10/canon-rf-15-35mm-f2-8l-is-review/
Probably because most people want the front filters and marketing wants to have its say on sticking the extra 1mm on the spec. The vignetting on that Canon lens is indeed very bad.
Apr 24, 2021 at 11:07 AM
p.8 #14Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
6683 wrote:
No filter thread
There was a rumor that Sony might have allowed for drop in rear filters (especially cir. pola) for us architectural shooters. Sadly, this did not happen.
Yes, NISI and others make the front attachment monster filters but shooting stopped down, you can focus the dust with these super wides.
No filter thread
There was a rumor that Sony might have allowed for drop in rear filters (especially cir. pola) for us architectural shooters. Sadly, this did not happen.
Yes, NISI and others make the front attachment monster filters but shooting stopped down, you can focus the dust with these super wides.
Apr 28, 2021 at 12:02 PM
p.8 #15Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
I'm waiting to see how long it takes NiSi to produce the 14GM compatible mount. I already have the S6 for the 12-24GM.............. so I really hope it is an S6 series adapter and not the 100mm series.
Apr 28, 2021 at 12:55 PM
p.8 #16Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
It would be nice to see more images. Yes, I realize the lens hasn't been released at this time. I did preorder it from B&H and I do have use for well corrected wide angles, at times and like the capability of close focusing. And I appreciate the size and weight. Looking forward to this.
Apr 30, 2021 at 01:36 PM
p.8 #17Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
ouch would be a fun lens, but far too expensive
The Sony 20mm F1.8 is working fine
The Sony 20mm F1.8 is working fine
Apr 30, 2021 at 01:53 PM
p.8 #18Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Expensive compared to what? :^) Seems like a lot of lens, to me, for the price.
Apr 30, 2021 at 02:30 PM
p.8 #19Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
jamato8 wrote:
Expensive compared to what? :^) Seems like a lot of lens, to me, for the price.
I agree. It costs the same as the humongous Sigma 14mm f/1.8 DN E-mount and likely the latter won't perform any better. We have to compare apples to apples.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1393489-REG/sigma_14mm_f_1_8_dg_hsm.html
I'm very happy with my Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN but the Sony 14/1.8 GM + 20/1.8 G set is a faster alternative.
Expensive compared to what? :^) Seems like a lot of lens, to me, for the price.
I agree. It costs the same as the humongous Sigma 14mm f/1.8 DN E-mount and likely the latter won't perform any better. We have to compare apples to apples.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1393489-REG/sigma_14mm_f_1_8_dg_hsm.html
I'm very happy with my Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN but the Sony 14/1.8 GM + 20/1.8 G set is a faster alternative.
Apr 30, 2021 at 02:40 PM
p.8 #20Pre-order: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM ($1,598)
Fred Miranda wrote:
I agree. It costs the same as the humongous Sigma 14mm f/1.8 DN E-mount and likely the latter won't perform any better. We have to compare apples to apples.
The only question is, when will FM do a 14 1.8 review?
I agree. It costs the same as the humongous Sigma 14mm f/1.8 DN E-mount and likely the latter won't perform any better. We have to compare apples to apples.
The only question is, when will FM do a 14 1.8 review?
May 01, 2021 at 09:57 AM