p.11 #1 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
QuietOC wrote:
While there have been many lesser small 40ish primes like the $600 screw-driven Pentax-FA 43mm F1.9 Limited, many may be comparing the 2.5/40G to a more recent native AF lens of similar size that has been on sale for $249 recently.
p.11 #2 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
Well for now I guess I will stay pat with the Sigma 35/2, 50/2.5G since for my A7C also have the Sigma 65/2, and 90/2.8 as well as the 24/2 for it. Maybe Sigma will release the rumored 50/2 as well.
Having an A1 as well and the 14/1.8 GM, 20/1.8 G, 24/1.4 GM, 35/1.4 GM, as well as 50/1.2 GM. I think I’m covered for when I need faster and sharper with many more Mpixels.
p.11 #3 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
JVan_02 wrote:
@Jonas B@ eh, sort of a slip, sort of not. I think its transition zone & bokeh is definitely superlative but I think the resolution is a bit dated at this point to be top tier and unit focus puts the Sonnar definitely in the ponderous category of lenses. Color reproduction is hard for me to call. I think it's a bit lacking compared to some lenses I've seen, but this could easily be the older sensor.
In short, it's a lens with definite strengths, but I think those other lenses I've listed in general offer more.
Hi again,
My _opinions_:
1) Sharpness is overrated, or very overrated.
2) Colors are misunderstood or abused due to systems not being color managed and a misuse of "color science". Most discussions on-line about colors are of low value. (See for example this thread.
3) Let's not take this too seriously.
4) The main problem I have with the Sonnar 35/2 is the CA.
5) Opinions are opinions. You agree with some and with other not so much.
6) Ponderous is OK. My best lens is the tripod after all - and i should use it more often.
and finally: If the 40G rendered more like the Sonnar I would be a happy old man.
p.11 #4 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
I discovered recently that it's really great on a gimbal. It was the easiest lens to balance on the Ronin and the excellent autofocus really helped to get some fast moving shots following running kids. I was considering selling it up to that point but now I think I'll keep it as the main Ronin lens
p.11 #5 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
JVan_02 wrote:
Is it difficult to just say what lens it is?
I'm assuming that's the Sigma 45mm. Which is heavier, and from what I've read, not as sharp. I would give it the edge in handling due to the separation of the focus and aperture rings. When I rented the 40mm G, I experienced some annoyance with the rings being on top of one another.
p.11 #6 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
letchhausen wrote:
I'm assuming that's the Sigma 45mm. Which is heavier, and from what I've read, not as sharp. I would give it the edge in handling due to the separation of the focus and aperture rings. When I rented the 40mm G, I experienced some annoyance with the rings being on top of one another.
It can produce more beautiful images than the 40 G, but the heavy amount of spherical aberration present in the lens means that outside its preferred output parameters you'll be struggling to get anything usable. In a controlled outdoor or studio situation you could make good argument for it being the better lens, but outside of that... eh. I feel it to be a lens with much stronger hype than merit on these boards.
p.11 #7 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
Camera Labs' review of the 40G has a couple of comparison images against the Sigma 45i that show the different levels of sharpness and bokeh rendering:
Fred's tests show that the Sigma 45i is quite sharp at infinity up to around 1m and closer where the SA is very noticeable (to put a positive spin on it: "dreamy"). At that distance, stopping down to f4 improves the performance a lot.
p.11 #8 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
grahamgibson wrote:
Camera Labs' review of the 40G has a couple of comparison images against the Sigma 45i that show the different levels of sharpness and bokeh rendering:
Fred's tests show that the Sigma 45i is quite sharp at infinity up to around 1m and closer where the SA is very noticeable (to put a positive spin on it: "dreamy"). At that distance, stopping down to f4 improves the performance a lot.
I said myself the lens can produce better results in controlled environments. I swear half the posts there are asking about if there's some hack to make AF-C viable, though.
Not great for a lot of day to day things that need AF-C. If you're just taking photos of people sitting down at dinner parties that's one thing, but for a lot of candid shots you need responsive AF... and it's probably a good thing if you don't have to compute what f-stop you need at the distance your subject's at too.
p.11 #9 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
I have Sigma 35/2 and 40/2.5 and they are my most used lenses (in addition to Sigma 24-70). I had the Sigma 45/2.8 for quite a while as well.
The 40/2.5 has impeccable AF and consistent performance across the frame and aperture range and all distances, it delivers a workable image almost 100% of the time. I find Sigma 35/2 images more pleasing almost all the time, but the AF has a lot of misses, enough that I always take a few shots and check images to make sure. Opportunistic grab shots of my kids are often out of focus, just slightly. Enough that I’m thinking I’ll just get the 35 GM instead of the 35/2. The Sigma 35 AF is quite good, it just becomes noticeable compared to the more recent FE lenses that are just incredible w/r/t AF (like the FE 35/1.8 which was amazing in both stills and video).
The Sigma 45/2.8 delivers lovely images, but AF, especially AF-C, was just unreliable for my primary photography use case - my kids in motion at relatively close distance. But I’ve got some beautiful pics of my kids w/ the 45 when they were relatively static and everything came together.
p.11 #10 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
I'm just providing a source with examples of the differences for those who want to see. Actually, I think the two lenses are mostly similar with minor reasons to choose one over the other.
The AF issues with the Sigma 45i are not minor, but in my experience seem to be dependent on which camera you're using. The Sigma was incredibly unreliable on my A7rII, back-focusing constantly, but it is very consistent and accurate on my A7IV. I wouldn't doubt that the Sony 40G is marginally better still, but the Sigma works well enough for candid shots of my young kids that I have no issues now, even in AF-C.
p.11 #12 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
I really enjoyed the Sigma 45 when I had it but ultimately sold my copy because it just wasn’t the general purpose lens I wanted. When used within its ideal parameters it really sings, though. I would jump on a mark 2 version that fixes the AFC issues.
I’m tempted to try out this 40G sometime. I mostly have been using my apsc kit when I want a small walk around lately, but it’d be nice to have a small lens with AF again in my FF kit.
p.11 #15 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
Hi! I'm tempted to buy this. I own the Samyang 45 mm f/1.8 but I think it is a tad too long. My Voigtländern 40 mm f/1.2 is just perfect. But well, no AF...
Does anyone know if the 40/2.5 a true 40 and the Samyang is a true 45? If the 40/2.5 is “a long 40” and the Samyang is “a short 45” the difference might be small. If they're true to spec 5 mm makes a big difference to me.
Perhaps I should say that the 2.5 aperture is holding me back a bit. 1.8 or 2.0 is my sweet spot (perfectly sized lenses with control over DOF). 2.8 usually bothers me. I'm missing that extra stop. Really wish there was a Sony equivalent for the Nikkor Z 40mm f/2.0.
After having shot 95% at 35 mm for over a decade I'm happy to have found a new favorite focal length.
p.11 #16 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
mikae1 wrote:
Hi! I'm tempted to buy this. I own the Samyang 45 mm f/1.8 but I think it is a tad too long. My Voigtländern 40 mm f/1.2 is just perfect. But well, no AF...
Does anyone know if the 40/2.5 a true 40 and the Samyang is a true 45? If the 40/2.5 is “a long 40” and the Samyang is “a short 45” the difference might be small. If they're true to spec 5 mm makes a big difference to me.
The Samyang 45 isn't very close to the Sony 40. The Sigma 45i is about mid way between them. I think the Samyang was very close to the Tamron SP 45 and Minolta 45. The Sony 40 is tighter than the Canon EF 40. I haven't used that Cosina. I have had some some other 40's.
Perhaps I should say that the 2.5 aperture is holding me back a bit. 1.8 or 2.0 is my sweet spot (perfectly sized lenses with control over DOF). 2.8 usually bothers me. I'm missing that extra stop. Really wish there was a Sony equivalent for the Nikkor Z 40mm f/2.0.
After having shot 95% at 35 mm for over a decade I'm happy to have found a new favorite focal length.
p.11 #17 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
The Voigtlander is a long 40, it’s closer to a 43mm!
Agreed with everything else you said though. The CV 40 is great, nice to have an alternative to 35mm, and the Nikon 40/2 is special lens.
mikae1 wrote:
Hi! I'm tempted to buy this. I own the Samyang 45 mm f/1.8 but I think it is a tad too long. My Voigtländern 40 mm f/1.2 is just perfect. But well, no AF...
Does anyone know if the 40/2.5 a true 40 and the Samyang is a true 45? If the 40/2.5 is “a long 40” and the Samyang is “a short 45” the difference might be small. If they're true to spec 5 mm makes a big difference to me.
Perhaps I should say that the 2.5 aperture is holding me back a bit. 1.8 or 2.0 is my sweet spot (perfectly sized lenses with control over DOF). 2.8 usually bothers me. I'm missing that extra stop. Really wish there was a Sony equivalent for the Nikkor Z 40mm f/2.0.
After having shot 95% at 35 mm for over a decade I'm happy to have found a new favorite focal length. ...Show more →
p.11 #18 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
mikae1 wrote:
Hi! I'm tempted to buy this. I own the Samyang 45 mm f/1.8 but I think it is a tad too long. My Voigtländern 40 mm f/1.2 is just perfect. But well, no AF...
Does anyone know if the 40/2.5 a true 40 and the Samyang is a true 45? If the 40/2.5 is “a long 40” and the Samyang is “a short 45” the difference might be small. If they're true to spec 5 mm makes a big difference to me.
Perhaps I should say that the 2.5 aperture is holding me back a bit. 1.8 or 2.0 is my sweet spot (perfectly sized lenses with control over DOF). 2.8 usually bothers me. I'm missing that extra stop. Really wish there was a Sony equivalent for the Nikkor Z 40mm f/2.0.
After having shot 95% at 35 mm for over a decade I'm happy to have found a new favorite focal length. ...Show more →
p.11 #19 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
QuietOC wrote:
The Samyang 45 isn't very close to the Sony 40.
Thanks!
akashyap wrote:
The Voigtlander is a long 40, it’s closer to a 43mm!
Thanks, interesting!
Jonas B wrote:
Page 1 post 4 may help a bit.
Oh, I've been coming back to this thread more than a few times. Had forgotten about that chart! Does DPReview not measure these things? Can't remember seeing them do that...
