p.14 #1 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
fotografur wrote:
I purchased the 24-50/2.8 for the very same reason of not having to change lenses in nasty weather. The zoom is sharper and has nicer bokeh. I still like having the 50 f2.5G on my A7CR for a walk around at times though.
Interesting!
A zoom is versatile.The digital picture has a long list of cons against the 24-50mm zoom. Some of them one can dismiss while some make me a bit concerned about a 440 gram walk around lens.
Here is the list. I would appreciate some comments!
• No aperture lock switch
• Extreme barrel distortion over much of the range requires correction
• Strong lateral CA except at the long end
• Strong out-of-focus color fringing at 50mm
• Focus ring lacks sufficient resistance
p.14 #2 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
I use them on a a7Cii to have a small everyday kit, but I find that often 40mm is not the focal length I need, and in the narrow streets of Paris, or along something like the Seine, it is not possible to back up further physically, thus the zoom seems like a good idea to add (get rid of the 24/2.8).
p.14 #3 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
Jonas B wrote:
Interesting!
A zoom is versatile.The digital picture has a long list of cons against the 24-50mm zoom. Some of them one can dismiss while some make me a bit concerned about a 440 gram walk around lens.
Here is the list. I would appreciate some comments!
• No aperture lock switch
• Extreme barrel distortion over much of the range requires correction
• Strong lateral CA except at the long end
• Strong out-of-focus color fringing at 50mm
• Focus ring lacks sufficient resistance
I'm not going to talk you into this lens.
You're going to get some cons with the GM zoom too.
I have no problem using this lens when I don't want to be tied down to the single FL 50G.
There's some barrel distortion but not "over the entire range".
As others here have said I just use the lens for taking pictures and have not been disappointed.
p.14 #5 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
I have a bunch of Sony lenses and this one the only one that erratically hunts or jitters back and forth when trying to focus on something just a tiny challenging in terms of contrast. I have a lot of focus misses with this lens too, but not with my other ones. My Sigma 45mm f/1.8 does a lot better as an example. Is that the same for you other people? Do you find that the AF performance is sub par?
p.14 #6 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
mikae1 wrote:
I have a bunch of Sony lenses and this one the only one that erratically hunts or jitters back and forth when trying to focus on something just a tiny challenging in terms of contrast. I have a lot of focus misses with this lens too, but not with my other ones. My Sigma 45mm f/1.8 does a lot better as an example. Is that the same for you other people? Do you find that the AF performance is sub par?
Hmm, my experience is the opposite. I have very few examples of missed focus. This is with the A7C, A7CR and A1. I notice no real world difference to the 50/1.4GM and it's faster than the Sigma 50/2 DG DN (which is OK and focus correctly).
p.14 #8 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
Jonas B wrote:
Interesting!
A zoom is versatile.The digital picture has a long list of cons against the 24-50mm zoom. Some of them one can dismiss while some make me a bit concerned about a 440 gram walk around lens.
Here is the list. I would appreciate some comments!
• No aperture lock switch
• Extreme barrel distortion over much of the range requires correction
• Strong lateral CA except at the long end
• Strong out-of-focus color fringing at 50mm
• Focus ring lacks sufficient resistance
I haven't had the 24-50 for long but I can't say I see any colour fringing wide open on out of focus areas at 2.8 (tried a few experiments today) in fact seems remarkably good. Nor am I seeing any LOCA to speak of
Yes there is extreme barrel distortion but well corrected in lightroom
p.14 #10 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
@Jonas B I know you haven't had the 24-50 for all that long and that you were a fan of the 40mm f2.5, and came around to picking up the 24-50 for fl convenience.
I'm considering both and thought I'd poke you for impressions and comparisons with the 40 in general, while the sales are happening.
I know we had a chat on the 24-50 not that long ago. Just thought I'd poke you again if I can get away with it and bring it up in the context of this lens specifically. Figured others would benefit from your thoughts so why keep it to myself.
In our dm you seemed to mention the TT Artisan 40mm f2 over the Sony 40mm f2.5 - did you swap it out for the for the bokeh/being a bit larger aperture?
I like the TT Artisan 40mm f2 quite a bit, but I figured a weathersealed one with faster autofocus at 40mm, would be nice for city walkabouts.
The TTA I'm liking indoors, casual shots with folks.
The 40mm f2.5 seems like something nice to have and use as a more flexible, low-stakes but fun regular and reliable outdoor option.
24-50 for not swapping lenses while still giving some flexibility on days I don't mind carrying bigger.
p.14 #11 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
My 40 f2.5 G was as sharp as my 35 GM, however the longitudinal CA wide open was unbearable. All out of focus areas had a greenish outline...You barely needed to even crop in to see it. It was bad.
p.14 #12 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
aryanenzo wrote:
My 40 f2.5 G was as sharp as my 35 GM, however the longitudinal CA wide open was unbearable. All out of focus areas had a greenish outline...You barely needed to even crop in to see it. It was bad.
Page 1, post #6 is what it is. But for the sake of calibration: post #8 - is the LoCA there too much for you?
p.14 #13 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
Yogifi wrote:
[...]
I like the TT Artisan 40mm f2 quite a bit, but I figured a weathersealed one with faster autofocus at 40mm, would be nice for city walkabouts.
The TTA I'm liking indoors, casual shots with folks.
The 40mm f2.5 seems like something nice to have and use as a more flexible, low-stakes but fun regular and reliable outdoor option.
24-50 for not swapping lenses while still giving some flexibility on days I don't mind carrying bigger.
Hi,
I'm sorry for the slow reply, I have been gone a couple of days.
Your last comments are exactly what I think as well. How stupid it may look I'm planning to keep both the FE 40/2.5G and the TTA40.
The 24-50mm zoom. It's a quite good lens. Sharp, weathersealed, fast focus, convenient and heavy (to my taste). I haven't used it a lot as I always hesitate to bring it. That's because of the weight.
If I recall correctly the 24-50 is about 440 g. When buying it I thought I would getting used to carry it. I admit I'm somewhat puzzled but it doesn't seem as I do. A psychological thing I guess and I'll have to work on it. I have sold all lenses with a weight around 500 g in the past because of their weight (the Tamron 70-180 is an exception as I sometimes need a fast tele).
So, this isn't much of a reply to you I'm afraid. If interested in the FE 24-50/2.8 G I think you should give it a go. Then I assume you have read the reviews and found the image quality to your liking. My main complaint about the lens is that the focusing ring is too close to the zoom ring and it's also a little nervous when touching it. The big blobby lens hood can be replaced by a couple of step-up/down rings (not perfect of course).
The "Little darling 40G" is still a favourite for walking around. Optically not a jewel but obviously trustworthy, easy to carry, fast focusing and these days also good looking with a rectangular hood. Expensive, getting a second hand or a good deal these dark days is a good idea.
p.14 #14 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
Jonas B wrote:
Hi,
I'm sorry for the slow reply, I have been gone a couple of days.
Your last comments are exactly what I think as well. How stupid it may look I'm planning to keep both the FE 40/2.5G and the TTA40.
The 24-50mm zoom. It's a quite good lens. Sharp, weathersealed, fast focus, convenient and heavy (to my taste). I haven't used it a lot as I always hesitate to bring it. That's because of the weight.
If I recall correctly the 24-50 is about 440 g. When buying it I thought I would getting used to carry it. I admit I'm somewhat puzzled but it doesn't seem as I do. A psychological thing I guess and I'll have to work on it. I have sold all lenses with a weight around 500 g in the past because of their weight (the Tamron 70-180 is an exception as I sometimes need a fast tele).
So, this isn't much of a reply to you I'm afraid. If interested in the FE 24-50/2.8 G I think you should give it a go. Then I assume you have read the reviews and found the image quality to your liking. My main complaint about the lens is that the focusing ring is too close to the zoom ring and it's also a little nervous when touching it. The big blobby lens hood can be replaced by a couple of step-up/down rings (not perfect of course).
The "Little darling 40G" is still a favourite for walking around. Optically not a jewel but obviously trustworthy, easy to carry, fast focusing and these days also good looking with a rectangular hood. Expensive, getting a second hand or a good deal these dark days is a good idea....Show more →
Yes I'm with you, and it's not silly at all I don't think. I wouldn't have much faith in daily using the TT Artisan lens but I don't want to lose it. Sony I bet is more rugged and has advantages. Amazon have a sale on one now, was thinking I'd go for it, just going to double check the image quality but Roman Fox makes the images work with it for sure in his editing so a bit of a skill issue for me.
Appreciate your further thoughts on the 24-50, and it's my fear as well. As much as I want the flexibility, and it doesn't seem that big, I think it might be just a tad too big for me to get my moneys worth with it. But I'm not sure, maybe I'll find one in a store somewhere and the ability to zoom will overcome me - I don't have a single zoom for Sony.
p.14 #15 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
Yogifi wrote:
Appreciate your further thoughts on the 24-50, and it's my fear as well. As much as I want the flexibility, and it doesn't seem that big, I think it might be just a tad too big for me to get my moneys worth with it. But I'm not sure, maybe I'll find one in a store somewhere and the ability to zoom will overcome me - I don't have a single zoom for Sony.
I don’t own a single zoom, period. I’ve rented and enjoyed using various ones from time to time. However, I tend to prefer to a single camera and single lens for a period, and then will shift to another lens. On paper the 24-50 makes immense sense. However, I’m giving the 35GM lens a rest because I got tired/bored of carrying it. I believe the 24-50 is about the same size, so rather hesitant to pull the trigger on it despite being a logical choice.
p.14 #16 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
goo0h wrote:
I don’t own a single zoom, period. I’ve rented and enjoyed using various ones from time to time. However, I tend to prefer to a single camera and single lens for a period, and then will shift to another lens. On paper the 24-50 makes immense sense. However, I’m giving the 35GM lens a rest because I got tired/bored of carrying it. I believe the 24-50 is about the same size, so rather hesitant to pull the trigger on it despite being a logical choice.
I think it's a hair shorter than the 35mm f1.4 GM, seems a little slimmer and about 80grams lighter so it's really close to seeming okay, but I'm with you.
And if I need it, I'm sure I'll manage. At an event or say when travelling with impatient people.
But I think I'd prefer to make do with the focal length I have day-to-day for the size benefit and it would be more a special use thing.
A nice to have for sure though.
If there wasn't a decent blackfriday sale I'd probably bury the idea.
TBH I should do that anyway, I've got enough new toys, it's almost time to start using them!
It's literally only my day at the protest when I took two cameras that I was feeling silly, and how often do I do that.
It's not so much the carrying it but when I take it out and heads snap as they look at what the hell I'm taking a photo off:
" must be amazing - that's a serious lens! ... huh. "
p.14 #17 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
Yogifi wrote:
Appreciate your further thoughts on the 24-50, and it's my fear as well. As much as I want the flexibility, and it doesn't seem that big, I think it might be just a tad too big for me to get my moneys worth with it. But I'm not sure, maybe I'll find one in a store somewhere and the ability to zoom will overcome me - I don't have a single zoom for Sony.
goo0h wrote:
I don’t own a single zoom, period. I’ve rented and enjoyed using various ones from time to time. However, I tend to prefer to a single camera and single lens for a period, and then will shift to another lens. On paper the 24-50 makes immense sense. However, I’m giving the 35GM lens a rest because I got tired/bored of carrying it. I believe the 24-50 is about the same size, so rather hesitant to pull the trigger on it despite being a logical choice.
I know I expressed my feelings about the 24-50/2.8 weight above. Now I think a clarification would be good. The 24-50 is too heavy for me (unless i can change my mind set somehow) when I'm out with only one camera and one lens.
When traveling it's another thing. I now own 2 Sony zooms, the other one being the slower PZ16-35/4. I have traveled Europe with the 16-35 and a fast 50 for a couple of years now. It has worked great. Anyone reading this has by now understood I'm a lot more into WA lenses than tele lenses. For other photographers the 24-50/2.8 together with a Viltrox 85/2 or Samyang 75/1.8 would be a good traveling combo.
Anyway, my main photography is made with one lens and one camera at a time. I kind of decide for a focal length and see the world that way. So, ask me again in half a year or so if I still have the 24-50...
p.14 #18 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
Yogifi wrote:
It's literally only my day at the protest when I took two cameras that I was feeling silly, and how often do I do that.
yeah, I’m certainly not saving on weight. In that sense it’s a little silly. On one Sony I have the Simera 28 because I’m exploring that right now. On the other Sony I have the Voigtlander 40/1.2. Life would be so much easier if I just compressed all that down to the 24-50, and then it’d be AF too.
OTH, I seem to be shifting AF, quick shots more and more to my iPhone, and then deliberately using manual focus lenses on my Sony bodies for an entirely different, more thoughtful experience. At least that’s the current rationalization. 😜
p.14 #19 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
I have a lot of respect for Jonas' well-articulated positions on lenses and photography matters, but personally I found that the 24-50/2.8 quickly became my main Sony lens. Sure, it is a bit heavier than a 40/2.5, but as stated above, if one like and use the 35GM, 50/1.4GM or 24GM, the zoom is pretty much the same size and weight. To me, if you are using a a7/a9/a1 FF camera body, you have to take a small bag or sling anyhow, and the downside of the added weight is quickly outweighed (pun!) by the added flexibility IMO. I found the benefits of the 24-50/2.8 zoom indispensable when photographing in an urban environment where you often cannot back up to make a 40mm or 50mm focal length wide enough.
p.14 #20 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
patotts wrote:
I have a lot of respect for Jonas' well-articulated positions on lenses and photography matters, but personally I found that the 24-50/2.8 quickly became my main Sony lens. Sure, it is a bit heavier than a 40/2.5, but as stated above, if one like and use the 35GM, 50/1.4GM or 24GM, the zoom is pretty much the same size and weight. To me, if you are using a a7/a9/a1 FF camera body, you have to take a small bag or sling anyhow, and the downside of the added weight is quickly outweighed (pun!) by the added flexibility IMO. I found the benefits of the 24-50/2.8 zoom indispensable when photographing in an urban environment where you often cannot back up to make a 40mm or 50mm focal length wide enough. ...Show more →
Hi patotts,
Still, for some reason you sold the 24-50. Was it the weight, the performance or because of some other idea?
I use a "big" Sony and yes, you are right, I always bring my stuff in a satchel bag. I'm in no way about to sell the 24-50. On the contrary, I've decided to get used to it and suddenly it may be all I need (and a fast 50). My copy of the zoom is a tad soft at 50mm at ƒ/2.8. If 2.8 is necessary I can go up to 43 or 44 mm and get a sharper image. At ƒ/4 50mm is as sharp as the other focal lengths.
It's a 440 g versatile lens.
I'll see how it goes by time.
