p.3 #1 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
Juha Kannisto wrote:
I also think the hood on the 40/2.5 is very practical and compact. It doesn't look as beautiful as the Sigma I-series hoods, but those Sigma hoods are bit too big and heavy in comparison. On my kitchen scale, 40/2.5 hood is 12g, and Sigma 35/2 hood is 48g, and Sigma 45/2.8 hood is 44g.
I guess my only question with the hood is if the conic section was worth it. From a practical sense: absolutely, as it allows you to attach filters. However, aesthetically the conic section is clearly inferior to the closing, square cut hoods we've had for decades at this point.
Perhaps it'll grow on me if I actually start using it, but one of my longest standing complaints with Sony cameras and lenses in general is that they look like they were designed by engineers :P I actually like the look of the α7C and I feel these compact G series are a large improvement on the typical G|GM aesthetic. The hood just gets me a bit salty
Well, diglloyd seem to be enthusistic...
Strange: Now it's a long time since I read anything by him but I seem to recall he was very methodical. I didn't think he would applaud a propiate lens hood not optimally shaped. As it is now the 40G hood could have been better with a smaller and rectangular opening. Again style and form was prioritized over function.
Brilliant is a strong word, I think? We have, btw, seen this design earlier. Pentax comes to mind, maybe from others as well.
For a moment I was tempted to add some gaffa but that wouldn't have made the contraption nicer. The lens handles direct light to the front lens element pretty well.
I forgot about flare when posting earlier. In my opinion the 40G performs well enough with regards to flare.
p.3 #4 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
smpetty wrote:
Any thoughts on how the 40/2.5 G will compare to the Batis 40/2?
Think it'll be a battle of ergonomics, AF, and good optics vs a more nuanced optical performance here. I'd say the Sony lens has a slight advantage in resolution being that it's slightly sharper wide open than the Batis lens—and while the Batis is sharper stopped down to 3.5 or 4, both lenses are excellent assuming you get good copies. Personally, I'd prize the advantage in wide open performance here, but opinions will vary. In other ways, I'd say the Batis has a slight lead optically: almost APO levels of CA correction, excellent color reproduction and contrast, and while both have similarly crunchy bokeh at times I'd favor the Batis more for being a bit more distinct. In terms of light gathering they're almost identical, both due to Zeiss' firware and due to my own preference for dealing with SA—but at distances of over a meter f2 is usable on the Batis, so slight advantage.
In all other ways, I'd consider the 40 G to be the better lens. It's not over inflated like the Batis, it has no firmware interfering with AF implementation, dual linear motors for faster implementation of AF adjustments, and of course first party AF implementation to really make sure everything works well. Additionally, the 40 G is nearly half the weight of Batis. It has a mfd just 0.01m off the Batis lens in manual focus, but due to the wider effective FL at MFD the reproduction ratio is notably inferior (so, for close focus work I guess the Batis gets another point).
Factoring in price, I'd say there are definitively fewer tradeoffs with the Sony offering in this case, but I guess this can vary on what you value. If I didn't already have the Batis, and if I had an α7C (specifically, double the low light focusing capability of my α7 III) I'd probably get the 40 G and never look back.
p.3 #5 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
Put in an offer on this lens via Greentoe on premise that it won’t sell like crazy and the lens is in stock everywhere on release day. Accepted! Hope to have it soon. I found the FE 35/2.8 to be a very useful lens for travel and as an every day carry lens and this looks to be much better. Might be selling my X100v and looking at used A7Cs…
p.3 #6 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
I added a distortion "test" at page 1, post 4. It's not too bad.
Above: a handheld pano from three exposures. Shot at f/2.5. PP: white balance and slight sharpening.
and again, as sometimes monochromes are what i like best:
p.3 #7 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
B&H delivered mine earlier today. Since then, I've taken a few test shots around the house with it. In my very nonprofessional opinion, the 40G does what it's supposed to do very well. It's compact, has nice haptics, and is sharp enough wide open. One thing I was very pleased to discover is that the lens hood will fit over most filters - no need to screw them into the hood itself. When these compact primes were announced, I picked up an A7C just to use these with. So far, I'm happy with my choice.
A few boring images from around the house:
Image Taken with SONY ILCE-7C with the following exposure settings: f 2.5, SS 1/40 at ISO 160. Focal Length 40 mm
Image Taken with SONY ILCE-7C with the following exposure settings: f 2.5, SS 1/40 at ISO 400. Focal Length 40 mm
Image Taken with SONY ILCE-7C with the following exposure settings: f 4, SS 1/1600 at ISO 100. Focal Length 40 mm
Image Taken with SONY ILCE-7C with the following exposure settings: f 8, SS 1/320 at ISO 100. Focal Length 40 mm
p.3 #9 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
TravelinBriNY wrote:
Loving that we're getting samples!
Now is only someone wanted to do a hands on comparison between that and the Sigma 35/2...
Just because no one has commented yet, I'd imagine the biggest optical differences would be the Sigma's residual spherical aberration. It'll improve rendering, but you'll need to stop down to ~2.8-3.5 (according to Fred's review) at distances under a meter to get rid of the SA—or just have the glow in your image. While the 40 2.5 G won't render as well, it's usable from MFD→infinity wide open.
Mechanical differences will be more aluminum in the construction of the lens (35i) vs a significant amount of weight savings, better sealing, more manual controls, superior reproduction ratio, and superior AF system (40 G). Another thing to keep in mind is that because the 35i is actually closer to a 33 or 32mm lens, the 40 G might have the same potential for subject isolation even though it's 2/3 a stop slower.
p.3 #10 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
JVan_02 wrote:
Just because no one has commented yet, I'd imagine the biggest optical differences would be the Sigma's residual spherical aberration. It'll improve rendering, but you'll need to stop down to ~2.8-3.5 (according to Fred's review) at distances under a meter to get rid of the SA—or just have the glow in your image. While the 40 2.5 G won't render as well, it's usable from MFD→infinity wide open.
Mechanical differences will be more aluminum in the construction of the lens (35i) vs a significant amount of weight savings, better sealing, more manual controls, superior reproduction ratio, and superior AF system (40 G). Another thing to keep in mind is that because the 35i is actually closer to a 33 or 32mm lens, the 40 G might have the same potential for subject isolation even though it's 2/3 a stop slower. ...Show more →
I agree with your assessment, but 35I and 40G are targeted to different audience and I would think that most people on this forum would prefer the qualities of 35I more than 40G, but 40G and other newer G lenses will appeal more to people who go to sites like KenRockwell's website for lens advice.
For weight and size perspective, I think 40 G is more of a competition to the old 35/2.8 ZA than the lenses in f/1.8 to f/2 category. Is 40G better than 35/2.8 ZA? 35 ZA is still more expensive brand new, but pricewise it isn't a huge difference. From the images in this thread I think 40G looks good.
p.3 #11 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
Just got mine yesterday, threw a 49mm inverted screw in hood on it and it looks pretty darned good.
Took some walk-about pics last night that I'll post later. Hood does not vignette and makes the lens much less lengthy than the included hood.
p.3 #12 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
John, looks great. Mine comes next Thursday. Will be curious to hear your thoughts vs the ZA 35/2.8. I bought this to replace the role the 35/2.8 had in my kit (what I am currently using a Fuji X100 for). I suspect you are doing the same. My impressions from samples so far are that it is the superior lens all round. Hope so!
Also - I couldn’t find that hood with a quick search. Can you point to it? Thx!
jhinkey wrote:
Just got mine yesterday, threw a 49mm inverted screw in hood on it and it looks pretty darned good.
Took some walk-about pics last night that I'll post later. Hood does not vignette and makes the lens much less lengthy than the included hood.
I use the same lens hood on my 35/2.8 and on my RX1RII. I'm sure it's not as "good" as the native lens hoods, but I really don't like longer than necessary lenses and I've had good success with these inverted ones. Makes inserting/retrieving the camera with the lens on easier too by kind of stream lining the front of the lens. Just need to get a 31mm (can't remember the exact size) lens cap for the domed hood.
So far my only handling complaints are the de-click switch - why does this need to be a switch on the barrel? I've already accidentally changed it to de-click when taking the lens on and off a couple of times because that's exactly where you grab it AND is has much more knurling on it than the AF/MF switch which is not nearly as easy to accidentally change. This should have been like other lenses where you need to use a tool or something like that. Don't know of any significant use case where you want to constantly switch back and forth between clicked and clickless aperture. I'll likely tap over it with gaffers tape.
I do like the sticky-ness of the aperture ring, especially in A mode as it seems. At least when brand new you won't be accidentally changing the aperture setting because it's too loose. We'll see if the aperture ring loosens up with age.
So far it's a keeper (checking on the centering still) and will probably go on the next vacation or outing in the mountains.
- J
EDIT: Added some quick conversions below. Surprisingly sharp at MFD. No major faults other than maybe ghosting and flare, which I will further test out.
p.3 #15 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
jhinkey wrote:
(...)
EDIT: Added some quick conversions below. Surprisingly sharp at MFD. No major faults other than maybe ghosting and flare, which I will further test out.
(....)
After having tried the 35GM I was surprised as well seeing the 40G to be just as good when stopped down a little.
Ghosting and flares, I haven't sen much of that at all. A little with the sun in the corners or just outside them but no other problems with the sun hitting the front element. Btw, nice hood! I mentioned Pentax in an earlier post but never crossed my mind that there might be replacement hoods for the DA40.
Bokeh balls, far away, f/2.5, clarity and curves
The corner bokeh balls are distorted down to f/5.6 in images like te one above. In real life the problem goes away earlier.
The balls aren't pretty and shows one of the shortcuts Sony took with this lens (while keeping the price at the high end).
p.3 #16 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
Jonas B wrote:
After having tried the 35GM I was surprised as well seeing the 40G to be just as good when stopped down a little.
Ghosting and flares, I haven't sen much of that at all. A little with the sun in the corners or just outside them but no other problems with the sun hitting the front element. Btw, nice hood! I mentioned Pentax in an earlier post but never crossed my mind that there might be replacement hoods for the DA40.
p.3 #17 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
Need Luminar AI to roll out a de-onioning feature. Actually a pretty constrained problem, machine learning could likely find and remove onion rings in bokeh balls.
j4nu wrote:
Should we call the onion rings police @vdo1@ ?
?