p.5 #1 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
bjornthun wrote:
Lensrentals mentions something about Sony having an extensive use of lookup tables e.g. in the 24-105/4. Maybe Zeiss has attempted something of that sort but couldn’t quite cope. Sony may have an even better knowledge of the intricacies of their AF implementation. This could work in favour of the 40/2.5 G.
I am absolutely sure it does—just don't know if it's enough of an advantage to at least semi-reliably track a toddler at 2.5. Know that Sony is the best at implementing their AF already from the 20 G.
p.5 #2 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
JVan_02 wrote:
@Jonas B@ kommer du på Norrköping snart?
Won't make you struggle with my imperfect Swedish for this next bit Low light AF is why I think the 35 GM is gonna be my next lens—don't wanna get the 40 G and find out that it doesn't completely solve the problems I already have with my Batis 40. I can barely use that lens between mid October till mid February. Would hate to buy another 2.5 lens and find out that despite Sony's better AF implementation my 7 III still hunts constantly in the Swedish winter.
@JVan_02: Nja... nej, jag planerar ingen tur till Norrköping. Synd att du inte är lite närmare Göteborg. Å andra sidan är det långt till vintermörkret också. Kanske har du en lösning på dina AF-problem vid det laget.
I don't really understand your AF problem... Are you saying your Batis can't AF at down to the A7 III minimum specified EV value for AF?
Using the A7C I don't notice any significant difference when it comes to AF speed between the 40G and the 35GM. Then I haven't tried every possible situation of course. The 40G simply delivers and I've settled with that.
p.5 #3 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
Jonas B wrote:
Nja... nej, jag planerar ingen tur till Norrköping. Synd att du inte är lite närmare Göteborg. Å andra sidan är det långt till vintermörkret också. Kanske har du en lösning på dina AF-problem vid det laget.
Håller jag med dig. Inte nämare alls untanför flygplanen.
Jonas B wrote:
I don't really understand your AF problem... Are you saying your Batis can't AF at down to the A7 III minimum specified EV value for AF?
Essentially, yes. I don't really know how to rephrase it from what I've specified in this thread, so if you can give me some specific questions I can give you a specific answer.
How this pertains to the 40 G is that while I know Sony optics at f1.8/2 do an alright job on the α7 III in poor indoor lighting, the 40 G will be at 2.5... which is a bit more uncertain. Additionally, those brighter optics usually come with more transmission at a given aperture—so while my 20 G might work at 2.5, the 20 G might actually be T 2.5 or 2.8 while the 40 G might be T 3.2—3.5 for example. I've seen that it works pretty well in bad lighting on an α7c, but the α7c has a full stop -EV rating to its AF.
p.5 #4 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
JVan_02 wrote:
(...)
How this pertains to the 40 G is that while I know Sony optics at f1.8/2 do an alright job on the α7 III in poor indoor lighting, the 40 G will be at 2.5... which is a bit more uncertain. Additionally, those brighter optics usually come with more transmission at a given aperture—so while my 20 G might work at 2.5, the 20 G might actually be T 2.5 or 2.8 while the 40 G might be T 3.2—3.5 for example. I've seen that it works pretty well in bad lighting on an α7c, but the α7c has a full stop -EV rating to its AF. ...Show more →
Nothing is to be taken for sure in this world, that's true.
But, you may be thinking a bit too much about all this.
To check your claim in this particular case I arranged a setup this way:
An old Kodak grey card against a wall, the A7C on tripod pretty close so the grey card filled the frame, two LED lights (one from left and one from the right) provided the light.
Camera settings was MF (set to infinity), A mode, center weighted metering. WB Auto.
OK. I took an image with the 40G wide open. The camera reported a shutter speed of 1/50 sec and ISO100. Then I switched to the 35GM and set the aperture to 2.5. The camera again reported 1/50 and ISO100.
The two images were loaded in ACR and I "measured" the brightness in the center of the image using the sample tool:
The 40G measured 159, 158, 159 for the RGB values.
The 35GM measured 156, 155, 155.
Checking the EXIF values using EXIFTool the reported shutter speeds were 1/50 and 1/48 (Sony2-value) for the 40G and 1/50 and 1/50 for the 35GM. That probably means something but I chose to ignore it.
The petimeter (Swedish for finicky freak) will then complain about a number of things ending up with the "obvious" conclusion that this test is worth less than a used paper towel found at a public restroom.
It might be so. I say that for all practical use chances are quite big that f/2.5 with the 35GM and the 40G are more or less equivalent with regards for light transmission in the center of the image at f/2.5.
That may mean something for you or it may not, it depends on the details at your place I guess.
p.5 #5 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
Jonas B wrote:
Nothing is to be taken for sure in this world, that's true.
But, you may be thinking a bit too much about all this.
To check your claim in this particular case I arranged a setup this way:
An old Kodak grey card against a wall, the A7C on tripod pretty close so the grey card filled the frame, two LED lights (one from left and one from the right) provided the light.
Camera settings was MF (set to infinity), A mode, center weighted metering. WB Auto.
OK. I took an image with the 40G wide open. The camera reported a shutter speed of 1/50 sec and ISO100. Then I switched to the 35GM and set the aperture to 2.5. The camera again reported 1/50 and ISO100.
The two images were loaded in ACR and I "measured" the brightness in the center of the image using the sample tool:
The 40G measured 159, 158, 159 for the RGB values.
The 35GM measured 156, 155, 155.
Checking the EXIF values using EXIFTool the reported shutter speeds were 1/50 and 1/48 (Sony2-value) for the 40G and 1/50 and 1/50 for the 35GM. That probably means something but I chose to ignore it.
The petimeter (Swedish for finicky freak) will then complain about a number of things ending up with the "obvious" conclusion that this test is worth less than a used paper towel found at a public restroom.
It might be so. I say that for all practical use chances are quite big that f/2.5 with the 35GM and the 40G are more or less equivalent with regards for light transmission in the center of the image at f/2.5.
That may mean something for you or it may not, I don't know....Show more →
Really grateful you went to the trouble at least! Still, not sure how I can interpolate this to the α7 III's low light AF capabilities. Wish I lived closer
p.5 #6 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
jhinkey wrote:
For me it's not Bokeh that's a deal breaker. My deal breakers are:
- Is it sharp from wide open and really sharp stopped down: The 40G is pretty good across the frame from wide open and modest improvement stopped down (on my A7RIII). So it's OK in this regard.
- Is it sharp when getting near MFD: Yes this lens doesn't seem to lose anything when focusing up close.
- Does it have terrible lens flare/ghosting: This lens appears to be acceptable to pretty good.
- Does it have decent sun stars: Supposedly yes, though I have not tested that myself.
- Is it light: Yes
- Is it compact: Yes if you use a 49mm inverted lens hood instead of the OEM hood.
Is this lens the sharpest 35/40/45mm lens? No. But I suspect this lens is geared towards the A7C crowd as a compact travel lens, and in this regard it's well worth the price. It's at least on par, if not a bit better then the 35/2.8 Zony which I've had for a long time.
I may send my copy back as I'm not convinced it's perfectly centered, but I've seen enough to want to have a copy in my bag and lens drawer....Show more →
Can you compare rendering with the Zony 35 f2.8? I'm very interested in having something smaller to compliment a 35 GM purchase
p.5 #7 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
JVan_02 wrote:
Really grateful you went to the trouble at least! Still, not sure how I can interpolate this to the α7 III's low light AF capabilities. Wish I lived closer
There could be other optical oddities at play here, cf. Sigma 45/2.8 C. Not necessarily the same though.
PS. Petimeter has the same meaning in Norwegian. We may have borrowed it from French/English => Latin.
p.5 #9 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
jhinkey wrote:
Took both out last night, but didn't get a chance for any rendering shots. Here's two similar bokeh-less landscape shots from the 40G and 35/2.8.
Thanks, from looking at these two I will just keep my 35/2.8 ZA, as planned. The difference between them appears small.
p.5 #10 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
For the same amount of money as the Sony 40/2.5 G you can also get either of Sony 35/1.8 FE, Sigma 35/2 DG DN C and Sigma 45/2.8 DG DN C, the latter slightly less. The Sony 35/1.8 FE has got a 55mm filter thread, so it won’t appear large. Sigma 45/2.8 C is known for nice rendering and AF issues that go hand in hand.
p.5 #11 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
bjornthun wrote:
Thanks, from looking at these two I will just keep my 35/2.8 ZA, as planned. The difference between them appears small.
Yes, I can find little image difference between them for the most part, though:
- Nice to have slightly longer FL and slightly faster lens for making the background out of focus at moderate distances
- The aperture ring and AF/MF switch are very nice on the 40G
- The manual focusing experience is better on the 40G
Really, at this point, the 35/2.8 has size and slightly more wide-ness going for it.
p.5 #13 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
More from the day up on Granite Mountain with the 40G.
Took the 21/3.5 CV, 40/2.5G, and 85/4ZM (though no shots with the ZM due to the overcast conditions).
p.5 #14 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
It's now three weeks since I started this thread. During this time the 40G has been mounted to the camera more and more: I find that I seldom switch to any other lens as I did in the beginning. When trying a new lens out you never know if the lens will work with you or if it will get in the way in one way or another.
Sure, the bokeh could have been a notch softer, it could have been faster and some more. But it works, it works well and (as somebody said) it gets the job done.
The weight and size make me bring the camera also when not planning for anything.
Here is a snap of the entrance to a junk yard I passed while driving a local street.
AF, wide open. A one second job and knowing the image would be OK.
Samples and opinions are welcome - I understand the 40G isn't is a lens for the typical forum member here. But let's see what it will be used for! Traveling and memories only? Something else as well?
p.5 #15 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
Jonas B wrote:
I understand the 40G isn't is a lens for the typical forum member here. But let's see what it will be used for! Traveling and memories only? Something else as well?
I think it will be attractive to lots of the forum members when size considerations are paramount.
The 40 G will fit easily into a saddlebag and will become my main horse trail-riding lens. Perfect size and FL for that application.
Same for longer hikes.
p.5 #16 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
I'm enjoying mine. Great for opportunistic snaps, just as I used the 35/2.8ZA but I enjoy this lens a lot more (focal length preferred and ergonomics / features - esp. manual focus experience vastly better than the 35/2.8, used in this photo to focus on eyeball).
p.5 #17 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
Tough one. I bought the 45mm 2.8 Sigma but I may pick this up to replace my Voiglander 40mm 1.4 classic. I do like the focal length a lot and would appreciate AF while keeping the size down.
p.5 #18 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
Jonas B wrote:
I understand the 40G isn't is a lens for the typical forum member here. But let's see what it will be used for! Traveling and memories only? Something else as well?
smpetty wrote:
I think it will be attractive to lots of the forum members when size considerations are paramount.
The 40 G will fit easily into a saddlebag and will become my main horse trail-riding lens. Perfect size and FL for that application.
Same for longer hikes.
Yes, when size and weight are important factors. But, also when considering the feature set, the haptics (not perfect but a better focusing ring and aperture ring than the 35GM for example), the fast and silent AF, good flare resistance, the high contrast and resolution also close up.
It could have been a tad more developed with regards to image quality but you'll get sharp and nice images with no fuzz.
The reason for me to believe not too many here are interested in the 40G is that it lacks the typical features so often discussed in this forum: the transition zones/the bokeh aren't very smooth and it doesn't add any extra free magic to your images. Then again, not many lenses does that.
p.5 #19 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
Love the size and look of the lens. IQ wise, Sigma i35 is the direct competitor. I think i35 wins in every department if you are indifferent about 35mm vs 40mm. In the case where you are trying to go as small as possible, the 40G's size is significant.
p.5 #20 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
gordec wrote:
Love the size and look of the lens. IQ wise, Sigma i35 is the direct competitor. I think i35 wins in every department if you are indifferent about 35mm vs 40mm.
Not if you wanted to use the 35i at distances under a meter wide open. Indoors, this can be a rather significant location—but I'd say this is probably a fair judgement otherwise based on preference.
Low light AF is why I think the 35 GM is gonna be my next lens—don't wanna get the 40 G and find out that it doesn't completely solve the problems I already have with my Batis 40. I can barely use that lens between mid October till mid February. Would hate to buy another 2.5 lens and find out that despite Sony's better AF implementation my 7 III still hunts constantly in the Swedish winter. 
