p.10 #2 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
Yeah, I think I'm going to use this a lot. I'm kind of surprised, it really does focus faster than my 50mm 2.5. A few reviews noted this, but it's more noticeable then I thought.
I just know I'm going to get these mixed up. Will probably walk out of the house with the 50 instead of the 40 visa versa. Ha, I should probably put a piece of tape on one of them just as an added reminder.
p.10 #6 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
ftllens wrote:
wow this is a nice lens
Are you going to pick it up? Haha. Probably still the best do-it-all prime if you consider weight/size as a significant factor. Wish I had an α7C to pair it with, but I'll get a C II or III down the line assuming they're made. My only complaint remains the lack of f2—the new 15 1.4 G is basically the dream form factor/spec. Hope we see it in a 35mm format one day.
Some candid samples for this thread where I find it absolutely unparalleled.
p.10 #8 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
So I haven’t had a chance to go though all 10 pages here but I’m wondering if anyone has done a comparison of the 40mm f/2.5 G and the Zeiss Batis 40mm f/2 CF? I know the Batis much larger but since I had that 40mm I bought the FE 50mm f/2.5 G instead. The Batis is very nice and I like 40mm a lot even though I also use 35mm and 50mm. Now I may be regretting this since I am using these on my A7C kit where I have duplicated some of my focal lengths for that kit I am trying to keep small.
Also interested in any comparison to the Sigma 35mm f/2 DG DN iSeries Contemporary which I also have as a small AF lense in this range ( for MF I’ve always had the Zeiss Loxia 35/2 and 50/2 since they first came out many years ago).
So if you’ve seen any comparisons and you can provide a link please let me know. Thank you for your time. Take care.
p.10 #9 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
Here ya go. Rereading it, I think the only thing I'd like to add is that recently I've noticed a difference in color reproduction for greenery as well along that same yellow/blue infusion split.
I still pull out my CF every once in a while, but if I have to sell off a lens it's definitely going to be the Zeiss. The 40 G just outstrips it so far along almost every category of utility it's hard to compare the two in terms of actual usefulness. The Zeiss does have a slightly nicer image though, and when I don't really care if I get the images and I don't really mind the extra size/weight I'll take it along. It's a nice addition to my kit, but if I hadn't gotten it first I definitely never would have.
p.10 #10 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
After riding my mountain bike at the local trails, a few guys rolled into the parking lot. One of the guys had just put on new rims and they wanted to take some pictures. After I saw them pulling out their phones, I offered my help. Handed them a business card and offered to take some pics for free. I had my camera with 40G along just in case I found some inspiration. I think I need to keep my old travel tripod in my truck for such opportunities. We lost the light very quickly.
p.10 #11 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
on a whim with little research into it, decided to pick up this little lens. It just arrived so we’ll see how it goes. I think it could be a real handy daily carry.
p.10 #12 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
twoeye wrote:
This little lens is my most used lens these days. Some samples, cross-posted from the FE images thread:
I found this lens quite mediocre compared to a host of similar focal length FE lenses I tried around the same time. This post is proof that the photographer is far more important than tiny differences in the kit. Absolutely fantastic photos in the mountains, I'm sure a lens of this tiny size is very welcome on such a journey
p.10 #13 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
newdom wrote:
I found this lens quite mediocre compared to a host of similar focal length FE lenses I tried around the same time. This post is proof that the photographer is far more important than tiny differences in the kit. Absolutely fantastic photos in the mountains, I'm sure a lens of this tiny size is very welcome on such a journey
Can you comment in more detail on what you found to be mediocre about this lens and what you have decided to use in this range instead?
p.10 #14 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
swldstn wrote:
Can you comment in more detail on what you found to be mediocre about this lens and what you have decided to use in this range instead?
I found the bokeh and rendering a bit busy - with a comparatively short focal length, f2.5 and 7 blades it's never going to be great I guess. I kept accidentally knocking the aperture ring to f22 when getting it out of the bag for a quick draw photo and then getting bad results, and the buttons/switches were too small/fiddly to use. I compared it against similar-ish size lenses like the Samyang 35/1.8 and Sigma 45/2.8 and preferred both of those optically - in particular the Sigma. Also compared to a bit bigger like the Sony and Sigma 35/2 I much preferred the Sigma optically, and obviously compared to 1.4 offerings it lacks although that's not really a fair comparison.
Saying that, I'm a very mediocre photographer and lean on lens' inherent capabilities to make up for that. The better the lens the more I can mash the shutter button and get some good results. I didn't really find that with the 40/2.5, you really do need some decent skills to get good results! That's what I meant in my comment above - looking at results from a good photographer it's clear this lens can deliver great results. What I did love was the size, weight, build quality and sealing of this lens - it's a beautifully crafted lens. Way too expensive in the UK, although second hand they're more sensible.
I've just ordered the 50G on sale in the UK and really looking forward to trying this form factor again - the 50 is supposed to be nicer optically so probably more suited to me
p.10 #15 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
newdom wrote:
I found the bokeh and rendering a bit busy - with a comparatively short focal length, f2.5 and 7 blades it's never going to be great I guess. I kept accidentally knocking the aperture ring to f22 when getting it out of the bag for a quick draw photo and then getting bad results, and the buttons/switches were too small/fiddly to use. I compared it against similar-ish size lenses like the Samyang 35/1.8 and Sigma 45/2.8 and preferred both of those optically - in particular the Sigma. Also compared to a bit bigger like the Sony and Sigma 35/2 I much preferred the Sigma optically, and obviously compared to 1.4 offerings it lacks although that's not really a fair comparison.
Saying that, I'm a very mediocre photographer and lean on lens' inherent capabilities to make up for that. The better the lens the more I can mash the shutter button and get some good results. I didn't really find that with the 40/2.5, you really do need some decent skills to get good results! That's what I meant in my comment above - looking at results from a good photographer it's clear this lens can deliver great results. What I did love was the size, weight, build quality and sealing of this lens - it's a beautifully crafted lens. Way too expensive in the UK, although second hand they're more sensible.
I've just ordered the 50G on sale in the UK and really looking forward to trying this form factor again - the 50 is supposed to be nicer optically so probably more suited to me ...Show more →
Thank you for the feedback. I actually own the 50G but bought it instead of the 40G because I owned the Batis 40/2 CF already . I had thought about switching but maybe I will reconsider. I did find a mint sigma 35/2 DG DN iSeries and do like it a lot.
p.10 #16 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
Interesting discussion. I agree about judging the lens as mediocre (if "mediocre" is the same as optically average for a modern lens).
My conclusion is at page 1, post 9. That was in May last year but I haven't changed my opinion.
There is no linear relation between smooth rendering and the number of aperture blades. Remember when comparing lenses wide open there are no aperture blades at all involved... It's the same with maximal aperture size. There is a lot more into it.
Just as many other here I prefer the Sigma 35/2 compared to the 40G. That is most often. Background bokeh at the edges and corners is worse, to my eyes.
The 50G... I have never tried it but from comments and reviews it seem to be pretty much the same as the 40G, some say bokeh is a notch smoother. The focal length is probably the deciding factor here.
I'm probably a worse than mediocre photographer. I like images in general and I like it even better when not getting distracted by too many technical flaws. So, a super good lens should help...
At the same time my best images have been taken with kind of "any lens" - but with a lens and a camera I was very familiar with when shooting. So, finding a camera and a lens working for you and stick to it is a formula working for me. Know your gear.
Really, the 40G works good enough together with some post processing from time to time.
p.10 #17 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
The 40 G is only "mediocre" compared to superlative optics like the 35 GM, the 35 APO Lanthar, the TTArtisan 35 APO, the Sigma 40 Art, the Tamron 35 1.4 SP, the Bigma... or either of the ~$5000 or $8000 35 APOs from Leica.
As someone who's been behind a camera from the 2000's this talk seems a bit silly. 'Oh yeah, one of the best lenses for the focal length in the past ~50 years is also one of the most feature rich, possessing some of the best AF, and is downright petite... but it's not in the shortlist of best lenses ever made for the FL so let's call it mediocre.'
I mean... yes, those lenses I mentioned produce better images. But the tradeoffs in terms of either/both weight and cost are obvious, and of all of them I think only the 35 GM matches it for features.
p.10 #18 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
JVan_02 wrote: The 40 G is only "mediocre" compared to superlative optics like the 35 GM, the 35 APO Lanthar, the TTArtisan 35 APO, the Sigma 40 Art, the Tamron 35 1.4 SP, the Bigma... or either of the ~$5000 or $8000 35 APOs from Leica. [...]
Exactly... as I wrote: optically average compared to modern lenses. You forgot the RX1 and its Sonnar 35/2 but I'm sure that was a one time mishap only... ;-)
Thinking about the cameras and lenses I have used since the 70's the A7C together with the 40G is a marvel in about every aspect of view. Totally usable for great things!
But that can be said about any average lens today, no?
p.10 #19 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
@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.
p.10 #20 · Sony FE 40/2.5 G - A little darling. Samples and opinions welcome!
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.
