Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

2 3 4 end

Two years of the Sony Small G Trio: User Experiences & Comments?

chiron
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Two years of the Sony Small G Trio: User Experiences & Comments?

The Sony small G trio of lenses has now been out for two years. How do people like them after having had them for a while?

I was looking forward to these lenses because of their small size and the likelihood that they would better the autofocus of the Sigma i series. But I wound up not getting any of them, for various critical reasons. But I now think I may have been wrong not to go after them.

My major hesitation was the question of rendering. But I recently had a chance to use the 50/2.5 G and I find that I like the rendering and colors very much and I have decided to buy the lens for a very small and lightweight travel lens.

Do the the 40/2.5 G and the 24/2.8 G have similar rendering and colors?

Edited on Apr 28, 2023 at 05:06 PM · View previous versions

Apr 28, 2023 at 03:43 PM

Alan Parker
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Two years of the Sony Small G Trio: User Experiences & Comments?

I'm personally also not sure how to feel about these. They are compact and beautifully made, but the specs and fall short in my opinion.
At least here in Europe I feel like you pay much more than the value I think you're getting. Not that the Sigma I series is any better in this regard.
They are however a compelling option for the A7C series, mostly aesthetically.

Apr 28, 2023 at 04:10 PM

StoneCrop
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Two years of the Sony Small G Trio: User Experiences & Comments?

I can’t comment on the similarity to the other g series, but I have the 40g and what I’d say about its rendering is that I think it’s good enough, but doesn’t have what I’d consider special rendering like my Batis 40 or CV 40. I also have the Samyang 45, which also has a good enough rendering, but not particularly special. For some reason I haven’t been able to let go of any of them (well I let go of the CV but later bought it again). They work great on a gimbal! And they’re probably at least as good as a zoom that covers their focal length.

Apr 28, 2023 at 04:13 PM

Tarekith
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Two years of the Sony Small G Trio: User Experiences & Comments?

The 40G is one of my favorite lenses, I love the way images look with it and it’s super sharp with decent control over any color fringing. I’ve tried two of the 24Gs at this point, but neither of them was as sharp as my 40mm, so I ended up selling or returning them.

They are great lenses when I had the A7C, and the 40mm continues to be a great lens with my A7IV.

Apr 28, 2023 at 04:17 PM

newdom
Online
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Two years of the Sony Small G Trio: User Experiences & Comments?

I've had the 40G first and I really didn't like it - I hated the small dials and buttons and thought it felt cheap, but most importantly the rendering/bokeh just wasn't very good, certainly not as good as the Samyang or Sigma 35s.

Then I had the 50G which I really liked - the rendering/bokeh is much nicer and I just didn't bother using the rings/buttons.

Then I got the A7C and it all made sense. I think these little lenses are actually a bit too small and lacking on the bigger bodies, but they make perfect sense for the smaller A7c. I wish they had made them just a little bit bigger and squeezed f2 and a bit better rendering and bigger buttons/rings. Maybe in a v2. They're also hugely overpriced in the UK at least.

Apr 28, 2023 at 04:52 PM

chiron
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Two years of the Sony Small G Trio: User Experiences & Comments?

Alan Parker wrote:
I'm personally also not sure how to feel about these. They are compact and beautifully made, but the specs and fall short in my opinion.
At least here in Europe I feel like you pay much more than the value I think you're getting. Not that the Sigma I series is any better in this regard.
They are however a compelling option for the A7C series, mostly aesthetically.

---------------------------------------------

StoneCrop wrote:
I can’t comment on the similarity to the other g series, but I have the 40g and what I’d say about its rendering is that I think it’s good enough, but doesn’t have what I’d consider special rendering like my Batis 40 or CV 40. I also have the Samyang 45, which also has a good enough rendering, but not particularly special. For some reason I haven’t been able to let go of any of them (well I let go of the CV but later bought it again). They work great on a gimbal! And they’re probably at least as...Show more →

---------------------------------------------

Tarekith wrote:
The 40G is one of my favorite lenses, I love the way images look with it and it’s super sharp with decent control over any color fringing. I’ve tried two of the 24Gs at this point, but neither of them was as sharp as my 40mm, so I ended up selling or returning them.

They are great lenses when I had the A7C, and the 40mm continues to be a great lens with my A7IV.

---------------------------------------------

newdom wrote:
I've had the 40G first and I really didn't like it - I hated the small dials and buttons and thought it felt cheap, but most importantly the rendering/bokeh just wasn't very good, certainly not as good as the Samyang or Sigma 35s.

Then I had the 50G which I really liked - the rendering/bokeh is much nicer and I just didn't bother using the rings/buttons.

Then I got the A7C and it all made sense. I think these little lenses are actually a bit too small and lacking on the bigger bodies, but they make perfect sense for the smaller A7c....Show more →

Most of the reviews of these lenses find them to be optically very good and mechanically well made. They are surprisingly small and also very light. They go perfectly on an A7C and also fit my A9 very nicely. They wouldn't be disparate on any Sony body prior to the bigger bodies--were the A9II and the A7RIV the first of those?

As I read the reviews about rendering--and only going by those who seem sensitive to it and take it to mean more than how much blur there is--the rendering of the 50 gets real praise. For example, Dustin Abbott thinks it has strong appeal and is special. The 24's rendering seems to register as good but nothing to jump up and down about. And the 40 people seem to have different opinions about.

I love the Sigma i series 45/2.8, but I think the 50 might make a good lens to have with it to get excellent rendering with also excellent autofocus. I think that I am likely to prefer the rendering of the Sigma by a bit, but no one can say the Sigma is top level autofocus. It would be nice to have excellent rendering and excellent autofocus in a small and light lens that is easy to travel with or to take anywhere.

Edited on Apr 28, 2023 at 06:42 PM · View previous versions

Apr 28, 2023 at 05:17 PM

darrellc
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Two years of the Sony Small G Trio: User Experiences & Comments?

I have the 40/2.5 and like the Zeiss 35/2.8 before it, no one seems to love it and yet I have many keepers from both lenses. Partially because it is so small that I tend to carry my A7R4 with it all the time as it is light and unobtrusive (eg I threw it on my shoulder this am to drive my kids to school, just in case) therefore I end up taking lots of pics with it, some of which are keepers despite rendering that would not match a better lens.

But the 40/2.5 has strengths. It is very sharp at all distances and apertures, it nails AF all of the time and bokeh can actually be good in some cases. And it makes a great video lens (sans breathing).

Apr 28, 2023 at 06:06 PM

araudan
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Two years of the Sony Small G Trio: User Experiences & Comments?

I have the 40G and the 24G. I use the 40G all the time. It is my most used lens. I use it on my A7RIII. I do like the results with the 24G but I also have th 20G which gets more use. I bought the 40G used which made the price easier to accept. I was given the 24G as a gift. Since I had the 20G I likely wouldn't have bought it myself. When packing light the 24G and 40G (or 50G) are great.

Apr 28, 2023 at 07:32 PM

280zAl
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Two years of the Sony Small G Trio: User Experiences & Comments?

araudan wrote:
I have the 40G and the 24G. I use the 40G all the time. It is my most used lens. I use it on my A7RIII. I do like the results with the 24G but I also have th 20G which gets more use. I bought the 40G used which made the price easier to accept. I was given the 24G as a gift. Since I had the 20G I likely wouldn't have bought it myself. When packing light the 24G and 40G (or 50G) are great.

Hence I really like the new 20-70mm even though ppl were going crazy cause its a f4

Apr 28, 2023 at 08:01 PM

araudan
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Two years of the Sony Small G Trio: User Experiences & Comments?

280zAl wrote:
Hence I really like the new 20-70mm even though ppl were going crazy cause its a f4

I do think that lens is a great idea. But I have the 20G and th 24-105G that I'm happy with. I couldn't justify a change in my own mind. Plus the primes are just so light in hand. I think I enjoy that most of all.

Apr 28, 2023 at 08:07 PM

chiron
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Two years of the Sony Small G Trio: User Experiences & Comments?

araudan wrote:
I do think that lens is a great idea. But I have the 20G and th 24-105G that I'm happy with. I couldn't justify a change in my own mind. Plus the primes are just so light in hand. I think I enjoy that most of all.

Yes, I agree that the 20-70/f4 is a very useful zoom. But any zoom would be very different in use than the G trio. The smallness and lightness of those lenses and the fact that they require you to use a single focal length and that they autofocus so quickly makes the experience very different than using even a medium size zoom lens.

A light, small lens makes for a different way of shooting and of thinking in the shooting situation, at least for me. While Leica people will bust a gasket if they read this, small, light lenses, especially on a small body like the A7C, confer a Leica-like experience and imaging capability in terms of being a small, quick, unobtrusive camera--which is what the Leica was first prized for.

That is one of the reasons (along with its special rendering) that I have so much liked the Sigma 45/2.8.

Apr 28, 2023 at 08:20 PM

chiron
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Two years of the Sony Small G Trio: User Experiences & Comments?

darrellc wrote:
I have the 40/2.5 and like the Zeiss 35/2.8 before it, no one seems to love it and yet I have many keepers from both lenses. Partially because it is so small that I tend to carry my A7R4 with it all the time as it is light and unobtrusive (eg I threw it on my shoulder this am to drive my kids to school, just in case) therefore I end up taking lots of pics with it, some of which are keepers despite rendering that would not match a better lens.

But the 40/2.5 has strengths. It is very...Show more →

Dustin Abbott gives the 40/2.5 good marks for its rendering, noting only some slight outlining of highlights, which is not the thing that I care about the most in terms of rendering. The dozen or so examples he gives do seem to show a very smooth and appealing out-of-focus area, with good colors and contrast. Abbot does a better job on rendering, in my view, than most other reviewers (Fred excepted).

Apr 28, 2023 at 08:25 PM

jeffbuzz
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Two years of the Sony Small G Trio: User Experiences & Comments?

The little G lenses need to be evaluated on the proper context. They are specifically designed for the compact a7C. Compared to similarly sized lenses, the Sony G's offer many features other do not: more physical controls, linear AF motors, real weather sealing, de-clickable aperture rings. I'm looking at these paired with my a7C as a better quality alternative to a compact camera or my phone. I am not expecting these lenses to compete with bigger glass that weighs and costs two or three times as much.

Optically they are quite good for "pancake" style lenses. All have good center sharpness with soft corners wide open. The 40 and 50mm corners clean up to an acceptable level by f/5.6. The 24mm not so much.

The 24mm is definitely the weakest optically of the three. That's not surprising and it is consistent with other wide angles of that size. I think Sony should have gone to an f/3.5 of f/4 design on that lens to get better consistency across the frame. I would not buy that lens intending to take expansive landscapes with corner to corner sharpness. But again, compared to a phone or small sensor compact it might give far better results.

The 40mm and 50mm are a toss up on quality. I picked the 40mm because I actually prefer that focal length and it has slightly better MFD compared to the 50mm. Is it as good as the Batis 40 f2? No. But it's also half the size and half the price.

Apr 28, 2023 at 08:49 PM

QuietOC
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Two years of the Sony Small G Trio: User Experiences & Comments?

My copies of the 24 G and 40 G were/are quite sharp in the corners wide-open, but I wouldn't be surprised if that varied some copy-to-copy. I don't miss the 24 G. The 40 G is not my favorite lens, but it is the best 40 mm I've had so far. It is wider than the Sigma 45 which is the widest 45mm I've had. And I have a bunch of 35's.

Apr 28, 2023 at 10:08 PM

chiron
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Two years of the Sony Small G Trio: User Experiences & Comments?

jeffbuzz wrote:
The little G lenses need to be evaluated on the proper context. They are specifically designed for the compact a7C. Compared to similarly sized lenses, the Sony G's offer many features other do not: more physical controls, linear AF motors, real weather sealing, de-clickable aperture rings. I'm looking at these paired with my a7C as a better quality alternative to a compact camera or my phone. I am not expecting these lenses to compete with bigger glass that weighs and costs two or three times as much.

Optically they are quite good for "pancake" style lenses. All have good center sharpness...Show more →

The reviews I have read of the 50 all state that it is very sharp across the frame (see Dustin Abbot, pcmag.com's Imatest studies on the A7rIV, and Camerlabs). I have read the reviews of the 40 more briefly, but I think the findings for ita re similar to the 50. I haven't read reviews on the 24, but I would be at least a bit surprised if it were very different from the other two. Sample variation on your 40 may be at play here (or field curvature?).

The limitation on these lenses appears to be some weaknesses in rendering, but I think what some reviewers (e.g., Cameralabs) mean by that is simply that the maximum aperture of the lenses is not sufficient to fully de-focus the background. But that is not really what I think is rendering, which is much more complicated than simply full blurring. Dustin Abbott, who I think does a decent job of judging rendering, gives the 50 very high marks and the 40 quite good marks on how they render. And for many shots, shooting with a narrower aperture is desirable anyway in order to give a sense of context and to get enough dof for the key elements of the picture.

I agree with you they are perfect lenses for the A7C, but I wouldn't limit them to that body. Even on an A1 or A7RV, they lighten the load very considerably while still yielding very high resolution and a pleasing look. Nice for travel and for taking along.

Apr 28, 2023 at 10:30 PM

QuietOC
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Two years of the Sony Small G Trio: User Experiences & Comments?

chiron wrote:
The limitation on these lenses appears to be some weaknesses in rendering, but I think what some reviewers (e.g., Cameralabs) mean by that is simply that the maximum aperture of the lenses is not sufficient to fully de-focus the background. But that is not really what I think is rendering, which is much more complicated than simply full blurring.

I compare at the same relative aperture. These compact G's are busier than some other lenses at the same aperture. The FE 1.8/35 and 1.8/85 have a similar weakness. Far from the worst, but some other lenses are noticeably better at least when compared back-to-back. The AF advantage of these Sony lenses is often quite clear too.

Apr 28, 2023 at 10:53 PM

chiron
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Two years of the Sony Small G Trio: User Experiences & Comments?

QuietOC wrote:
I compare at the same relative aperture. These compact G's are busier than some other lenses at the same aperture. The FE 1.8/35 and 1.8/85 have a similar weakness. Far from the worst, but some other lenses are noticeably better at least when compared back-to-back. The AF advantage of these Sony lenses is often quite clear too.

Yes, I think there is a lot of agreement that G lenses' backgrounds are a bit busier or perhaps at least more definite. The Sigma 45/2.8 has the advantage of the 40 G or the 50 G on rendering. And the G lenses have the advantage over the Sigma in quickly catching eyes, or anything else you target, in very sharp focus. But I do quite like what I have seen of the rendering of the 50, at least, and I am still looking at the 40.

My thought is to keep the Sigma, which I love, for when its limitations on autofocus don't matter. And to use the 50 for those occasions when quick autofocus is critical, as with most situations involving people. And I'll see the images over time and decide which I like better or if I like both.

Apr 28, 2023 at 11:30 PM

tzhang4284
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Two years of the Sony Small G Trio: User Experiences & Comments?

I wish Sony made the 40mm f2.5 as a 35mm f2.5 - the non-standard focal length is annoying enough for me where I still want an updated true compact 35mm lens. That or give us a sharp compact 28mm lens that can give the Leica Q2 a run for its money.

Apr 29, 2023 at 02:35 AM

JVan_02
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Two years of the Sony Small G Trio: User Experiences & Comments?

I have to the left of my keyboard right now a book filled with photos mostly from the 40G, and having used it for over a year at this point I can say with the exception of its aperture there is nothing stopping you from making any image you'd like with the lens. Do not take this as a dismissal either—my 55 ZA certainly struggled to keep up with the erratic movement of my younger children, a lens like the 45i (or to a lesser extent, the 35i or Samyang 35 1.8 FE) would need to be managed in terms of SA as distances came under a meter (often necessary for smaller subjects), my 40 CF was unreliable, and my more recently acquired 35 GM is much more easily spotted and objected to when my son's not in the mood for pictures at the moment. The AF is (with sufficient light provided) the best I've seen in a Sony lens, the controls are all there, the weight is sublime, and the IQ—it's worst feature—is still excellent. To be honest, the only reason it seems to fall a bit flat is that the industry has made some of its greatest leaps in its history in the past ~5-10 years.

Since getting the 35 GM, there's only been one reason that I keep going back to it in good lighting—and it's a matter of time saving, not capability. The 35 GM is optically better in every category, but looking at prints the GM won't be showing the G up too much in terms of resolution or bokeh. They're better for sure, but the flaws we see clearly on sharp monitors don't really even display that often in print. What really brings me back to the GM is I find I often need to adjust the colors much less. Perhaps there's some fundamental shortcoming of the α7 III not present in newer models, but the WB on the 40 G is often just a touch too warm for my tastes and I find that I can save so much more time on 35 GM files by just not needing to adjust the color.

Again, the photobook right to the left shows that getting the colors (and everything else) right on the 40 G is possible, certainly. With that as the standard, and seeing its size, it's a really remarkable lens. I plan at some point to get a matching α7C/CII to give my wife so someone can finally take pictures of me for family photobooks

Apr 29, 2023 at 03:21 AM

ramesesthe2nd
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Two years of the Sony Small G Trio: User Experiences & Comments?

All super compact lenses have compromises:

Sigma I Series: AF system. IMO AF is acceptable on all I lenses except the 45mm. 45mm is borderline useless for any moving subject. Sigma in general seems to struggle more with AF than all other vendors in the Sony ecosystem. I feel rendering and IQ of Sigma I series lenses are better than other alternatives in this category.

Sony Compact G: Busy, point and shoot, style rendering. Expensive for what you get for your money. Image sharpness is the key priority of these lenses, not bokeh and rendering. I wish Sony kept 20 G qualities and rendering with the G line up, but clearly the focus of this series shifted after A7C came out.

Samyang: Try to mimic the IQ and rendering style of Sony lenses (Zony 35/2.8, Zony 55/1.8, FE 35/1.8, etc.) and it comes pretty darn close in performance to comparable Sony lenses. Build quality is the bottom of the barrel, and the software updates are too many and require a proprietary dock. However, Samyang lenses usually cost less than half of Sony and Sigma lenses. I recently picked up Samyang 45 to replace my Sigma 45 I. Dustin Abbott praised this lens a lot and I was quite frustrated with the AF on my Sigma 45 I. I am still figuring out how I like the IQ and rendering, but it beats Sigma 45 hands down on AF. The bokeh feels a little busy for my taste and a lot like classic Voigtlander lenses to my eyes, i.e., not as smooth and pleasing as Dustin Abbott claims in his videos.

Tamron: Distortion and fat lenses. I don't know why Tamron was so focused on making all their lenses 67mm diameter in size. Compact primes are not mid-range zooms, but apparently Tamron felt it needed to keep the same diameter on all its lenses.

Sony compact G lenses are not bad lenses, but they offer little to nothing extra to stand out from the rest in this crowded segment. The GM lenses are more expensive than comparable alternatives too, but they always provide extra something that is hard for competitors to replicate.

Edited on Apr 29, 2023 at 12:13 PM · View previous versions

Apr 29, 2023 at 06:19 AM

1 2 3 4 end
FM Forums \| Sony Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 end

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.