Sony FE 12-24mm f/2.8 GM Review - Sony Forum - Photography

Current versionSaved Aug 18, 2020 at 06:10 PMTitle changed

Sony FE 12-24mm f/2.8 GM Review

Let’s wait for field curvature, flare, rendering, coma, and sunstars. But there’s no question how much of a bargain the 14-24 is when it comes to resolution (and probably coma).

I suspect Fred’s completed review will reveal some challenges Sony will have in moving a $3000 lens once the insta-buy crowd gets their copy, esp. with this level of competition from Sigma. In a year, and at closer to 2300 I could see Sony selling a bunch more.

Jman13 wrote:
Thanks for the test. Sigma looks better at 14mm to my eye, but Sony is better at midfield at the mid and long end (but same or worse at the corners). In all, there's so little real world difference between the two that I would have an extremely hard time justifying $1600 more for the Sony unless 12mm was absolutely essential in my wide zoom. And it's not.

Version 2Saved Aug 18, 2020 at 05:24 PM

Re: FM Review: Sony FE 12-24mm f/2.8 GM

Let’s wait for field curvature, flare, rendering, coma, and sunstars. But there’s no question how much of a bargain the 14-24 is when it comes to resolution (and probably coma).

I suspect Fred’s completed review will reveal some challenges Sony will have in moving a $3000 lens once the insta-buy crowd gets their copy, esp. with this level of competition from Sigma. In a year, and at closer to 2300 I could see Sony selling a bunch more.

Jman13 wrote:
Thanks for the test. Sigma looks better at 14mm to my eye, but Sony is better at midfield at the mid and long end (but same or worse at the corners). In all, there's so little real world difference between the two that I would have an extremely hard time justifying $1600 more for the Sony unless 12mm was absolutely essential in my wide zoom. And it's not.

Original postPosted Aug 18, 2020 at 05:20 PM

Re: FM Review: Sony FE 12-24mm f/2.8 GM

Let’s wait for field curvature, flare, rendering, coma, and sunstars. But there’s no question how much of a bargain the 14-24 is when it comes to resolution (and probably coma).

I suspect Fred’s completed review will reveal some challenges Sony will have in moving a $3000 lens once the insta-buy crowd gets their copy, esp. with this level of competition from Sigma

Jman13 wrote:
Thanks for the test. Sigma looks better at 14mm to my eye, but Sony is better at midfield at the mid and long end (but same or worse at the corners). In all, there's so little real world difference between the two that I would have an extremely hard time justifying $1600 more for the Sony unless 12mm was absolutely essential in my wide zoom. And it's not.