DavidBM wrote:
Ah, don’t bother Fred.
Coatings and surfaces matter for flare reasons, but the days when we cared about light transmission because we were worried we couldn’t use our preferred ASA of film if the lens was .2 of a stop less transmissive than the f stop suggested, or we had a digital camera that was terrible above base ISO are long gone. Video shooters may want to know, but it’s not a reason for choosing a lens, so they can wait to test their personal copies.
Also, at wide aperture, where there is a lot of vignetting, how to you test for t-stop? Average transmission will be misleading, and lead to overexposure in the centre. I suppose you have to test for transmission dead on axis, and then provide vignetting figures at various places off axis. A lot of work for not much benefit!...Show more →
Maybe you don't care, but for astrophotography it matters. If say the 35GM is a t-stop of 1.4 (doubtful but according to Dxomark some sony lenses have f-stop and t-stop equal), then even though vignetting is worse, it probably is just as useful as the Sigm 40 1.4 given how sharp it is and how good its coma is. (Not sure about distortion)
And yes, you would need to meter off the center of the image and then compare on there but a relative comparison should be easy. Also, and maybe this is just the lenses I played with, but the difference between t-stop and f-stop is not dependent on whatever f-stop the lens is set at. (i.e. light loss is constant across all f-stops) so that would help the vignetting issue. So you could shoot all of them f8 and that should help too.
Schlotkins wrote:
Maybe you don't care, but for astrophotography it matters. If say the 35GM is a t-stop of 1.4 (doubtful but according to Dxomark some sony lenses have f-stop and t-stop equal), then even though vignetting is worse, it probably is just as useful as the Sigm 40 1.4 given how sharp it is and how good its coma is. (Not sure about distortion)
And yes, you would need to meter off the center of the image and then compare on there but a relative comparison should be easy. Also, and maybe this is just the lenses I played with, but the difference between t-stop and f-stop is not dependent on whatever f-stop the lens is set at. (i.e. light loss is constant across all f-stops) so that would help the vignetting issue. So you could shoot all of them f8 and that should help too.
Yes, if you are doing a lot of wide field astrophotography without a tracker them e.g. a .2 stop of transmission could reduce the number of exposures you need in your stack a little. My point about average transmission was just that often quoted T-stop is sometimes average, or weighted average, so you need to be careful if you using it for metering purposes.
Since many FM members are trying to decide on these two lenses, I've updated the infinity comparison to the Voigtlander 35mm f/2 APO-Lanthar including crops at f/2.2, f/2.5 and f/11 for both lenses:
So I got my copy of the 35 GM a week ago. I feel super lucky to have one but the top left and top right corners of my copy are definitely weaker in comparison to the bottom corners. I really dont want to return it. I cant get another copy for a while. Has anyone sent a lens to Sony for an issue like this? Would they align it, or send me a new one? Is it worth going down this path, or would it be better to return it and wait for a different copy? I have until this Thursday to decide. Any advice would be much appreciated. Thanks!
smmerz56 wrote:
So I got my copy of the 35 GM a week ago. I feel super lucky to have one but the top left and top right corners of my copy are definitely weaker in comparison to the bottom corners. I really dont want to return it. I cant get another copy for a while. Has anyone sent a lens to Sony for an issue like this? Would they align it, or send me a new one? Is it worth going down this path, or would it be better to return it and wait for a different copy? I have until this Thursday to decide. Any advice would be much appreciated. Thanks!...Show more →
I'd like to know this as well. I got a copy of the 24 GM that is far below the perfect example in Fred's review.
smmerz56 wrote:
So I got my copy of the 35 GM a week ago. I feel super lucky to have one but the top left and top right corners of my copy are definitely weaker in comparison to the bottom corners. I really dont want to return it. I cant get another copy for a while. Has anyone sent a lens to Sony for an issue like this? Would they align it, or send me a new one? Is it worth going down this path, or would it be better to return it and wait for a different copy? I have until this Thursday to decide. Any advice would be much appreciated. Thanks!...Show more →
Depending on what's causing the problem, it may not be able to be fixed: lenses only have a certain amount of adjustability built in, and this depends on their design (some have none at all); we won't know unless Roger at Lensrentals does a teardown.
I'd be returning it for sure...
smmerz56 wrote:
So I got my copy of the 35 GM a week ago. I feel super lucky to have one but the top left and top right corners of my copy are definitely weaker in comparison to the bottom corners. I really dont want to return it. I cant get another copy for a while. Has anyone sent a lens to Sony for an issue like this? Would they align it, or send me a new one? Is it worth going down this path, or would it be better to return it and wait for a different copy? I have until this Thursday to decide. Any advice would be much appreciated. Thanks!...Show more →
I think the question to ask yourself is whether later on you will regret not returning it? If so, return it.
The Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM is well corrected for distortion. There is no profile for Lightroom yet but when available, it won't do much to the image. Outstanding correction, similar to Voigtlander 35mm f/2 APO and Loxia 35mm f/2 Biogon.
Samples below with No correction in-camera or in-post.
FE 35mm f/1.4 GM very low distortion. Perhaps only a -1 barrel distortion in LR but it's not even needed.
Before I even compare these two lenses the Sigma may have no shot staying in my bag. Distortion is a big issue for me. But I'm hoping someone may want my Sigma after I'm done. Rather not send it back.
I have not been paying attention to this 3 or 4 lens quandary. So I'll come in with virgin thoughts. Lol
Btw I tested the Sigma already and in C1 the distortion can be corrected quite nicely. But that can take a lot of time and many times I don't have it
The FE 35mm f/1.4 GM has Sony's Extreme Aspherical elements (XA) and the designers are not afraid to place a huge aspherical as the first element. The specular highlights' inner structure is very clean with only traces of onion pattern which would not be visible in real images. There is some visible outlining but not out of the ordinary.
CENTER | CLOSE DISTANCE: At f/1.4 and f/2: Perfectly circular with only small traces of onion pattern
CENTER | CLOSE DISTANCE: At f/2 and f/2.8: Still circular
CENTER | CLOSE DISTANCE: At f/2.8 and f/4: At f/4 and smaller, a hendecagon shape starts to form but this would not be noticiable in real images
EXTREME CORNER | CLOSE DISTANCE: At f/1.4 and f/2: Cat's eyes when wide open but not extreme
EXTREME CORNER | CLOSE DISTANCE: At f/2 and f/2.8: Round at f/2 and f/2.8 at the corners at close distance
EXTREME CORNER | MID DISTANCE: At f/1.4 and f/2: When wide open and at mid-distance, optical vignetting is higher and we get a bit more of cat's eye bokeh, but it's already well-controlled at f/2
EXTREME CORNER | MID DISTANCE: At f/2 and f/2.8: Both round for f/2 and f/2.8
EXTREME CORNER | INFINITY DISTANCE: At f/1.4 and f/2: This is the worse cat's eye will get (infinity). You may see something similar when your subject is focused further than 10m.
EXTREME CORNER | INFINITY DISTANCE: At f/2 and f/2.8: Round again at f/2.8
The FE 35mm f/1.4 GM has outstanding close-up performance. FLE elements help keep a high resolution level high even at minimal focus distance (MFD) and wide open.
Spherical aberration (SA) is well corrected making rendering neutral with no glow or low contrast.
Bokeh for loosely framed shots could be better. I took some shots on the GM this weekend that raised some flags. So I tested again against the Bigma...this time framed a bit loose as I had been framing kind of tight when I tested previously. Environmental portraits where you frame wide because you want to pull the background in....not the GM's strong suit.
The crazy thing is that I still really like the lens and may end up in a bizarro world with 35i, Bigma, and 35GM in my bag. They all have very specific strengths and weaknesses, and I have multi purpose needs out of the 35mm focal length.
The Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM is well corrected for distortion. There is no profile for Lightroom yet but when available, it won't do much to the image. Outstanding correction, similar to Voigtlander 35mm f/2 APO and Loxia 35mm f/2 Biogon.
Samples below with No correction in-camera or in-post.
Fred, after the last Lightroom update it appears to be showing a Lightroom profile for this lens. Just FYI.
