The sony 24mm gm has almost zero distortion. The characteristics of the focal length while being very close is expected. Thats why you dont do portraits with 24 usually but its nearly perfect when used from appropriate distance. One of the least distortion in gm lens
Wes, I love your reviews that’s why I’m subscribed. But sheesh this came off a little pessimistic for a review with a high score for the lens. Since you shoot wedding as I used to I found the best case scenario for this lens is the reception. I think it gave my couples the most unique looking photos for the reception. 24mm F1.4 on the dance floor looked out of this world. Way better than the 35mm F1.4.
I have the same problem with the aperture ring on my Sony/Zeiss 35/1.4. I finally put a piece of tape on it overlapping over to the lens body to lock it in A-mode. It is a little funny that old Minolta MD manual focus lenses actually all have a lock switch on the aperture ring. That piece of knowledge must have gotten lost when Sony bought Minolta.
Awesome that you also now reviewed the 24mm GM. I bought this lens as a travel lens because of the lightweight and I love using the 24mm focal length for travel. Not too wide, I can get both landscapes and more if I get closer. Also amazing bokeh for environmental portraits. I’m a bit dissappointed you’re not a big fan of this lens, because I am :) And true, there really is no comparison, no cheaper 24mm 1.8 or something.
Fantastic that you compared it to other lenses in its class. Also, I never understood how wedding shooters are conformable shooting portraits with 24mm lenses. Great review WP. Your easy presentation style is engaging.
I find the 24mm focal length an awkward one for portraits. I generally draw the line around 35mm for indoor work, and work around 85mm for outdoor stuff. But then if I want to create a shot with a huge feel, I'll go all the way down to 16-20mm...but 24 doesn't quite hit either of those sweet spots for me. It's a pretty great focal length for video, though.
I thought this was a great review and I appreciate your scoring system. I thought though that your review comes from the perspective of an wedding or other event shooter and I'm primarily a landscape photographer so I would like to hear your thoughts on shooting landscape with this lens?
I dunno. That batis is a tough sell now it’s barely any smaller and lighter than the 1.4 Sony. Depends what apertures you’re usually sticking to, I guess?
@@WesPerry NIce, that lens looks perfect for video use. The smooth focus and no focus breathing I have seen so far in a couple of shots look promising. Will keep an eye out for your thoughts.
Uhm I used the Sony gm 24 in a pinch for last years oscars reason being my video guy forget his lens so I was stuck using this lens for red carpet with a7riv and it didn’t disappoint focusing wise, very sharp but nothing special. I also tried it out for lowlight runway on my second camera when the model comes to a stop at the the end of the runway and it was just ok. Good review I might add there are several other alternatives I would include in your list The Sony 20mm f1.8 and the Sigma 20mm f1.4 which I highly recommend you review.
I would have mentioned those, but many would say that at the wide end, a 4mm difference is actually too large to consider them for comparable usage anymore. I do hope to review the 20mm 1.8 pretty soon, though.
Many images I see with this lens at f1.4 renders the subject person like a flat (two dimensional) paper figure in front of a flat poster wall background. It lacks depth, 3D-pop, presence or what ever you like to call it. Something you noticed too, or what is your take?
@@WesPerry It is one stop slower, the Batis 25/2, but from what I have seen from it, it has a whole other depth in its rendering and I don't think it is just the f1.4 vs f2 that has to do with it. I skipped the GM24/1.4 and live with 24 mm on f2.8 zooms at the moment. The Batis 25/2 is to expensive for just gaining a stop vs my zooms.
Yeah. Though those batis lenses do tend to have a great look, they’re still always a tough sell these days, now that there are so many other options available.
Sony’s PR has never sent me anything. They don’t answer my emails. The only loaners I get from them is through the Pro Support program. If near the end of the year I haven’t used up my loaners for repairs and such, I’ll get some review hardware.
Hey Wes, I like your reviews. If a lens is in your bag it must be good and worth buying lol Except the 35 1.4 that you always complain about... I personally like the image character especially for the 24mm focal length, I like it better than 16-35 GM @ 24 for portraiture… I find that it has less distortion and more character @ 24 mm. Do you find that it has less distortion?
@@WesPerry I don’t own the 35 1.4 and never tried it however based on your review I would wait for the 35 GM because I don’t want to play the lens lottery… I like my 16-35 GM better than 24 1.4 GM because it’s more versatile however @ the 24 mm focal length I prefer the 24 1.4 especially for portraiture. I prefer the 16-35 GM for landscape photography…
Yes, I am using a rather cheap Canon M50 with my Sigma 16mm and it makes a world of a difference! I also use their 56mm and this is my best lens by far. Tbh, when I tried the Sigma Art lens 24-70 an a Sony A7III, I was shocked by how much better my 16mm looked in comparison.
I got a A7 Mk1 with no ibis so i want to lens with good autofocus? I thinking of getting FE 24mm F1.4 GM please give some advise because I am planning to get a new A7 camera in 2023.
I like to take picture of airplane, Landscape, Astro, Street photography and travel? Next year I want to travel to Japan and i already got Sony FE 50mm F1.8. I want have a run and gun FE 24mm or 16-35mm?
I’m aware of this concept, however it doesn’t apply to the a9, and none of the shoots with the a7Siii were above sync speed, so it didn’t matter there.
@@WesPerry I second that. 20mm really commits you to ultra wide angle while with 24mm you can do more without the perspective distortion screaming at you. Perfect street lens. The 20mm is even better value considering it saves you from needing both "true" (i.e. 16mm) UWA and 24mm, but it is neither.
The lens has almost zero distortion. Now if your talking about the characteristics of the focal length. If u take any 24mm lens and under and get too close to subject ofcourse it will distort. Its not a portrait or close up lens. If u use it from appropriate distance no distortion
The sony 24mm gm has almost zero distortion. The characteristics of the focal length while being very close is expected. Thats why you dont do portraits with 24 usually but its nearly perfect when used from appropriate distance. One of the least distortion in gm lens
Wes, I love your reviews that’s why I’m subscribed. But sheesh this came off a little pessimistic for a review with a high score for the lens. Since you shoot wedding as I used to I found the best case scenario for this lens is the reception. I think it gave my couples the most unique looking photos for the reception. 24mm F1.4 on the dance floor looked out of this world. Way better than the 35mm F1.4.
Hey, I wouldn’t want to spoil the surprise ending 😂
@@WesPerry Now that’s the perfect reply! Lol. 👍🏽💪🏽
Great Review! I love the examples of what the lens produces. Thank you for sharing!
I have the same problem with the aperture ring on my Sony/Zeiss 35/1.4. I finally put a piece of tape on it overlapping over to the lens body to lock it in A-mode. It is a little funny that old Minolta MD manual focus lenses actually all have a lock switch on the aperture ring. That piece of knowledge must have gotten lost when Sony bought Minolta.
They seem to have forgotten a lot of things when they bought Minolta 😏
@@WesPerry Yes, which is a little odd since they took over a lot of their personnel from what I have understood.
👏
Great honest review.
Could you please do a review for the 85mm G lens.
This one?
ruclips.net/video/zMxebmFq1wE/видео.html
The other one 85 mm 1.8
I hope to at some point. It’s never been high on my list of priorities, though, as I’m not a huge fan of the way it renders. It’s a bit too harsh.
Do you have link to your rating sheet?
Your reviews are very organized 👌 love it
docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1nRG739xMX-tQv7TxIcu6m1I5BvNATNxy0uF5TQn20BU/edit?usp=sharing
Awesome that you also now reviewed the 24mm GM. I bought this lens as a travel lens because of the lightweight and I love using the 24mm focal length for travel. Not too wide, I can get both landscapes and more if I get closer. Also amazing bokeh for environmental portraits. I’m a bit dissappointed you’re not a big fan of this lens, because I am :)
And true, there really is no comparison, no cheaper 24mm 1.8 or something.
I thought it was a very solid lens, just not for me, unfortunately. (I actually wanted to love it! Always looking for an excuse for a new lens! Haha)
@@WesPerry You can’t love ‘m all. I have the same with the 35mm. Everyone is crazy about it, but for me that specific focal length just doesn’t do it.
New “rumors” suggest the 35GM is right around the corner! 😉
🤣
And what company was that? 🤔
Fantastic that you compared it to other lenses in its class. Also, I never understood how wedding shooters are conformable shooting portraits with 24mm lenses. Great review WP. Your easy presentation style is engaging.
I find the 24mm focal length an awkward one for portraits. I generally draw the line around 35mm for indoor work, and work around 85mm for outdoor stuff. But then if I want to create a shot with a huge feel, I'll go all the way down to 16-20mm...but 24 doesn't quite hit either of those sweet spots for me.
It's a pretty great focal length for video, though.
I thought this was a great review and I appreciate your scoring system. I thought though that your review comes from the perspective of an wedding or other event shooter and I'm primarily a landscape photographer so I would like to hear your thoughts on shooting landscape with this lens?
This is generally considered a great lens for landscapes due to its high resolving power, and low CA and ghosting.
I am between Sony gm 24 / zeiss 25. Wanna pair with my a7r3 which one do you recommend for street photography. I am also thinking about zeiss 40mm f2.
I dunno. That batis is a tough sell now it’s barely any smaller and lighter than the 1.4 Sony. Depends what apertures you’re usually sticking to, I guess?
There is a Sony Viltrox 24mm 1.8 incoming that looks really good in Video and I believe is at that $500 ish mark.
I’m currently testing the Viltrox ;)
@@WesPerry NIce, that lens looks perfect for video use. The smooth focus and no focus breathing I have seen so far in a couple of shots look promising. Will keep an eye out for your thoughts.
I just purchased this today (before your video) as B&H had it brand new for less than $1100. BTW, I love my 135GM too.
You can never be sure, so I always have to go with MSRP in my value comparisons. Some things go on sale more often than others, though 🤷🏻♂️
Uhm I used the Sony gm 24 in a pinch for last years oscars reason being my video guy forget his lens so I was stuck using this lens for red carpet with a7riv and it didn’t disappoint focusing wise, very sharp but nothing special. I also tried it out for lowlight runway on my second camera when the model comes to a stop at the the end of the runway and it was just ok. Good review I might add there are several other alternatives I would include in your list The Sony 20mm f1.8 and the Sigma 20mm f1.4 which I highly recommend you review.
I would have mentioned those, but many would say that at the wide end, a 4mm difference is actually too large to consider them for comparable usage anymore. I do hope to review the 20mm 1.8 pretty soon, though.
Many images I see with this lens at f1.4 renders the subject person like a flat (two dimensional) paper figure in front of a flat poster wall background. It lacks depth, 3D-pop, presence or what ever you like to call it. Something you noticed too, or what is your take?
I did notice that to a degree, but I wouldn’t find it all that unexpected with such a wide lens.
@@WesPerry It is one stop slower, the Batis 25/2, but from what I have seen from it, it has a whole other depth in its rendering and I don't think it is just the f1.4 vs f2 that has to do with it. I skipped the GM24/1.4 and live with 24 mm on f2.8 zooms at the moment. The Batis 25/2 is to expensive for just gaining a stop vs my zooms.
Yeah. Though those batis lenses do tend to have a great look, they’re still always a tough sell these days, now that there are so many other options available.
Hi! Did you tried out the 85mm Samyang? I saw Viltrox on the list so that's why I'm asking 😄
I'll check your review on the 135mm 😎
Unfortunately I haven’t gotten my hands on one of those yet. Someday...
Have you not done a review on the 50mm?
Which one?
@@WesPerry 50mm f1.2 gm
I guess because it’s $3000 where I live 😂
I’ll try to borrow one sometime though ;)
@@WesPerry they should have sent you one to try. Sony is slacking.
Sony’s PR has never sent me anything. They don’t answer my emails.
The only loaners I get from them is through the Pro Support program. If near the end of the year I haven’t used up my loaners for repairs and such, I’ll get some review hardware.
Hey Wes, I like your reviews. If a lens is in your bag it must be good and worth buying lol
Except the 35 1.4 that you always complain about... I personally like the image character especially for the 24mm focal length, I like it better than 16-35 GM @ 24 for portraiture…
I find that it has less distortion and more character @ 24 mm. Do you find that it has less distortion?
Just for clarity, you’re saying you prefer the 35 1.4 over the...16-35GM or the 24GM?
@@WesPerry I don’t own the 35 1.4 and never tried it however based on your review I would wait for the 35 GM because I don’t want to play the lens lottery…
I like my 16-35 GM better than 24 1.4 GM because it’s more versatile however @ the 24 mm focal length I prefer the 24 1.4 especially for portraiture.
I prefer the 16-35 GM for landscape photography…
Oh yes, that all makes sense. I do use my 16-35GM a lot more than I expected to when I first bought it.
Enjoyed the video and tend to agree with a lot of your points.
Enjoyed the comment and tend to agree with a lot of your points.
My Sigma 16mm (24mm full frame equivalent on the A7iii) is razor sharp, light and cheap
I hope to try it out someday!
Yes, I am using a rather cheap Canon M50 with my Sigma 16mm and it makes a world of a difference! I also use their 56mm and this is my best lens by far. Tbh, when I tried the Sigma Art lens 24-70 an a Sony A7III, I was shocked by how much better my 16mm looked in comparison.
Although it’s becoming increasing less of a difference, generally speaking you’ll get better performance out of a prime lens than a zoom.
I got a A7 Mk1 with no ibis so i want to lens with good autofocus? I thinking of getting FE 24mm F1.4 GM please give some advise because I am planning to get a new A7 camera in 2023.
What do you shoot?
I like to take picture of airplane, Landscape, Astro, Street photography and travel? Next year I want to travel to Japan and i already got Sony FE 50mm F1.8. I want have a run and gun FE 24mm or 16-35mm?
16-35 and 24GM are very different lenses!
I want to choose one travel len and I like to shoot landscape and street photography.
You'll get smoother and more uniform bokeh if you turn off electronic first curtain shutter :)
I’m aware of this concept, however it doesn’t apply to the a9, and none of the shoots with the a7Siii were above sync speed, so it didn’t matter there.
Love this lens !
Great video!
I own and like this lens for playground photos of my kids
I think I’d want a longer lens so I could do it from the bench 😂
There is the 20mm 1.8 G better price value.. You should compare them two..
Many would say the two focal lengths are too far apart to truly compare. Wouldn't mind doing it anyway. haha
@@WesPerry I second that. 20mm really commits you to ultra wide angle while with 24mm you can do more without the perspective distortion screaming at you. Perfect street lens. The 20mm is even better value considering it saves you from needing both "true" (i.e. 16mm) UWA and 24mm, but it is neither.
i used to own this, and i remember it distorted my friend’s face wayyy too much
The lens has almost zero distortion. Now if your talking about the characteristics of the focal length. If u take any 24mm lens and under and get too close to subject ofcourse it will distort. Its not a portrait or close up lens. If u use it from appropriate distance no distortion
First :)
🥳