Again, thank you so much for these amazing reviews, Dustin. I have been a full time working photographer for 15 years now and these days your reviews are the first place I go when thinking of buying new gear. Just ordered the 35GM. I received the 24GM last month and I have shot about 5 weddings with it now and absolutely love it!
Thanks for the review, Dustin. I’ve already purchased this lens but was curious about what you thought anyway. It’s definitely a no fuss lens that gets the job done.
2:56, Watched dozens reviews of this lens sofar and of course it must be only you who shows us that amazing case of this lens! Kudos to Sony and Bravosima to you for breaking down all these excellent level products as great as it's even possible! The fact, it's not only us as customers who should appreciate your awesome work, the manufacturers from all brands should treasure your work for making their products shine the way they deserve!
Nice review. I hope one day I can afford this lens. For now I am using its younger sister 35mm f1.8. Still very good in my opinion. You brought back some childhood memories at 13:17 :) my parents used to give me that 100 draxma growing up in Thessaloniki and I used to buy ice cream with it that comes with a little toy. Good Times.
Great review especially the IQ tests. Sony has indeed found a magic formula and using it on all the recent GM lenses, and even some of the G lens like the 20mm f1.8. Another advantage over the Sigma that shouldn't be ignored is the AF, especially when using an A9 or an A1.
Been using the lens for over a month now.. Truthfully.. There is only 2 cons.. 1) It isnt the cheapest lens. Of cos.. It's a GM... 2) If you do alot of video.. the focus breathing is pretty bad? not excellent. But. If you dont do video.. then this is not a concern at all. So in a nutshell.. I'll say.. if you dont do video or dont do video with 35mm.. and the price of lens isnt a issue to you. Well. It is all good. This lens is 1) Small. 2) light 3) AF very fast n quiet 4) Very sharp 5) low distortion n Coma 6) Nice color 7) Smooth Bokeh What else you can ask for. oh.. 8) The MFD is nearer than most 35mm. Maybe more good point but I'll leave it as it is.. To me .. This lens is really a winner..
I definitely enjoy using this lens. The close focusing and out of focus areas are extremely important for me - thank you for confirming what I suspected for comparison to the Sigma. Another factor for me will be the need for the lens to handle 20 fps compressed raw in low light no flash allowed events on the A1 wherever that camera will finally get to me (out of stock everywhere).
When the rumors were out that this lens was coming I said to myself that I wasn't going to consider it if it were over 525g, haha. Sony seems to have delivered on that expectation, and basically just never stopped when it comes to this 35mm. I actually appreciate the focus breathing, as its telescopic nature adds magnification capability that otherwise wouldn't be there-and portraits with this optic will be just that little more flattering. Of course, I don't do video. If I could make one change, I guess it would be this exact package in a 35mm 1.8 or 2 G setup for even greater weight & price savings but from your review and everyone else's first looks this seems to be an optic worth saving up for even a lot of hobbyists-especially when making the comparison like you did against the Canon L II offering. Thanks as always for the great review!
Love the lens. Focus breathing is strong but i would not go as far as to say that it is horrible for video as some of the comments here suggest. Yes it's less than ideal if you are moving towards or away from the lens but that doesn't negate it's ability to focus super fast and maintain a nice image for interviews, weddings etc.
Fantastic review! Was very excited for this lens review. Wow what an amazing optical formula. The lack of close serious field curvature makes this a really nice landscape lens. Sony really nailed it with this lens. The hype around this was definitely real. Can't wait to see your 50 1.2 GM review next. Might add some more GM primes to my kit as the GAS is kicking in again after a long pause hehe.
Get the feeling the vignette is also related to the relative size of the Sony. And if size Is a big factor you might go with the Sony 35 f1.8. But if 35 is your favorite focal length, I can see splashing out for the GM. Maybe the lens profile in the software people use in post will negate the vignette with little to no loss in quality?
With a limited budget for lenses... even though it seems like a great lens, it is hard to justify the cost for a fixed lens when there are solid zooms in the 20s-70s range. I'd love to see a comparison between a quality zoom lens shooting at 35mm vs the fixed focal to see just how much better the fixed lens is. I know it would be better but just how much better?
That's fair, though it is equally fair to say that those zooms aren't touching the image quality of this lens and don't provide the depth of field and creative options at the 35mm focal length that this lens will.
@@DustinAbbottTWI i completely agree you lose a lot going from 1.4 to 2.8 as far as bokeh goes. I was mainly curious about how similar the sharpness and detail in the picture quality would be. In no way am I bashing the GM lenses... I've heard nothing but good things about them.
@@ufosaboveus probably not much of a difference in details and sharpness when at the same aperture…. I have a 16-35mm F/4 Zeiss and will get a 35mm GM just for the sake of the F/1.4, i use the Zeiss for landscape and architecture, but the GM will be for portraits and street photography, which the big aperture will help in both bokeh / dof / and faster shutter speeds.
It seems like a lot of people are using the 35mm 1.8 for video use to get over the focus breathing, but it does seem like this GM 35 does better for stills.
High Dustin. Thanks for a great review . Bought the lens, really enjoying it, but don't like the way it pulses on focus when in single shot. My 85mm 1.8 doesn't have the same issue. Do you think it's faulty ? I have seen issues online from people with the 24mm GM. Many thanks, Andy.
Every now and then a high end Sony lens surprises me in this way. I rarely shoot in single shot, myself, so I don't often encounter it. I haven't seen this issue with my own copy of the 35GM which I purchased this month.
Hi Dustin, I am as concerned with Image Quality and the Quality of my Lenses as any photographer is, and I must always remind myself that the content of what I capture is more important than the Image Quality! Since you gave the Sony 24-240mm f/3.5-6.3 OSS Lens such a bad review I sold it and bought the Sony 35mm f/1.4 GM. The 35GM is a better lens than my Zeiss Batis 85mm f/1.8. I wish Sony would make a 85GM mark II with the XD Linear Motors, Because the original 85GM is like a lame duck. I am glad to see you reviewing Sony Lens again, Sony G & GM lenses are the only ones I am interested in buying these days. If I had the courage I would have all Sony GM Prime Lens in my kit, except for on the wide end where I would have the Sony 12-24GM. I just don't see how any lens could be better than that one.
I just purchased this lens and the 24mm f/1.4 gm . I release like it . I was hesitant on this lens and almost went for the Sigma Art f/1.2 . I really like the images from that lens but in the end size won over . I just watched your review of the Sigma 65mm f/2 and have been looking at this lens or maybe and the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 dg dn . I like that 65 mm fov. I shoot live music photography and videography. 65 seems to help tell a story and still isolate like the 85. I don’t particularly like the 50mm fov . I have 24,28,35 and 40mm fov. 24 and 35 for my new Sony a7siii. Thinking 85 then saw this focal length. From 35 to 65 is a good gap feel I think and I need something kind of tight for a gimbal sometimes. This may be just the ticket . What do you think ?
I just purchased the Sigma 65mm f/2 several hours ago . This was in part because of your review of it . I have the fe 24mm gm on my a7siii at the moment. Just shot into the sun with it and it retained great contrast with very little ghosting and flaring. I shot it wide open and at f/16 . This is why I got the Sony 24 and 35mm f/1.4 G Masters . I plan on getting the 135 gm f/1.8 and I’m up in the air on the 14mm gm f/1.8 or the 12-24 gm f/2.8 . I love being able to drop down to f/2 or bigger on that aperture. I love primes also but in fast action live music photography being able to zoom to frame on the ultra wides is handy. I also need very fast autofocus on my wide angle lenses. Sony has now given me this with these G Master lenses. My Nikon dslr bodies and my Sigma and Tamron wide to ultrawides focus a little to slow and won’t lock onto a subject very well in these lighting conditions. Heck even my Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8 e fl vr hunts . Even more than my Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 Art . It’s actually my fastest focusing lens in these bad lighting conditions. The 70-200 e is blazing fast in good light though.
So again no surprise that the "sweet spot" of the Sony 35mm 1.4 GM are around aperture 4.0, back in the "good old" analog days, we used to say that a lens had it´s optimum performance when stopped down 2 to 3 (sometimes 4) stops
NO! I own that lens (as well as the 20 G, the Sigma 65 and 105 macro) and it is incredible sharp at f/1.4 right into the corners at every focussing distances. I am using an A7R4 and I am blown away! The only reason to close down the aperture is for the depth of field.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Unfortunately today many consider a lens sharp when it is sharp in the center, to me a lens are sharp when most of the whole frame are close to equal sharp, bokeh or not bokeh, but you do not get a 35mm to get bokeh, you get it for having a wide angle and lot of depth of field.
I suspect you didn't actually watch the review, as you would then known that this lens is sharper in the corners at F1.4 than many classic lenses were in the center at much smaller apertures.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I did, but the "law of lens design" have not changed that much, it is just much faster with computer and software today to create very good lenses, if you want the best of a lens with sharpness from corner to corner without vignetting and distorting and other "funny stuff"" then you have to stop the lens down, that said I will really rather read a review, it takes muh too long time to watch a review.
In your comparision at 21:30, I find the sigma to have a MUCH nicer character. Creamy is not always good. I think about purchasing a 50 1.2, and the character is my main fear with it. It's possible that I just go with the sigma 40 mm 1.4 for that reason, that one has really fine bokeh.
@@DustinAbbottTWI it might have something to do with how the light catches in the fence, but I prefer that the bokeh of the sigma shows more of the structure. Especially in the transition from sharp to blurred I like to create some guiding lines with the bokeh, probably coming from a stronger outline of the bokeh circles. I need to get myself one of these bubble-bokeh lenses, not for the stupid bubbles, but to test wether my theorie is correct that the outlines are what I want. At least I know that the lens I find most displeasingly boring is the100mm STF lens. I really can't stand that look. As it stands, I really love the bokeh I get from a Takumar 50 1.4. You are obviously correct, character and bokeh are really subjective, and not every character is right for every picture. I just found the example you chose very striking.
It seems that Sony has surpassed Canon as a leader when it comes to lens design. They are really pushing the boundaries of what is possible with the latest GM lenses, despite the alleged limitations of E mount.
I wouldn't say better. The Sony is close on those things, but the chief advantages will be larger aperture, autofocus, weather sealing, and general usability. I own and love the 35GM.
Wow. What a bokeh! Is it really the lens or does Sony do some tricks in software? Unfortunately no one I know tests these lenses adapted to Nikon, then we would get some insights. How does the bokeh compare to the Sigma f1.2?
I'm skeptical that there is any software assistance, and I've never known a camera to aid bokeh through electronics. The Sigma would be able to generate more blur due to the larger aperture, but I think the quality of the GM blur is better.
As this lens is so sharp, you will find in other discussions on forums that the bokeh can look a bit sharp or busy with certain backgrounds (leaves) at certain distances.
@@DustinAbbottTWI www.kamera-express.be/sony-fe-35mm-f-1-4-gm-sel35f14gm-syx- this is the link to one of the "cheaper" shops. Its so stupid, why those high euro prices???
@@billx4266 Hah, I know the feeling. It is literally twice as expensive as the Sigma 35 1,4 DN here in Sweden. Yes "buy nice or buy twice" but nice isn't 18999SEK (vs 9490SEK). Nice review by the way, very thorough.
Ah, you are showing your ignorance. If you compare it to a small leica manual focus lens, then yes, it's is larger. But when you use the word "huge", you are instantly ignorable.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Compared to a Leica or Canon 35 1.4. or even the the Nikkor 35 1.4 IS . . Not only are these mirrorless lenses huge but I think they are all ugly to boot. Said the same thing about all the modern AF lenses compared to say the Classic Nikkor AIS legacy glass. Not only are they ugly but if you look on the lens you will see a#10 with arrears around it. That tells you where Sony thinks that in 10 years the lens will be in the landfill or recycled. lol . Getting back to the size. Iv used my Canon 34 1.8 rangefinder on my Sony Mirrorless and it was a really fast and compact unit. Not sure why Sony cant make a equally small lens in manual focus for the Mirror less system. I am all about using owning and carrying fast glass. But only f1.4 ? How come they dont make an 35 mm f1.0. If its going to be huge < I want it to be fast. F1.4 was fast 30 years ago. Where are the F1.0 /f0.95 ?
@@scrollop Everything is relative :) I think my Canon 50 F0.95 is huge , where as I think of my NIkkor 800 5.6 IF-ED AIS to be reasonal when compared to the 43 pound Pentax 800 F4 for 6X7 I used to own. As far as showing my ignorance. Your right, I a not up to speed on all the AF crap out there. Even If I could afford it , and I cant, I wouldn't be caught dead using it. lol. Sorry I still like to focus for myself. FOR me Photography is more than just pressing a button and letting the camera have all the fun. Now that AF actually works most of the time. Where is the challenge and gratification in doing it for yourself ?
@@gregoryrogalsky6937 😅 I have vintage glass too my friend I just tried shooting them with moving kids good luck getting anything in sharp focus! Modern glass are much sharper and AF gets you in focus with multiple shots. You aren't a professional photographer otherwise you wouldn't say such silly things.
![[#2024MAMA] ROSÉ (로제), Bruno Mars - APT. | Mnet 241122 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dgGqD28J6aQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Just bought this lens last week. Lemme go ahead and sit down and get my confirmation on a solid purchase. lol
Mission accomplished.
On the same boat.
Again, thank you so much for these amazing reviews, Dustin. I have been a full time working photographer for 15 years now and these days your reviews are the first place I go when thinking of buying new gear. Just ordered the 35GM. I received the 24GM last month and I have shot about 5 weddings with it now and absolutely love it!
Thanks for the kind feedback. I have no question that you'll also enjoy the 35GM. It's a beautiful lens.
Subtle lens flex at around 19:00 can't wait for the review of that one!
It's a pretty fab lens. I'll drop my review next week.
Glad this lens lived up to the early hype, it's superior in virtually every way. Great work Dustin Abbott on another excellent review.
Couldn't agree more!
Thanks for the review, Dustin. I’ve already purchased this lens but was curious about what you thought anyway. It’s definitely a no fuss lens that gets the job done.
Exactly.
2:56, Watched dozens reviews of this lens sofar and of course it must be only you who shows us that amazing case of this lens! Kudos to Sony and Bravosima to you for breaking down all these excellent level products as great as it's even possible! The fact, it's not only us as customers who should appreciate your awesome work, the manufacturers from all brands should treasure your work for making their products shine the way they deserve!
Glad it was helpful!
Been waiting for this! The most comprehensive lens reviewer on RUclips!
Thank you for the nice compliment.
Nice review. I hope one day I can afford this lens. For now I am using its younger sister 35mm f1.8. Still very good in my opinion. You brought back some childhood memories at 13:17 :) my parents used to give me that 100 draxma growing up in Thessaloniki and I used to buy ice cream with it that comes with a little toy. Good Times.
Great review especially the IQ tests. Sony has indeed found a magic formula and using it on all the recent GM lenses, and even some of the G lens like the 20mm f1.8.
Another advantage over the Sigma that shouldn't be ignored is the AF, especially when using an A9 or an A1.
Agreed. Owning the "faster" cameras has made me more aware of the limitations of third party vs first party lenses in terms of speed.
Been using the lens for over a month now.. Truthfully.. There is only 2 cons.. 1) It isnt the cheapest lens. Of cos.. It's a GM...
2) If you do alot of video.. the focus breathing is pretty bad? not excellent. But. If you dont do video.. then this is not a concern at all.
So in a nutshell.. I'll say.. if you dont do video or dont do video with 35mm.. and the price of lens isnt a issue to you. Well. It is all good. This lens is 1) Small. 2) light 3) AF very fast n quiet 4) Very sharp 5) low distortion n Coma 6) Nice color 7) Smooth Bokeh
What else you can ask for. oh.. 8) The MFD is nearer than most 35mm. Maybe more good point but I'll leave it as it is.. To me .. This lens is really a winner..
That's a pretty fair nutshell.
I definitely enjoy using this lens. The close focusing and out of focus areas are extremely important for me - thank you for confirming what I suspected for comparison to the Sigma. Another factor for me will be the need for the lens to handle 20 fps compressed raw in low light no flash allowed events on the A1 wherever that camera will finally get to me (out of stock everywhere).
That's become a real and important point for consideration with native Sony lenses and these high powered bodies.
When the rumors were out that this lens was coming I said to myself that I wasn't going to consider it if it were over 525g, haha. Sony seems to have delivered on that expectation, and basically just never stopped when it comes to this 35mm.
I actually appreciate the focus breathing, as its telescopic nature adds magnification capability that otherwise wouldn't be there-and portraits with this optic will be just that little more flattering. Of course, I don't do video. If I could make one change, I guess it would be this exact package in a 35mm 1.8 or 2 G setup for even greater weight & price savings but from your review and everyone else's first looks this seems to be an optic worth saving up for even a lot of hobbyists-especially when making the comparison like you did against the Canon L II offering.
Thanks as always for the great review!
It's impressive how light it is.
Love the lens. Focus breathing is strong but i would not go as far as to say that it is horrible for video as some of the comments here suggest. Yes it's less than ideal if you are moving towards or away from the lens but that doesn't negate it's ability to focus super fast and maintain a nice image for interviews, weddings etc.
Agreed
Fantastic review! Was very excited for this lens review. Wow what an amazing optical formula. The lack of close serious field curvature makes this a really nice landscape lens. Sony really nailed it with this lens. The hype around this was definitely real. Can't wait to see your 50 1.2 GM review next. Might add some more GM primes to my kit as the GAS is kicking in again after a long pause hehe.
I'm really looking forward to doing the 50 GM review and comparing it to my 50mm F1.4 Planar
Can't wait for the big boy review GM 50
Me too. I don't have one lined up yet, however.
Hi Dustin, if you had to choose between the 24mm GM and the 35mm GM, which one would you kept if portrait is not the main use ? I use Sony A7R2.
I prefer the 35mm myself.
Get the feeling the vignette is also related to the relative size of the Sony. And if size Is a big factor you might go with the Sony 35 f1.8. But if 35 is your favorite focal length, I can see splashing out for the GM. Maybe the lens profile in the software people use in post will negate the vignette with little to no loss in quality?
That's actually a very moderate amount of vignette relative to many other 35mm options.
With a limited budget for lenses... even though it seems like a great lens, it is hard to justify the cost for a fixed lens when there are solid zooms in the 20s-70s range. I'd love to see a comparison between a quality zoom lens shooting at 35mm vs the fixed focal to see just how much better the fixed lens is. I know it would be better but just how much better?
That's fair, though it is equally fair to say that those zooms aren't touching the image quality of this lens and don't provide the depth of field and creative options at the 35mm focal length that this lens will.
@@DustinAbbottTWI i completely agree you lose a lot going from 1.4 to 2.8 as far as bokeh goes. I was mainly curious about how similar the sharpness and detail in the picture quality would be. In no way am I bashing the GM lenses... I've heard nothing but good things about them.
@@ufosaboveus probably not much of a difference in details and sharpness when at the same aperture…. I have a 16-35mm F/4 Zeiss and will get a 35mm GM just for the sake of the F/1.4, i use the Zeiss for landscape and architecture, but the GM will be for portraits and street photography, which the big aperture will help in both bokeh / dof / and faster shutter speeds.
It seems like a lot of people are using the 35mm 1.8 for video use to get over the focus breathing, but it does seem like this GM 35 does better for stills.
I think that's a fair assessment.
High Dustin. Thanks for a great review . Bought the lens, really enjoying it, but don't like the way it pulses on focus when in single shot. My 85mm 1.8 doesn't have the same issue.
Do you think it's faulty ? I have seen issues online from people with the 24mm GM.
Many thanks,
Andy.
Every now and then a high end Sony lens surprises me in this way. I rarely shoot in single shot, myself, so I don't often encounter it. I haven't seen this issue with my own copy of the 35GM which I purchased this month.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks for taking the time to reply. I have contacted Sony, but no reply as yet.
This episode indicated 14gm review will come very soon. I’m also looking forward of 50gm, thank you for your great review as always!
I'm working on the 14mm right now, and hopefully Sony will get me a 50GM soon.
I hope you are testing the Sony 50mm F1.2 GM 🙂
I'm sure I will, but I don't have one sourced yet.
Hi Dustin,
I am as concerned with Image Quality and the Quality of my Lenses as any photographer is, and I must always remind myself that the content of what I capture is more important than the Image Quality! Since you gave the Sony 24-240mm f/3.5-6.3 OSS Lens such a bad review I sold it and bought the Sony 35mm f/1.4 GM.
The 35GM is a better lens than my Zeiss Batis 85mm f/1.8. I wish Sony would make a 85GM mark II with the XD Linear Motors, Because the original 85GM is like a lame duck.
I am glad to see you reviewing Sony Lens again, Sony G & GM lenses are the only ones I am interested in buying these days. If I had the courage I would have all Sony GM Prime Lens in my kit, except for on the wide end where I would have the Sony 12-24GM. I just don't see how any lens could be better than that one.
I agree that the 85mm F1.4 is due for an update.
I just purchased this lens and the 24mm f/1.4 gm . I release like it . I was hesitant on this lens and almost went for the Sigma Art f/1.2 . I really like the images from that lens but in the end size won over .
I just watched your review of the Sigma 65mm f/2 and have been looking at this lens or maybe and the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 dg dn . I like that 65 mm fov. I shoot live music photography and videography. 65 seems to help tell a story and still isolate like the 85. I don’t particularly like the 50mm fov . I have 24,28,35 and 40mm fov. 24 and 35 for my new Sony a7siii. Thinking 85 then saw this focal length.
From 35 to 65 is a good gap feel I think and I need something kind of tight for a gimbal sometimes. This may be just the ticket . What do you think ?
Agreed on the focal length observations.
I just purchased the Sigma 65mm f/2 several hours ago . This was in part because of your review of it .
I have the fe 24mm gm on my a7siii at the moment. Just shot into the sun with it and it retained great contrast with very little ghosting and flaring. I shot it wide open and at f/16 . This is why I got the Sony 24 and 35mm f/1.4 G Masters . I plan on getting the 135 gm f/1.8 and I’m up in the air on the 14mm gm f/1.8 or the 12-24 gm f/2.8 .
I love being able to drop down to f/2 or bigger on that aperture. I love primes also but in fast action live music photography being able to zoom to frame on the ultra wides is handy. I also need very fast autofocus on my wide angle lenses. Sony has now given me this with these G Master lenses. My Nikon dslr bodies and my Sigma and Tamron wide to ultrawides focus a little to slow and won’t lock onto a subject very well in these lighting conditions. Heck even my Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8 e fl vr hunts . Even more than my Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 Art . It’s actually my fastest focusing lens in these bad lighting conditions. The 70-200 e is blazing fast in good light though.
Sometimes watching your reviews comes with expensive consequences...
LOL - so I've been told.
Thanks for a great review of a great lens
Glad it was helpful!
Gorgeous close up of your daughter at 22:01, Dustin!
May God bless and keep you and your family save!
Thanks, you too!
Excellent and valuable review, as usual
Thanks again!
Thanks again for this review! Is anybody can advise if the breathing compensation “new” function works effectively on this lens?
I've got the lens, and yes, it does work pretty well.
Is there a possibility of reviewing the Voigtlaner 35 APO Lanthar f2 especially in comparison to this lens?
Voigtlander doesn't have distribution in Canada, so it is hard for me to get Voigt loaners.
So again no surprise that the "sweet spot" of the Sony 35mm 1.4 GM are around aperture 4.0, back in the "good old" analog days, we used to say that a lens had it´s optimum performance when stopped down 2 to 3 (sometimes 4) stops
NO! I own that lens (as well as the 20 G, the Sigma 65 and 105 macro) and it is incredible sharp at f/1.4 right into the corners at every focussing distances. I am using an A7R4 and I am blown away! The only reason to close down the aperture is for the depth of field.
That's true to some extent, except for this lens is sharper at F1.4 than many of the "good ol" lenses at F4
@@DustinAbbottTWI Unfortunately today many consider a lens sharp when it is sharp in the center, to me a lens are sharp when most of the whole frame are close to equal sharp, bokeh or not bokeh, but you do not get a 35mm to get bokeh, you get it for having a wide angle and lot of depth of field.
I suspect you didn't actually watch the review, as you would then known that this lens is sharper in the corners at F1.4 than many classic lenses were in the center at much smaller apertures.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I did, but the "law of lens design" have not changed that much, it is just much faster with computer and software today to create very good lenses, if you want the best of a lens with sharpness from corner to corner without vignetting and distorting and other "funny stuff"" then you have to stop the lens down, that said I will really rather read a review, it takes muh too long time to watch a review.
In your comparision at 21:30, I find the sigma to have a MUCH nicer character. Creamy is not always good. I think about purchasing a 50 1.2, and the character is my main fear with it. It's possible that I just go with the sigma 40 mm 1.4 for that reason, that one has really fine bokeh.
That's interesting, and goes to demonstrate the point that bokeh is a subjective measure. I completely favor the look of the Sony, myself.
@@DustinAbbottTWI it might have something to do with how the light catches in the fence, but I prefer that the bokeh of the sigma shows more of the structure.
Especially in the transition from sharp to blurred I like to create some guiding lines with the bokeh, probably coming from a stronger outline of the bokeh circles.
I need to get myself one of these bubble-bokeh lenses, not for the stupid bubbles, but to test wether my theorie is correct that the outlines are what I want.
At least I know that the lens I find most displeasingly boring is the100mm STF lens.
I really can't stand that look.
As it stands, I really love the bokeh I get from a Takumar 50 1.4.
You are obviously correct, character and bokeh are really subjective, and not every character is right for every picture.
I just found the example you chose very striking.
In my country sony 35 1.4 GM is 2000usd and the sigma 35 1.4 is 1000usd. Which would you buy with these prices?
That's a big difference. I would probably go with the Sigma under those circumstances.
Sony needs to make 85mm GM mk 2!
Agreed...and I think they will.
It may be an exellent lens, but I think I rather will have the Voigtländer 35mm 2.0 APO-Lanthar, I hope you soon can review the Voigtländer
I was debating that choice too. Check Fred Miranda comparison!
Get Voigtlanders is difficult for me because they have no distribution in Canada.
@@francoisaudet7958 I did see that review, but I always want to see several reviews
It seems that Sony has surpassed Canon as a leader when it comes to lens design. They are really pushing the boundaries of what is possible with the latest GM lenses, despite the alleged limitations of E mount.
I can't disagree. These new GM lenses are universally fantastic.
Color and Micro contrast better then Voigtlander apo 35 f2?
I wouldn't say better. The Sony is close on those things, but the chief advantages will be larger aperture, autofocus, weather sealing, and general usability. I own and love the 35GM.
Wow. What a bokeh! Is it really the lens or does Sony do some tricks in software? Unfortunately no one I know tests these lenses adapted to Nikon, then we would get some insights. How does the bokeh compare to the Sigma f1.2?
I'm skeptical that there is any software assistance, and I've never known a camera to aid bokeh through electronics. The Sigma would be able to generate more blur due to the larger aperture, but I think the quality of the GM blur is better.
As this lens is so sharp, you will find in other discussions on forums that the bokeh can look a bit sharp or busy with certain backgrounds (leaves) at certain distances.
This lens costs 1699 euro here
Wow - that's considerably higher!
@@DustinAbbottTWI Yes thats why i dont buy it here
@@DustinAbbottTWI www.kamera-express.be/sony-fe-35mm-f-1-4-gm-sel35f14gm-syx- this is the link to one of the "cheaper" shops. Its so stupid, why those high euro prices???
@@billx4266 Hah, I know the feeling. It is literally twice as expensive as the Sigma 35 1,4 DN here in Sweden. Yes "buy nice or buy twice" but nice isn't 18999SEK (vs 9490SEK). Nice review by the way, very thorough.
Compact ? Give me a break. These lenses are huge..
Ah, you are showing your ignorance. If you compare it to a small leica manual focus lens, then yes, it's is larger. But when you use the word "huge", you are instantly ignorable.
Compared to what? What autofocusing, high quality 35mm F1.4 lens is smaller and lighter?
@@DustinAbbottTWI Compared to a Leica or Canon 35 1.4. or even the the Nikkor 35 1.4 IS . . Not only are these mirrorless lenses huge but I think they are all ugly to boot. Said the same thing about all the modern AF lenses compared to say the Classic Nikkor AIS legacy glass. Not only are they ugly but if you look on the lens you will see a#10 with arrears around it. That tells you where Sony thinks that in 10 years the lens will be in the landfill or recycled. lol . Getting back to the size. Iv used my Canon 34 1.8 rangefinder on my Sony Mirrorless and it was a really fast and compact unit. Not sure why Sony cant make a equally small lens in manual focus for the Mirror less system. I am all about using owning and carrying fast glass. But only f1.4 ? How come they dont make an 35 mm f1.0. If its going to be huge < I want it to be fast. F1.4 was fast 30 years ago. Where are the F1.0 /f0.95 ?
@@scrollop Everything is relative :) I think my Canon 50 F0.95 is huge , where as I think of my NIkkor 800 5.6 IF-ED AIS to be reasonal when compared to the 43 pound Pentax 800 F4 for 6X7 I used to own. As far as showing my ignorance. Your right, I a not up to speed on all the AF crap out there. Even If I could afford it , and I cant, I wouldn't be caught dead using it. lol. Sorry I still like to focus for myself. FOR me Photography is more than just pressing a button and letting the camera have all the fun. Now that AF actually works most of the time. Where is the challenge and gratification in doing it for yourself ?
@@gregoryrogalsky6937 😅 I have vintage glass too my friend I just tried shooting them with moving kids good luck getting anything in sharp focus! Modern glass are much sharper and AF gets you in focus with multiple shots. You aren't a professional photographer otherwise you wouldn't say such silly things.