Wish there are more portrait samples. Let’s face it, one of the biggest reasons you’ll get this lens is for portraits. I’m tired of reviewers shooting plants, rocks, trees, and other inanimate objects. C’mon man.
Big thanks, Ted, for your review of the Sony 85mm F1.4 GM II! I've been counting down the days for this lens to drop and itching to get my hands on it. My Sigma 85mm F1.4 DG DN ART has been my go-to for portraits, but it sounds like this Sony might be the perfect upgrade. I’m excited to see what it can do. Really appreciate your insight!
That this lens is not f/1.2 has me worried E-mount really is the limiting factor that other manufacturers suggested it would be. Leta hope the 50mm focal length isn’t the only 1.2 aperture that E-mount can deliver.
Is the practically imperceptible image difference between f1.2 and f1.4 at 85mm worth going from 650g to over 1KG? The Nikon version is 1160g 🤯. As a previous Nikon Z user, I was crying out for smaller f1.4 high end primes and is one of the reasons why I switched to Sony. You’ll soon get sick of carrying the weight of f1.2 lenses when you realise the resulting image is practically indistinguishable.
I actually like to see how this lens compare to Sigma DG DN Art 85mm F1.4 and that lens came out about 2 years ago on E and L mount. I think the current going price is around $750 which is about $1000 cheaper than Sony GM2.
I'd have preferred a side by side comparision with the GM I so I can see how they render exactly the same image - this would be good in your in depth review
That last comparison (Mrs. Ted, I presume?) was very helpful. The Sony delivers just about the same sharpness as the 75 APO, at least at this image size. One could even argue the Sony was a wee bit sharper. If additional DOF is needed, the Sony could be stopped down any time to f/2, but the 75 APO can’t be dialed back to f/1.4. Seems like a no-brainer: the Sony 85/1.4 GM II + a used A7R V for the price of the 75 APO.
@@blazeboy777 - I am curious to know on what basis you like the Leica more. There is very little to be subjective here. There is nothing in the background, so there is no bokeh, and you cannot compare how the out of focus objects or points of light transition into blur. The lighting and shadows on the wall behind the subject are softer and more smoothly transition in the Sony image, but you would expect that from f/1.4 vs. f/2. The model's hair behind her ears, ear rings, folds on her shirt, etc. away from her face are better defined in the Leica image, again because it's f/2 vs. f/1.4. In the Sony image, these features are softer. At the plane of focus, the Sony at f/1.4 is at least as sharp as the Leica at f/2, which is very impressive. I think the Sony stopped down to f/2 would look identical to the Leica image, since sharpness is already at a peak, and only DOF can improve. I think Sony just proved the 85/1.4 GM II is a far better value than either the Leica SL 75/2 and probably also the SL 90/2 APO Summicron lenses that cost 2.5x.
@@royprasad ofc value no question is sony, but rendering on specific photo is better on leica, I guess f2 makes the trick. So does Leica’s microcontrast tuning. Apo lenses have this look. Where Sony I can’t explain… there is like nothing wrong with photo…. it’s sharp and perfect, but I don’t like it. I know it sounds weird but I had sony a1 and 50mm 1.2 which I also didn’t like how it rendered.
@@blazeboy777 - Other than the DOF, there's really nothing here to compare between the two images, so essentially, what you are saying is, you prefer f/2 to f/1.4. That would also be consistent with your comment about not liking the Sony 50/1.2 on an A1. Which is fine, I accept that. With a faster lens, you can always stop down to f/2, but with a slower lens, you can't open up to a wider aperture. But if f/2 is what you prefer, then there is no need to pay for a faster lens, which would also be heavier and bulkier.
Hmm. Been waiting for this as an upgrade to my 85mm 1.8. But in Australia it's launched at $3000 v Sigma at $1300! Since I upgraded to an A7R v and G-Master 35 &50 mm (plus 70-200 28ii) I have not really used my 85 1.8. Which way to go ???
The original 85/1.4 is optically sounds but it has some AF "quirks" that can get in the way especially for low light situations. I don't use this focal length enough to upgrade.
The "Iris Lock" doesn't really need to be there..the older 85GM and even the newer ones like the 35GM, 50GM..when you put it on "A"..on the aperture ring..its really does a good job of locking and it takes a little bit of force to move it out of that "A" position even if the lens is in a bag moving around..just my opinion..but hey its there and the price point is the same..so not much really to complain about..lol
Very cool! .my older 85 1.4GM just gave out on me..this is a much needed upgrade!... Yes 8 years wait is crazy..I dont mind the 1.4...but to nit pick Sony had 8 years to come out with a 1.2!!!..come on!! certainly no excuses for it..im sorry but fine tuning bokeh and slightly sharper and obviously quicker AF..yes thats all good but why couldn't you put that towards the 1.2!!..lol Yes they can put the analytics and sales and price point behind it to answer the question of why they chose 1.4... but for some of us a 1.2 would be nice and for them to just release a 1.4 II..is kinda disappointing...yes I will pick one up..but if Sigma releases a new 85 1.2..then I might have to certainly rethink about selling this 1.4 II..lol I hope that they will still consider a 1.2 in the future..like the 50mm 1.2/1.4...releases..at least give people an option to choose..lol
Leica price is for often being hand-built with stricter quality-control (hopefully), and then more expense for exclusivity and luxury connotation. These days, they aren't optically superior to the best of the rest.
This lens should have been released two years ago, it’s still outclassed by the Sigma in terms of weight & nearly double the cost. They couldn’t make a f/1.2 because of the 46mm E-Mount, so they elected to build a video-centric 85 Prime, as opposed to a portrait photographer 85 Prime, which Nikon & Canon offers. They can make a 24 f/1.2 Prime with Quad-XD motors & shock the world once again in 2025 in conjunction with the α1ii announcement. Does Sony have the courage to still innovate?
E-Mount can support apertures as wide as f/0.63 which has been well documented. Designing an f/1.2 lens would have increased the size and the price substantially. I think they'll have one eventually, but its the same reason they have 2 versions of the 50mm G Master. Just curious - why on earth would you need a 24mm f/1.2?!?
@@theartofphotography not beyond 58mm. Nikon had the best optical engineers since 1959 and could never push beyond 58mm with F-Mount at 44mm, E-Mount is 46mm, so maybe Sony could get to 62mm, but vignetting in the corners at f/1.2 is unacceptable because Z & RF mounts have 9mm more space on their mount to allow more light to hit the edges of the sensor. When Nikon upgraded from 44mm to 55mm, they immediately proved my point by dropping the 58 f/0.95 Noct & 85 f/1.2. 200 f/1.8 is possible with a 55mm mount, not with a 46mm mount
"They couldn’t make a f/1.2 because of the 46mm E-Mount"... If only we already had an example of a 85mm f1.2 FE made almost 10 years ago... (Mitakon-speedmaster-85mm-f1.2)
Thanks Ted! I switched to Sony about six months ago and bought the original 85mm F 1.4GM. No regrets! Cheers from Australia 🇦🇺
Wish there are more portrait samples. Let’s face it, one of the biggest reasons you’ll get this lens is for portraits. I’m tired of reviewers shooting plants, rocks, trees, and other inanimate objects. C’mon man.
90% of reviews for a 85mm are for portraits already, c’mon man please accept the variety of photographers 😉
Big thanks, Ted, for your review of the Sony 85mm F1.4 GM II! I've been counting down the days for this lens to drop and itching to get my hands on it. My Sigma 85mm F1.4 DG DN ART has been my go-to for portraits, but it sounds like this Sony might be the perfect upgrade. I’m excited to see what it can do. Really appreciate your insight!
I own the first one and it is still my favorite lens to use . 👌🏻
Is this 85 GM II now quiet enough for 4K videos at higher frame rates with A1 and A7RV in camera mikes?
That this lens is not f/1.2 has me worried E-mount really is the limiting factor that other manufacturers suggested it would be. Leta hope the 50mm focal length isn’t the only 1.2 aperture that E-mount can deliver.
Is the practically imperceptible image difference between f1.2 and f1.4 at 85mm worth going from 650g to over 1KG? The Nikon version is 1160g 🤯.
As a previous Nikon Z user, I was crying out for smaller f1.4 high end primes and is one of the reasons why I switched to Sony. You’ll soon get sick of carrying the weight of f1.2 lenses when you realise the resulting image is practically indistinguishable.
Especially as you're getting f/0.95 56mm APS-C equivalent here at quite a small/light package, pretty compelling.
I actually like to see how this lens compare to Sigma DG DN Art 85mm F1.4 and that lens came out about 2 years ago on E and L mount. I think the current going price is around $750 which is about $1000 cheaper than Sony GM2.
will we have a gh7 review?
I would love a 1.2 lens like the Canon, but Sony lenses are getting better and better.
I really want to try this lens for my videos!
I'd have preferred a side by side comparision with the GM I so I can see how they render exactly the same image - this would be good in your in depth review
That last comparison (Mrs. Ted, I presume?) was very helpful. The Sony delivers just about the same sharpness as the 75 APO, at least at this image size. One could even argue the Sony was a wee bit sharper. If additional DOF is needed, the Sony could be stopped down any time to f/2, but the 75 APO can’t be dialed back to f/1.4. Seems like a no-brainer: the Sony 85/1.4 GM II + a used A7R V for the price of the 75 APO.
Just wanted to praise how much I liked leica more when I saw photos :D haha :) guess it's subjective :D
@@blazeboy777 - I am curious to know on what basis you like the Leica more. There is very little to be subjective here. There is nothing in the background, so there is no bokeh, and you cannot compare how the out of focus objects or points of light transition into blur. The lighting and shadows on the wall behind the subject are softer and more smoothly transition in the Sony image, but you would expect that from f/1.4 vs. f/2. The model's hair behind her ears, ear rings, folds on her shirt, etc. away from her face are better defined in the Leica image, again because it's f/2 vs. f/1.4. In the Sony image, these features are softer. At the plane of focus, the Sony at f/1.4 is at least as sharp as the Leica at f/2, which is very impressive. I think the Sony stopped down to f/2 would look identical to the Leica image, since sharpness is already at a peak, and only DOF can improve. I think Sony just proved the 85/1.4 GM II is a far better value than either the Leica SL 75/2 and probably also the SL 90/2 APO Summicron lenses that cost 2.5x.
@@royprasad ofc value no question is sony, but rendering on specific photo is better on leica, I guess f2 makes the trick. So does Leica’s microcontrast tuning. Apo lenses have this look. Where Sony I can’t explain… there is like nothing wrong with photo…. it’s sharp and perfect, but I don’t like it. I know it sounds weird but I had sony a1 and 50mm 1.2 which I also didn’t like how it rendered.
@@blazeboy777 - Other than the DOF, there's really nothing here to compare between the two images, so essentially, what you are saying is, you prefer f/2 to f/1.4. That would also be consistent with your comment about not liking the Sony 50/1.2 on an A1. Which is fine, I accept that. With a faster lens, you can always stop down to f/2, but with a slower lens, you can't open up to a wider aperture. But if f/2 is what you prefer, then there is no need to pay for a faster lens, which would also be heavier and bulkier.
Hmm. Been waiting for this as an upgrade to my 85mm 1.8. But in Australia it's launched at $3000 v Sigma at $1300! Since I upgraded to an A7R v and G-Master 35 &50 mm (plus 70-200 28ii) I have not really used my 85 1.8. Which way to go ???
The original 85/1.4 is optically sounds but it has some AF "quirks" that can get in the way especially for low light situations. I don't use this focal length enough to upgrade.
The "Iris Lock" doesn't really need to be there..the older 85GM and even the newer ones like the 35GM, 50GM..when you put it on "A"..on the aperture ring..its really does a good job of locking and it takes a little bit of force to move it out of that "A" position even if the lens is in a bag moving around..just my opinion..but hey its there and the price point is the same..so not much really to complain about..lol
Very cool! .my older 85 1.4GM just gave out on me..this is a much needed upgrade!... Yes 8 years wait is crazy..I dont mind the 1.4...but to nit pick Sony had 8 years to come out with a 1.2!!!..come on!! certainly no excuses for it..im sorry but fine tuning bokeh and slightly sharper and obviously quicker AF..yes thats all good but why couldn't you put that towards the 1.2!!..lol Yes they can put the analytics and sales and price point behind it to answer the question of why they chose 1.4... but for some of us a 1.2 would be nice and for them to just release a 1.4 II..is kinda disappointing...yes I will pick one up..but if Sigma releases a new 85 1.2..then I might have to certainly rethink about selling this 1.4 II..lol I hope that they will still consider a 1.2 in the future..like the 50mm 1.2/1.4...releases..at least give people an option to choose..lol
Leica price is for often being hand-built with stricter quality-control (hopefully), and then more expense for exclusivity and luxury connotation. These days, they aren't optically superior to the best of the rest.
Yongnuo 85mm F1.8 is still the Sharpest Lens tested by DXOMARK
I just wish Sony cameras weren’t so boring and soulless
Cameras can not be boring. People can...
This lens should have been released two years ago, it’s still outclassed by the Sigma in terms of weight & nearly double the cost. They couldn’t make a f/1.2 because of the 46mm E-Mount, so they elected to build a video-centric 85 Prime, as opposed to a portrait photographer 85 Prime, which Nikon & Canon offers. They can make a 24 f/1.2 Prime with Quad-XD motors & shock the world once again in 2025 in conjunction with the α1ii announcement. Does Sony have the courage to still innovate?
E-Mount can support apertures as wide as f/0.63 which has been well documented. Designing an f/1.2 lens would have increased the size and the price substantially. I think they'll have one eventually, but its the same reason they have 2 versions of the 50mm G Master. Just curious - why on earth would you need a 24mm f/1.2?!?
@@theartofphotography not beyond 58mm. Nikon had the best optical engineers since 1959 and could never push beyond 58mm with F-Mount at 44mm, E-Mount is 46mm, so maybe Sony could get to 62mm, but vignetting in the corners at f/1.2 is unacceptable because Z & RF mounts have 9mm more space on their mount to allow more light to hit the edges of the sensor. When Nikon upgraded from 44mm to 55mm, they immediately proved my point by dropping the 58 f/0.95 Noct & 85 f/1.2. 200 f/1.8 is possible with a 55mm mount, not with a 46mm mount
You again on a different video with the same nonsense comment? If you want a bigger mount so much get a Canon, Nikon or even GFX
"They couldn’t make a f/1.2 because of the 46mm E-Mount"... If only we already had an example of a 85mm f1.2 FE made almost 10 years ago... (Mitakon-speedmaster-85mm-f1.2)
@@extremephilou which is a terrible lens with heavy vignetting in the corners and unusable at f/1.2. Nice try