Find out why 40mm is the ideal general-purpose lens! Check price at B&H: bhpho.to/3lIWlGm // WEX UK: tidd.ly/3tMbTvJ Buy Gordon a coffee: www.paypal.me/cameralabs Gordon's In Camera book at Amazon: amzn.to/2n61PfI / Amazon uk: amzn.to/2mBqRVZ Like Cameralabs? Get the merch: redbubble.com/people/cameralabs/shop Sample images and written review: www.cameralabs.com/sony-fe-40mm-f2-5-g-review/ Music: www.davidcuttermusic.com / @dcuttermusic #sony #40mm #lens
I agreed with you initially with the lens hood design until I used the Sony 40mm in rain. As long as the wind didn’t blow directly towards me it kept the rain off of the front element. Now that’s actually a first for me. I’ve battled with several designs but this Sony lens cap is the best street photography hood I’ve ever used in rainy conditions. Sometimes it’s the little things
I have the older Sony-Zeiss 35mm f2.8, so I don't really need the 40mm f2.5, but I think it'd be nice to have a lens that's closer to the Full Frame diagonal of 43mm and also includes an aperture ring, AF/MF switch, etc. Like you, I'm thrilled to see Sony making compact FF lenses! Big lenses are nice at times, but these compacts on the a7c are fantastic everyday, hiking, and walk around lenses. 24, 40 & 50 do a fantastic job of covering Normal and Wide. I wish they would include a compact short telephoto like a 75mm or 85mm. I would prefer such a lens not be slower than 2.8, but if it had to have a slightly larger form-factor, I could live with that. Since there is no compact Sony 85mm f2.8, I picked up the innovative Samyang 75mm f1.8 with the programmable custom switch that changes its one ring from manual focus to aperture setting. Thank you for everything, Gordon!
I love my Minolta 45mm and Konica 40mm specially pairing it with my anamorphic. I'm stoked theres a new 40mm on the block with all the modern feats and sharpness. Can't wait to get my hands on it.
I love 40mm, really hope we'll get more choice at this focal length that isn't stoppy focussing ultra pancakes, or Sigma's monster 1.4 Art lens. 50 is always a bit too tight for me as a single prime, where 35 feels just somewhat unnatural for the kinds of shots I like to take (portraits of friends and family across a table, for example). 40 is my favourite focal length by far, so I'm really happy about this even though I am not, and won't be a Sony shooter - their bodies just don't do it for me. Mind you, I really like small lenses/pancakes, I just wish they didn't have to make them THIS tiny and sacrificing AF all the time - another centimeter wouldn't ever make me not take my camera vs the standard, super tiny pancake. Right now I'm using an Olympus 17 1.8 for my single lens setup which is just ever so little longer than the Panasonic 20mm, but it just doesn't suffer from bad AF so I use it despite the focal length being not what I prefer. It's a super nice lens, just a little soft and I wish it was that little bit tighter.
I'm in the same boat. I don't like 35mm or 50mm... preferring 40mm... We need some modern faster 40mm lenses instead of these pancakes... make something that is 1.4 or 1.8 and not humongous...I have similar problem with fuji 27mm 2.8. What's weird is, at longer focal lengths... I'm fine...b/c they actually make them! I can have a fast 24 and a fast 85... I like those.... 35/50 def are awkard to me though...always have been, and always struggled with picking between them. Right now I don't have either, but, could use them for low light. I'd rather have a fast 1.4 40mm, and a 40mm 2.8 pancake... without having a 35 or 50 whatsoever.
Just a note, but the Sigma 45mm gets very sharp at F4 (especially up close) and is deliberately designed for beautiful OOF rendering by under correcting for SA. It's the closest you can get to an STF lens that's under 50mm. One could argue they are both worth acquiring if your a fan of this focal range.
Great review. And while it is older, could you do a review of the 24-105 Sony Full Frame lens. People like me wanting to go full frame would surely benefit from it. Keep up the great work.
That's a good question. Sony's latest lenses have been very sharp at close range AND have also exhibited a lot of focus breathing, so I wonder if they're related?
Thanks for the great review Gordon. This is a lens I am considering but I am surprised you did not mention the Sony 35 f1.8 as it is fairly compact and close in focal length. Do you have a view of that lens vs this new 40mm?
But why is it so expensive for the aperture? Seems like a bad deal when compared to the old EF 40mm f/2.8, EF 50mm f/1.8, and other cheap but faster nifty fifties.
Thank you Gordon for your thorough review. Nice to see it's very sharp across the frame. It looks like a great landscape lens and great general use lens.
Great review. I do wish you had tested the breathing compensation on the Sony to see how it performs with the Sony lens but still really helpful. Thanks!
Nice review and comparison as always. But, as a clear fan of Samyang 45/1.8, I must wonder if it doesn't deserve to be mentioned at least. Not only it came first, but it's still the lightest and cheapest lens in this compact-and-light-40-50mm class with good IQ, and is also the only one with aperture most people really want (f/2 or less). Sure it doesn't have the aperture ring, custom and AF button, but at least most of the photo shooter don't need that most of the time I think. Makes me wonder, and not the first time since all the compact Sigma reviews some time back..
Definitely better than a 50. I actually don't like 35mm or 50mm... preferring 40mm... Would be nice if this was an 1.4 or 1.8 though. Love seeing all the 40mm lovers in this thread. I wonder if this is also because I like 24mm as my wide, and 85mm as my tele. 40 fits nicely in between them... but if you like 20mm as a wide, 40mm kind of far...better with a 35mm. And if you like 28mm as your wide, 50mm is usually the natural pair. I think the natural pair of 24mm is a 40mm.
Top Notch video Gordon thank you. I was planning on buying the G Master 35 mm 1.4 since I'm going to London and Paris in a couple of months and I want it to shoot video and photos but now I don't know. This lens seems to be pretty good. However I don't know if I should own both, what are you thoughts?
The 24 1.4 GM, 35 1.4 GM and 50 1.2 GM are arguably the three best primes Sony has made to date and I'd love ALL of them. It boils down to size, weight and price though. These small G lenses are really designed to be as good as they can for their size and price. Different class but better than expected.
Hey Gordon, Wonderful review as always! How does the 40mm compare to the Sony 35mm 1.8? I was thinking to get the Batis 40mm, which excels over the Sony 35mm 1.8 in the corners, but I would prefer this sony for the price and the size. Do you have any observations how these two lenses compare? May be even the three - this Sony 40mm, Batis 40mm and the Sony 35mm 1.8?
I've not tested them side by side so it's hard to say. Co check out some of my written lens reviews at cameralabs.com for more comparisons . The 40 here doesn't have particularly attractive rendering of blurred areas but otherwise is really sharp and compact. It'd be my choice unless I wanted lovely bokeh
Hi Gordon, I have a very silly question for you. I have this lens and love it very much, particularly how sharp it is. I have it paired with my A7RV and love all the detail it can capture. But there is a part of me that wonders is the 35 mm significantly sharper? I know that is both bright brighter and has fewer optical flaws, but is it also significantly sharper? Sharpness is my number one priority. Appreciate any and all detailed feedback you might be able to give. Regardless, thank you for your incredible content.
Do you mean the little Zeiss 35 2.8? That's one of the earliest lenses in the system, but I remember it being nice. A nice Zeiss! I've not tested it recently though, so can't say how it compares to one of these newer G models, I suspect the G's will be sharper, but maybe less attractive bokeh, but you'd need to search for some samples on flickr to get an idea.
@@cameralabs I’m embarrassed to admit I meant the 35mm GM. I suspect that it is sharper, but was wondering if it was *significantly* sharper. I know that it will have significantly better qualities and almost every other category. But my primary concern is sharpness and detail. I love how small and compact the 40 is, but if I can get a significant increase in sharpness, then I will probably sell it and get the 35 GM.
@@geekcommentator8567 the 35 GM is one of their best lenses, way better in every respect. It's one of my favourites. BTW, if you're ordering one from, say, B&H online, please do consider going via my links!
Is one of the reasons 40mm lenses wwere almost the standard on fixed lens telemetric cameras in the film era. The other one, is that it is the easiest focal lenght to make a compact lens.
40mm is such a nice focal length. I chose the Batis 40mm F2 because I wasnt sure, that I would get a good used copy of the Sony Zeiss 35mm F1.4. At this time I didnt know if I would like the 40mm. But wow! It is so great and versatile! Great video! I hope it raises attention for 40mm lenses. Your video shows that this focal length has it place in this world.
Please does anybody knows if the recent Sony FE 40mm f/2.5 G lens has better optical quality than the similar in size much older Sony Zeiss FE 35mm f/2.8 ZA lens? I am in a big dilemma which to buy. Thank you
Hello Gordon Hope you're doing well. Enjoyed the video very much. Clearly the Sony 40 mm lens seems to be a winner.! Are Sony lenses strictly for Sony cameras or do they make adapters for other camera brands? Anyway be safe Gordon.
So here is the thing - the 45 is the weakest of Sigma's I lenses. The one I would like to know how it compares to is the Sigma 35/2. Any thoughts between the 2?
Weeeell, I make similar tests and take similar sample images with all the lenses I review, so I'd suggest comparing those from my 40mm review with those from my 35 f2 review - remember bigger samples at cameralabs.com - let me know what you think.
Thanks for the video. Just one question about the lack of ED glass element on the 40mm but found on the 24 and 50? Does it affect the image quality with respect to color fringing?
With the wrong subject they can also exhibit some colour, but I didn't notice one being worse than another. Check out my sample images at cameralabs.com as a couple trigger the effect.
Great review and comparison to the one from Sigma! The hood design of the Sony lens is more compact, but can you use it with a uv filter attached to the lens?
@@cameralabs I bought the lens and can confirm that it works fine with both a filter and the lens hood attached. Although I ran into a problem: when used on a Sony Alpha 7 IV, it won't let me change the aperture on the camera body, only on the ring of the lens. Can I change that somewhere in the settings?
@@s.k.6899 excellent, thanks for the update. As for the aperture ring, that's odd as it should work especially with newer bodies like yours. Is the camera in aperture priority / manual? You might want to check the dial configuration menus too.
@@cameralabs Sony support says it's meant to be that way, but in daily handling I find it inconvenient. Could you please check whether it's the case for your camera and lens too - can you change the aperture on the body or on the lenses aperture ring only? Would be a great help for me, as I'm thinking about returning the lens and get the Zeiss 35 mm instead.
@@s.k.6899 sadly I can't check it as these are all review samples that are loaned to me for a couple of weeks and then returned afterwards, so that one is long gone! I'm pretty sure I remember the aperture ring working fine though. Do you need to update any firmware?
@@cameralabs I prefer the Sony style the sigma I series looks a bit over engineered and heavy for what they are but I suppose that's a matter of taste and the sonies are always more confident at focusing
Hi Gordon, could it function like a manual lens when adapted onto other camera bodies via adapter that doesn’t support lens communication since it has aperture and focus ring built in? I want to use it on L mount bodies as well if possible.
And, unlike Sony FF, the Fuji is truly compact, especially when mounted on a camera like the new X-E4. I'm too committed to Canon to switch, but I really admire what Fujifilm is doing these days, and I hope they prosper.
@@cameralabs Hey! Don't argue with your subs! 😣 Sorry Gordon! I'm getting my first jab today, so I'm cranky. I'll be fully under government mind control by tomorrow. 😲
@@patrickfitzgerald2861 snap! I got mine earlier today and in fact replied to your comment straight afterwards! I now have a strange desire to install Microsoft Windows and feel my earlier criticisms of the government may have been misplaced. I'm assuming all that will pass! Hope we both manage to avoid the aches on day two!
Looks really good to me, it happens that its strengths are things I care about and its flaws are things I don't care about. I'm not 100% sure about the sharpness, but if it's good (say, comparable to a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art or a Zeiss 55mm f/1.8), then its price is actually pretty great too!
It is a pretty sharp lens, with performance just slightly worse than a typical GM lens. Most importantly it pretty sharp across a wide range, eve at F2.5 it is fairly good, but starts to get great at F2.8, and excellent from F4.0 to F8.0
@@cameralabscompré el 50 y tengo el zeiss 35 2.8. Venderé el zeiss y el 50 ha sido devuelto. Compré el 40 2.5. Un solo objetivo entre 35 y 50. Aparte tengo el Sony 85 1.8 y 20 G 1.8
Yes I currently own the 28 f2 and the 85 1.8 and was also thinking that this might be a perfect in betweener all arounder. Ofcourse the 28mm in super 35 becomes a 42mm roughly. Which is the perfect cinematic focal length so I dunno lol
Same focal length as the old Olympus 35RC and Canon Canonet compact rangefinders from yesteryear and they were great. 27mm is arguably Fuji's best prime too.
I can't see paying $550 for a lens like this I got a Canon 50mm 1.8 for under $50 and it was fine. 35mm moved to slightly longer "normal" lenses than what was common focal length vs. diagonal which helped portraits looking less " nosey." Of course with hi-def cameras ypu can just use a 35mm and crop.
This is exactly the comparison I was hoping for. I had, and loved the sigma 45mm 2.8 when I bought the sigma fp. It really is a tiny little guy with gorgeous rendering. And 40/45 is my more favored focal length vs 35 or 50 for sure. I guess that's all I have to say lol. Just thankful for this specific comparison. The Sony looks incredibly promising. Especially, imo, for video with the added benefit of declicking the aperture ring. And 40mm has always been the cinematic standard focal length (42mm to be exact? )
for portraits, 40mm will introduce more distortions than 50mm. For street photography and landscapes, I agree that 40mm is best suited since it captures more of the environment. Of course, there is also a place for 40mm in portraits in the use case of tight confined cases where one can't back out far enough to get good focus or environment, but will have to contend with more facial distortion at close range. There's never a right answer to these things.
@@cameralabs I know, I watched all your videos about these three compact Sony lenses, but I couldn't find the answer to my question, which is; "Should I keep the 50mm or 40mm of the trio?" I have all three lenses (24, 40 and 50mm) and I will definitely keep the 24mm, but I'm not sure if I should keep the 40mm or the 50mm? I also have Sony FE 85mm f1.8 and 20mm f1.8 and a RX1RMK2 with Zeiss Sonnar 35mm F2. - For me 50mm f2.5 is better for portraits and it's bokeh looks a little smoother, but I can't really get used to 50mm focal length, especially when I also have 85mm f1.8, which is not much bigger or heavier as a portrait prime. There is no direct comparison video about Sony 40 and 50mm G lenses on youtube and I'm sure there are more people who has the similar dilemma as I have. I don't really think that it make sense to own both 40mm and 50mm in the kit, I have to sell one of them, but which one? 🤔
@@UfukSahinDenmark ah I see what you mean. In all seriousness, you could open two windows and play my 40 and 50 videos to make your own comparison, as I seem to recall I took all the test photos at the same time.
@@cameralabs purchased it a few days ago, surprisingly sharp and resolving lens for the rIV even compared to my GM 24-70 f2.8 at 40 f2.8, definitely notice a huge difference towards the edges. Definitely a worth while travel lens and fast/accurate focusing.
Would anyone be able to help? I'm on the fence between the 45mm f2.5 sony and the 35mm f2 sigma. I use the sony a7r3. I'm looking for a small travel lens. landscapes and enviro shots mostly.
You mean the Sony 40mm f2.5? I'd say they're actually quite close in style, but the Sony is smaller. I've reviewed both here and at cameralabs.com so have a look at my sample images from each and see if there's one you prefer the style of. They are similar.
@@cameralabs My apologies, the 40mm. Right now with my discount, the sony 40mm is 480 USD to Sigmas 700 USD. But I love the rendering on Sigma glass. Such a tough choice!
Good question and I agree the 40 and 50 hoods aren't very attractive, although they are small. I didn't try swapping them, but I think they should fit. It may not be that effective though.
Samyang 35mm 2.8 would have fit perfectly into this comparison - coming the closest to a true pancake lens, with great AF, according to Dustin Abbott and at half the price. It does lack weather sealing though. Is the 40mm Sony weather sealed?
Ya thats a pretty awesome little lens the samyang, but i have a feeling the overall quality, sharpness, and rendering/focus falloff is much nicer on the Sony like any ssmyang vs. Sony comparison. And supposedly this new Sony lens is pretty weather sealed but def not proof from what I've read
@@akyerit "like any samyang vs Sony comparison" So for you, its a foregone conclusion... that is just silly. There are benefits and drawbacks, that have nothing to do with the brand, but with the price point and the size. And Sony does not always have the best compromise. All lenses are compromises, or else, you could go to a store and buy a 16mm-450mm pancake zoom with a constant 1.4 aperture, that weighs 30 grams. Since you can't - if you want a Samyang 35mm pancake prime, because your camera is pocketable with that, it will be less sharp at the edges than a Sony that is not a pancake. It may still have nicer bokeh as a number of reviewers say. And unless you spend on a G-Master, many Sony lenses are not weather sealed, and the days of affordable OSS lenses are long over. If you want to be a Sony fanboy, suit yourself. Most people do buy a mix of Sony lenses, Samyang, Tamron, Sigma etcetera - and for good reason: Sony is good, but not the best for every purpose. One last thing: Don't rely too much on RUclips reviews - people get sent cream-pie lenses by manufacturers to get good reviews. What you get in the store can be as good, or the glass could be less well aligned. And of course, there's DXO to look at. If for your photos, all attributes need to be maxed, your bag will be very heavy and costly... You'd never make it far beyond your garden. Better to know how to use imperfect lenses to advantage.
@@Pharesm lol definitely not a sony fanboy. If I had to pick a preference it would probably be sigma actually. I prefer their rendering. But I have a feeling I might like the 40mm over the 45 a little more (because I'm more used to that focal length), And that tiny bit of extra light. But to me the Sony is almost as nice so I am fine living with the "compromise' lol What I do prefer from Sony is its nativity. More confident auto focus and these tiny lenses are pretty tiny lol. These lenses aren't meant to be the best mind you, just some great options in a much smaller package. I also think it was a mistake to choose a 40 combined with a 50mm. I don't see why anyone would want both, therefore making the desire to own the whole set almost null and void. I also have owned samyang. And while they're fine for most applications. I just don't prefer their rendering to the Sony or the sigma, never mind Zeiss glass or anything similar. That's all. And they're not as confident in lowlight autofocusing either. AND you need a friggen lens station to keep them updated which is another extra hassle and cost. So I'd personally rather spend a tiny bit more and get the more confident and better rendering Sony glass. Which to me, is a perfect "compromise"
@@akyerit You can't reasonably blanket-judge "AF confidence" Some Samyang models tested by Dustin Abbott actually did better than Sony's AF. Its more like your personal confidence, that you don't need to check if a specific Sony lens has ok, good or great AF. But they are not all at the same level. There are some that simply miss a lot of shots with fast movement. Anyway... your preference for your money.
@@Pharesm lmao my personal confidence? Wth does that have to do with anything? Lol! Ok anyways. If you wanna talk about judging, you've been doing nothing but judging me in all of your replies. Telling me I'm a sony fanboy and I haven't tried other lenses and that I lack personal confidence. Wow really? I've simply talked about my preference and what I think is better from mostly my experience actually, and what I prefer. And when I was speaking of AF confidence, it was more to do with lowlight more than anything. Which i find myself shooting in a ton. So every little bit of af confidence, if you dont mind me using that word without personally attacking me, is the difference between a wasted and a non wasted shot. Or more like a a wasted moment or not. And you just got done saying how you shouldn't always rely on RUclips videos for your info and then go and quote Dustin Abbot for yours. So I don't know how much your arguments are making much sense or carrying much weight at this point.
It's not the new 50, one is just 40mm the other is 50mm nothing really mindblowing, and for these prices is better to get the Tammy 28mm-75mm and then you get all the focal lengths you want.. lol
It's para-phrasing the expression when fashion describes a colour as being 'the new black'. Just having a bit of fun. PS - the Tamron zoom is bigger, these Sony's are for people who want small lenses.
Find out why 40mm is the ideal general-purpose lens!
Check price at B&H: bhpho.to/3lIWlGm // WEX UK: tidd.ly/3tMbTvJ
Buy Gordon a coffee: www.paypal.me/cameralabs
Gordon's In Camera book at Amazon: amzn.to/2n61PfI / Amazon uk: amzn.to/2mBqRVZ
Like Cameralabs? Get the merch: redbubble.com/people/cameralabs/shop
Sample images and written review: www.cameralabs.com/sony-fe-40mm-f2-5-g-review/
Music: www.davidcuttermusic.com / @dcuttermusic
#sony #40mm #lens
Nice review, thanks. Did you manage to see if the lens hoods are compatible with the older lenses like the 35 2.8 or the 55 1.8 and vice versa?
@@NickNightingaleYT I'm afraid I don't have either of those old lenses so can't check, sorry!
I agreed with you initially with the lens hood design until I used the Sony 40mm in rain. As long as the wind didn’t blow directly towards me it kept the rain off of the front element. Now that’s actually a first for me. I’ve battled with several designs but this Sony lens cap is the best street photography hood I’ve ever used in rainy conditions. Sometimes it’s the little things
Thanks, i'd not used it like that yet so good to know!
A very underrated focal length. Really nice as a do all prime along with a zoom for a day out shooting.
Exactly, I really enjoyed shooting with it.
I have the older Sony-Zeiss 35mm f2.8, so I don't really need the 40mm f2.5, but I think it'd be nice to have a lens that's closer to the Full Frame diagonal of 43mm and also includes an aperture ring, AF/MF switch, etc. Like you, I'm thrilled to see Sony making compact FF lenses! Big lenses are nice at times, but these compacts on the a7c are fantastic everyday, hiking, and walk around lenses. 24, 40 & 50 do a fantastic job of covering Normal and Wide. I wish they would include a compact short telephoto like a 75mm or 85mm. I would prefer such a lens not be slower than 2.8, but if it had to have a slightly larger form-factor, I could live with that. Since there is no compact Sony 85mm f2.8, I picked up the innovative Samyang 75mm f1.8 with the programmable custom switch that changes its one ring from manual focus to aperture setting. Thank you for everything, Gordon!
The Batis 40 mm vs this Sony 40 mm would make a good comparison
40mm is 35mm and 50mm combined.
Got 40mm Batis f/2, my favorite lens so far on Sony full frame system
40 mm is my preferred go to focal length for general every day walk photography. Tempting.
It's a great walkaround focal length!
Can compare this one to Batis 40/2?
Ah yes. Exactly why I love my Canon 40mm STM pancake prime. I wish Canon would make one in RF.
I love my Minolta 45mm and Konica 40mm specially pairing it with my anamorphic. I'm stoked theres a new 40mm on the block with all the modern feats and sharpness. Can't wait to get my hands on it.
It makes me excited that you're reviewing all of these! Thanks!
Thanks, it was really hard work doing separate reviews and comparisons of all three.
I love 40mm, really hope we'll get more choice at this focal length that isn't stoppy focussing ultra pancakes, or Sigma's monster 1.4 Art lens. 50 is always a bit too tight for me as a single prime, where 35 feels just somewhat unnatural for the kinds of shots I like to take (portraits of friends and family across a table, for example). 40 is my favourite focal length by far, so I'm really happy about this even though I am not, and won't be a Sony shooter - their bodies just don't do it for me.
Mind you, I really like small lenses/pancakes, I just wish they didn't have to make them THIS tiny and sacrificing AF all the time - another centimeter wouldn't ever make me not take my camera vs the standard, super tiny pancake. Right now I'm using an Olympus 17 1.8 for my single lens setup which is just ever so little longer than the Panasonic 20mm, but it just doesn't suffer from bad AF so I use it despite the focal length being not what I prefer. It's a super nice lens, just a little soft and I wish it was that little bit tighter.
I'm in the same boat. I don't like 35mm or 50mm... preferring 40mm... We need some modern faster 40mm lenses instead of these pancakes... make something that is 1.4 or 1.8 and not humongous...I have similar problem with fuji 27mm 2.8. What's weird is, at longer focal lengths... I'm fine...b/c they actually make them! I can have a fast 24 and a fast 85... I like those.... 35/50 def are awkard to me though...always have been, and always struggled with picking between them. Right now I don't have either, but, could use them for low light. I'd rather have a fast 1.4 40mm, and a 40mm 2.8 pancake... without having a 35 or 50 whatsoever.
As a user of MFT too, Lumix G9, im gonna say the worst AF lens from sony still doing better than AF lens lumix.
Excellent gem of a review. Extremely articulate, efficient, helpful.
Thanks!
Just a note, but the Sigma 45mm gets very sharp at F4 (especially up close) and is deliberately designed for beautiful OOF rendering by under correcting for SA. It's the closest you can get to an STF lens that's under 50mm. One could argue they are both worth acquiring if your a fan of this focal range.
Great review. And while it is older, could you do a review of the 24-105 Sony Full Frame lens. People like me wanting to go full frame would surely benefit from it. Keep up the great work.
I've been looking at 40mm legacies lately and then thought I might treat myself to an AF as well. This was really useful, Gordon. Thank you 👍
Could the focus breathing actually help close focus sharpest? 🤔
That's a good question. Sony's latest lenses have been very sharp at close range AND have also exhibited a lot of focus breathing, so I wonder if they're related?
Thanks for the great review Gordon. This is a lens I am considering but I am surprised you did not mention the Sony 35 f1.8 as it is fairly compact and close in focal length. Do you have a view of that lens vs this new 40mm?
I have a review of the 35 at cameralabs.com
But why is it so expensive for the aperture? Seems like a bad deal when compared to the old EF 40mm f/2.8, EF 50mm f/1.8, and other cheap but faster nifty fifties.
12:55 a bit of foreshadowing for their release of focus breathing compensation?
Thank you Gordon for your thorough review. Nice to see it's very sharp across the frame. It looks like a great landscape lens and great general use lens.
You're very welcome!
Can you compare it with the 40mm Batis?
My specific question is flare. Batis behaves badly in the backlight. How about Sony?
I’d love this 40 as an EDC lens on a zve1 instead of 35 due to small size!
Great review. I do wish you had tested the breathing compensation on the Sony to see how it performs with the Sony lens but still really helpful. Thanks!
Nice review and comparison as always. But, as a clear fan of Samyang 45/1.8, I must wonder if it doesn't deserve to be mentioned at least. Not only it came first, but it's still the lightest and cheapest lens in this compact-and-light-40-50mm class with good IQ, and is also the only one with aperture most people really want (f/2 or less).
Sure it doesn't have the aperture ring, custom and AF button, but at least most of the photo shooter don't need that most of the time I think. Makes me wonder, and not the first time since all the compact Sigma reviews some time back..
Definitely better than a 50. I actually don't like 35mm or 50mm... preferring 40mm... Would be nice if this was an 1.4 or 1.8 though. Love seeing all the 40mm lovers in this thread. I wonder if this is also because I like 24mm as my wide, and 85mm as my tele. 40 fits nicely in between them... but if you like 20mm as a wide, 40mm kind of far...better with a 35mm. And if you like 28mm as your wide, 50mm is usually the natural pair. I think the natural pair of 24mm is a 40mm.
Top Notch video Gordon thank you. I was planning on buying the G Master 35 mm 1.4 since I'm going to London and Paris in a couple of months and I want it to shoot video and photos but now I don't know. This lens seems to be pretty good. However I don't know if I should own both, what are you thoughts?
The 24 1.4 GM, 35 1.4 GM and 50 1.2 GM are arguably the three best primes Sony has made to date and I'd love ALL of them. It boils down to size, weight and price though. These small G lenses are really designed to be as good as they can for their size and price. Different class but better than expected.
Great to see some lighter weight high quality options and I also prefer the more traditional lens hood look. Thanks for the review Gordon.
You're welcome!
Super helpful thank you. I’ll be getting the 40mm after watching this video.
Thanks for this review, I was in doubt, but now I will buy it! Thanks
This is an amazing, very detailed review. Thank you!
Hey Gordon, Wonderful review as always! How does the 40mm compare to the Sony 35mm 1.8? I was thinking to get the Batis 40mm, which excels over the Sony 35mm 1.8 in the corners, but I would prefer this sony for the price and the size. Do you have any observations how these two lenses compare? May be even the three - this Sony 40mm, Batis 40mm and the Sony 35mm 1.8?
I've not tested them side by side so it's hard to say. Co check out some of my written lens reviews at cameralabs.com for more comparisons . The 40 here doesn't have particularly attractive rendering of blurred areas but otherwise is really sharp and compact. It'd be my choice unless I wanted lovely bokeh
Hi Gordon, I have a very silly question for you. I have this lens and love it very much, particularly how sharp it is. I have it paired with my A7RV and love all the detail it can capture. But there is a part of me that wonders is the 35 mm significantly sharper? I know that is both bright brighter and has fewer optical flaws, but is it also significantly sharper? Sharpness is my number one priority. Appreciate any and all detailed feedback you might be able to give. Regardless, thank you for your incredible content.
Do you mean the little Zeiss 35 2.8? That's one of the earliest lenses in the system, but I remember it being nice. A nice Zeiss! I've not tested it recently though, so can't say how it compares to one of these newer G models, I suspect the G's will be sharper, but maybe less attractive bokeh, but you'd need to search for some samples on flickr to get an idea.
@@cameralabs I’m embarrassed to admit I meant the 35mm GM. I suspect that it is sharper, but was wondering if it was *significantly* sharper. I know that it will have significantly better qualities and almost every other category. But my primary concern is sharpness and detail. I love how small and compact the 40 is, but if I can get a significant increase in sharpness, then I will probably sell it and get the 35 GM.
@@geekcommentator8567 the 35 GM is one of their best lenses, way better in every respect. It's one of my favourites. BTW, if you're ordering one from, say, B&H online, please do consider going via my links!
@@cameralabs thank you!
Is one of the reasons 40mm lenses wwere almost the standard on fixed lens telemetric cameras in the film era.
The other one, is that it is the easiest focal lenght to make a compact lens.
40mm is such a nice focal length. I chose the Batis 40mm F2 because I wasnt sure, that I would get a good used copy of the Sony Zeiss 35mm F1.4. At this time I didnt know if I would like the 40mm. But wow! It is so great and versatile!
Great video! I hope it raises attention for 40mm lenses. Your video shows that this focal length has it place in this world.
Thanks!
28mm on aps-c is great! (Just saying.)
Please does anybody knows if the recent Sony FE 40mm f/2.5 G lens has better optical quality than the similar in size much older Sony Zeiss FE 35mm f/2.8 ZA lens?
I am in a big dilemma which to buy.
Thank you
Hello Gordon Hope you're doing well. Enjoyed the video very much. Clearly the Sony 40 mm lens seems to be a winner.! Are Sony lenses strictly for Sony cameras or do they make adapters for other camera brands? Anyway be safe Gordon.
Thanks! No room for adapters I'm afraid, mirrorless lenses will only work on the mounts they're designed for.
Nice!
That sigma would be a bit more interesting to me thanks to the 45mm focal length!
Great review and keep up the good work!
Awesome!! I am actually in the process of deciding between the SIgma 45mm f2.8 and the Sony 40mm f2,5 - coincidental 😁
Greetings from Soton. Maybe one day, who knows - summer is coming. Good video. Take care.
Lovely review and lenses.
As a 40 mm addict since the 80:thies,
I will go for the Voigtlander Nokton 40/1,4. / Ulf
Love my 40mm G! There’s no going wrong with it. I feel the Sigma performance is just not quite at the same level…
I greatly prefer the color and highlight falloff on the Sigma.
So here is the thing - the 45 is the weakest of Sigma's I lenses. The one I would like to know how it compares to is the Sigma 35/2. Any thoughts between the 2?
Weeeell, I make similar tests and take similar sample images with all the lenses I review, so I'd suggest comparing those from my 40mm review with those from my 35 f2 review - remember bigger samples at cameralabs.com - let me know what you think.
I do some toy photography, and I was wondering between 40mm and 50mm, which do you recommend?
They're so close, it's really like choosing a baggy jumper over a slightly tighter one. Go for whatever works for you!
Thanks for the video. Just one question about the lack of ED glass element on the 40mm but found on the 24 and 50? Does it affect the image quality with respect to color fringing?
With the wrong subject they can also exhibit some colour, but I didn't notice one being worse than another. Check out my sample images at cameralabs.com as a couple trigger the effect.
(Samyang 45mm should be reminded for its "nice" rendering etc.
MF Voightlander f/1.2 ..is manual, also interesting rendering.)
I'm on a tight budget. Do you think a used Sonnar 35mm F2.8 Zeiss would be comparable?
Yes and it's still a solid lens
Great review and comparison to the one from Sigma! The hood design of the Sony lens is more compact, but can you use it with a uv filter attached to the lens?
I'm not 100% sure, sorry!
@@cameralabs I bought the lens and can confirm that it works fine with both a filter and the lens hood attached.
Although I ran into a problem: when used on a Sony Alpha 7 IV, it won't let me change the aperture on the camera body, only on the ring of the lens.
Can I change that somewhere in the settings?
@@s.k.6899 excellent, thanks for the update. As for the aperture ring, that's odd as it should work especially with newer bodies like yours. Is the camera in aperture priority / manual? You might want to check the dial configuration menus too.
@@cameralabs Sony support says it's meant to be that way, but in daily handling I find it inconvenient.
Could you please check whether it's the case for your camera and lens too - can you change the aperture on the body or on the lenses aperture ring only?
Would be a great help for me, as I'm thinking about returning the lens and get the Zeiss 35 mm instead.
@@s.k.6899 sadly I can't check it as these are all review samples that are loaned to me for a couple of weeks and then returned afterwards, so that one is long gone! I'm pretty sure I remember the aperture ring working fine though. Do you need to update any firmware?
Hi Gordon, would you recommend this over the sony 35 f1.8 and the sigma 35 f2? Thanks!
It's really hard to say as I like all three. The 40 is the dimmest if that's an issue for you, but also the smallest and I'm fond of the focal length.
Very cool, visually useful. Thank you
Thanks!
I love the 40mm version of this lens group . I am wishing for a 20mm f3.5 in this compact formatt from Sony great review as always.
Thanks, yes, more compact lenses please! Sigma now has a semi budget 20 as well
@@cameralabs I prefer the Sony style the sigma I series looks a bit over engineered and heavy for what they are but I suppose that's a matter of taste and the sonies are always more confident at focusing
To me, 35mm is always the new 50mm :)
Gordon it would be amazing if you could compare the Sony to the Batis 40mm !!!
Fantastic and thorough review !!
Yes, that would be interesting!
the autofocus of sony is brilliant...
best review on youtube. Thanks. Flawless.
You're very welcome! Hope you enjoy some of my other reviews too!
Hi Gordon, could it function like a manual lens when adapted onto other camera bodies via adapter that doesn’t support lens communication since it has aperture and focus ring built in? I want to use it on L mount bodies as well if possible.
My favourite focal length. Fuji has the 27mm 2.8, which is 40 equivalent
And, unlike Sony FF, the Fuji is truly compact, especially when mounted on a camera like the new X-E4. I'm too committed to Canon to switch, but I really admire what Fujifilm is doing these days, and I hope they prosper.
@@patrickfitzgerald2861 weeeell, that depends which Fujifilm body you're referring to. If you out the Sony 40 on an A7c, it's pretty small.
@@cameralabs Hey! Don't argue with your subs! 😣 Sorry Gordon! I'm getting my first jab today, so I'm cranky. I'll be fully under government mind control by tomorrow. 😲
@@patrickfitzgerald2861 snap! I got mine earlier today and in fact replied to your comment straight afterwards! I now have a strange desire to install Microsoft Windows and feel my earlier criticisms of the government may have been misplaced. I'm assuming all that will pass! Hope we both manage to avoid the aches on day two!
@@cameralabs LMAO! And I'm feeling compelled to re-install MS Edge! When will the madness end! 😷
Looks really good to me, it happens that its strengths are things I care about and its flaws are things I don't care about.
I'm not 100% sure about the sharpness, but if it's good (say, comparable to a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art or a Zeiss 55mm f/1.8), then its price is actually pretty great too!
It is a pretty sharp lens, with performance just slightly worse than a typical GM lens. Most importantly it pretty sharp across a wide range, eve at F2.5 it is fairly good, but starts to get great at F2.8, and excellent from F4.0 to F8.0
Awesome review!!!
If I already own the Sony Zeiss 35mm f/2.8, which is smaller than the 40, should I purchase any of the new G lenses?
I would say probably not the 40, but you may enjoy the 24 or 50
@@cameralabscompré el 50 y tengo el zeiss 35 2.8. Venderé el zeiss y el 50 ha sido devuelto. Compré el 40 2.5. Un solo objetivo entre 35 y 50. Aparte tengo el Sony 85 1.8 y 20 G 1.8
I was never really into Sony, but this lens with the 24mm 2.8 and 85 1.8 could be a very nice light combination.
Yes, I could be very happy with those lengths too!
Yes I currently own the 28 f2 and the 85 1.8 and was also thinking that this might be a perfect in betweener all arounder. Ofcourse the 28mm in super 35 becomes a 42mm roughly. Which is the perfect cinematic focal length so I dunno lol
Hi,thanks for the interesting review. I didn't know you were such a great model!
Ha ha, thanks!
Nice, but I'd still stick with the Zeiss FE 55 1.8 or Zeiss 35 2.8
Same focal length as the old Olympus 35RC and Canon Canonet compact rangefinders from yesteryear and they were great. 27mm is arguably Fuji's best prime too.
I need to retest that lens!
Can the hood be used with a filter?
Yes it has its own thread in the hood.
Are these lens made for those who want to do video or for stills?
both
Pl sir can u give suggestions lens selection for A1 sony for video's and still photos I am in tight budget
You have an A1 and a tight budget?
thank you so much. This helped me alot! :D
You're welcome!
I can't see paying $550 for a lens like this I got a Canon 50mm 1.8 for under $50 and it was fine. 35mm moved to slightly longer "normal" lenses than what was common focal length vs. diagonal which helped portraits looking less "
nosey."
Of course with hi-def cameras ypu can just use a 35mm and crop.
An exelent review of the sony 40 mm/2,5 😊
Thanks! 👍
This is exactly the comparison I was hoping for. I had, and loved the sigma 45mm 2.8 when I bought the sigma fp. It really is a tiny little guy with gorgeous rendering. And 40/45 is my more favored focal length vs 35 or 50 for sure. I guess that's all I have to say lol. Just thankful for this specific comparison. The Sony looks incredibly promising. Especially, imo, for video with the added benefit of declicking the aperture ring. And 40mm has always been the cinematic standard focal length (42mm to be exact? )
Glad it was useful!
Thank you, Super review.
Very nice video, roaring 40:ties rules / Ulf
for portraits, 40mm will introduce more distortions than 50mm. For street photography and landscapes, I agree that 40mm is best suited since it captures more of the environment. Of course, there is also a place for 40mm in portraits in the use case of tight confined cases where one can't back out far enough to get good focus or environment, but will have to contend with more facial distortion at close range. There's never a right answer to these things.
This video does not compare Sony 40mm G to 50mm G or other 50mm lenses. The video title should be Sony 40mm G vs Sigma 45mm f2.8..
I made this at the same time as the other compact Sonys, so you have loads of results to compare.
@@cameralabs I know, I watched all your videos about these three compact Sony lenses, but I couldn't find the answer to my question, which is; "Should I keep the 50mm or 40mm of the trio?" I have all three lenses (24, 40 and 50mm) and I will definitely keep the 24mm, but I'm not sure if I should keep the 40mm or the 50mm? I also have Sony FE 85mm f1.8 and 20mm f1.8 and a RX1RMK2 with Zeiss Sonnar 35mm F2. - For me 50mm f2.5 is better for portraits and it's bokeh looks a little smoother, but I can't really get used to 50mm focal length, especially when I also have 85mm f1.8, which is not much bigger or heavier as a portrait prime. There is no direct comparison video about Sony 40 and 50mm G lenses on youtube and I'm sure there are more people who has the similar dilemma as I have. I don't really think that it make sense to own both 40mm and 50mm in the kit, I have to sell one of them, but which one? 🤔
@@UfukSahinDenmark ah I see what you mean. In all seriousness, you could open two windows and play my 40 and 50 videos to make your own comparison, as I seem to recall I took all the test photos at the same time.
My 40mm pancake always stay on my eos r. Even withe adapter its still compact
For travel I’m trying to decide between the Sony 40 f2.5 and the Sony Zeiss 35 f2.8, anyone have experience with both?
I'd get the 40 2.5 as it's a much newer design.
@@cameralabs purchased it a few days ago, surprisingly sharp and resolving lens for the rIV even compared to my GM 24-70 f2.8 at 40 f2.8, definitely notice a huge difference towards the edges. Definitely a worth while travel lens and fast/accurate focusing.
@@viajay works well, like it as a walk around lens. Quick focus and sharp, good color contrast, for its size it’s very good.
Would anyone be able to help?
I'm on the fence between the 45mm f2.5 sony and the 35mm f2 sigma. I use the sony a7r3. I'm looking for a small travel lens. landscapes and enviro shots mostly.
You mean the Sony 40mm f2.5? I'd say they're actually quite close in style, but the Sony is smaller. I've reviewed both here and at cameralabs.com so have a look at my sample images from each and see if there's one you prefer the style of. They are similar.
@@cameralabs My apologies, the 40mm. Right now with my discount, the sony 40mm is 480 USD to Sigmas 700 USD. But I love the rendering on Sigma glass. Such a tough choice!
G Master lenses are phenomenal. As sharp or sharper than Leicas finest offerings at 1/3 the price
But lack in colour and micro contrast. The bokeh is alright though
A7C lens, obviously...
Is at least that one weather sealed?
Thanks!
Thankyou! Much appreciated!
Will the 24 G hood fit on the 40? I find the 40 hood a bit strange..
Good question and I agree the 40 and 50 hoods aren't very attractive, although they are small. I didn't try swapping them, but I think they should fit. It may not be that effective though.
flexing the new a2 I see
A1 you mean?
Are Sony lenses priced too high considering the quality?
I think most of them are priced correctly, but Sigma has some great options that can be more affordable
This video tile says how does the 40 compare to the 50 but there was nothing on the 50!
We need 35 , 50 , 85 , what is this i don’t know (
Samyang 35mm 2.8 would have fit perfectly into this comparison - coming the closest to a true pancake lens, with great AF, according to Dustin Abbott and at half the price. It does lack weather sealing though.
Is the 40mm Sony weather sealed?
Ya thats a pretty awesome little lens the samyang, but i have a feeling the overall quality, sharpness, and rendering/focus falloff is much nicer on the Sony like any ssmyang vs. Sony comparison. And supposedly this new Sony lens is pretty weather sealed but def not proof from what I've read
@@akyerit "like any samyang vs Sony comparison" So for you, its a foregone conclusion... that is just silly.
There are benefits and drawbacks, that have nothing to do with the brand, but with the price point and the size.
And Sony does not always have the best compromise. All lenses are compromises, or else, you could go to a store and buy a 16mm-450mm pancake zoom with a constant 1.4 aperture, that weighs 30 grams.
Since you can't - if you want a Samyang 35mm pancake prime, because your camera is pocketable with that, it will be less sharp at the edges than a Sony that is not a pancake. It may still have nicer bokeh as a number of reviewers say.
And unless you spend on a G-Master, many Sony lenses are not weather sealed, and the days of affordable OSS lenses are long over.
If you want to be a Sony fanboy, suit yourself. Most people do buy a mix of Sony lenses, Samyang, Tamron, Sigma etcetera - and for good reason: Sony is good, but not the best for every purpose.
One last thing: Don't rely too much on RUclips reviews - people get sent cream-pie lenses by manufacturers to get good reviews. What you get in the store can be as good, or the glass could be less well aligned. And of course, there's DXO to look at.
If for your photos, all attributes need to be maxed, your bag will be very heavy and costly... You'd never make it far beyond your garden.
Better to know how to use imperfect lenses to advantage.
@@Pharesm lol definitely not a sony fanboy. If I had to pick a preference it would probably be sigma actually. I prefer their rendering. But I have a feeling I might like the 40mm over the 45 a little more (because I'm more used to that focal length), And that tiny bit of extra light. But to me the Sony is almost as nice so I am fine living with the "compromise' lol
What I do prefer from Sony is its nativity. More confident auto focus and these tiny lenses are pretty tiny lol. These lenses aren't meant to be the best mind you, just some great options in a much smaller package. I also think it was a mistake to choose a 40 combined with a 50mm. I don't see why anyone would want both, therefore making the desire to own the whole set almost null and void.
I also have owned samyang. And while they're fine for most applications. I just don't prefer their rendering to the Sony or the sigma, never mind Zeiss glass or anything similar. That's all. And they're not as confident in lowlight autofocusing either. AND you need a friggen lens station to keep them updated which is another extra hassle and cost. So I'd personally rather spend a tiny bit more and get the more confident and better rendering Sony glass. Which to me, is a perfect "compromise"
@@akyerit You can't reasonably blanket-judge "AF confidence"
Some Samyang models tested by Dustin Abbott actually did better than Sony's AF.
Its more like your personal confidence, that you don't need to check if a specific Sony lens has ok, good or great AF. But they are not all at the same level. There are some that simply miss a lot of shots with fast movement. Anyway... your preference for your money.
@@Pharesm lmao my personal confidence? Wth does that have to do with anything? Lol! Ok anyways. If you wanna talk about judging, you've been doing nothing but judging me in all of your replies. Telling me I'm a sony fanboy and I haven't tried other lenses and that I lack personal confidence. Wow really? I've simply talked about my preference and what I think is better from mostly my experience actually, and what I prefer. And when I was speaking of AF confidence, it was more to do with lowlight more than anything. Which i find myself shooting in a ton. So every little bit of af confidence, if you dont mind me using that word without personally attacking me, is the difference between a wasted and a non wasted shot. Or more like a a wasted moment or not. And you just got done saying how you shouldn't always rely on RUclips videos for your info and then go and quote Dustin Abbot for yours. So I don't know how much your arguments are making much sense or carrying much weight at this point.
Seems like they released these lenses because of the a7C.
Any focal length than 50mm is better for full frame.
You have a extremely youngful voice.
Alpha 1!!
I'd rather just get a Tamron 28-200 as a walkaround lens rather than any of these tiny primes that cost pretty much the same amount.
bit of a size difference though
Great video
Thanks!
For me the old 35 f.2,8 had a more characterized yield and I presume much better in B/W
It's not the new 50, one is just 40mm the other is 50mm nothing really mindblowing, and for these prices is better to get the Tammy 28mm-75mm and then you get all the focal lengths you want.. lol
It's para-phrasing the expression when fashion describes a colour as being 'the new black'. Just having a bit of fun. PS - the Tamron zoom is bigger, these Sony's are for people who want small lenses.
@@cameralabs Yeah but they could have been smaller, they aren’t really all that small. Certainly better carrying the Tammy than 3 of those.
They kind of look like the canon 40mm f2.8 on an adapter.
I'd buy none of the 2. Samyang 45mm is way faster than both, cheaper (half the price) and way sharper than the sigma at minimum focusing distance.
Good not great lens f2 would had been better. Really like to shoot at 40mm but 2.5 is a bit of disappointment
No, it's more like a new 35mm because it's much closer to 35mm..