FAQ: The 35mm f/1.8 has a closer focusing distance than the 35mm f/1.4, so why did my test show the 35mm f/1.4 filled the frame with the camera more? It's the difference between maximum magnification and close focusing distance. The 35 f/1.4 has a min focus distance of 9.8", while the 35 f/1.8 is 8.7". So, yes, the f/1.8 can focus at a shorter distance - BUT - the focal length must shrink to 25mm or 30mm or so because of focus breathing (we have a video on this topic). The 35 f/1.4 has a max magnification of 0.26x, whereas the 35 f/1.8 has a max magnification of 0.24x. Thus, the 35mm f/1.4 fills the frame with the subject more, even though it's further away. It probably stays closer to a true 35mm than the f/1.8 lens does. You don't actually care about minimum focusing distance - you care about maximum magnification. Here's a video on the topic: czcams.com/video/XP5-e4Q01Ac/video.html
It’s good you explain things to make it easier to follow. However, I would like to see more Nikon lens reviews. The Nikon 35 f1.8 and the 35 f1.4 both have the same 0.16x maximum magnification. However, with Nikon the 35 f1.4 still seems to fill the frame with the subject better than the 35 f1.8. Nikon pretty much puts the magnification theory on the back burner again. Yes, the Nikon 35 f1.8 gets in closer than the 35 f1.4, so I don’t know what’s going on. Maybe because the 1.4 lens is bigger or it’s more about the apertures? That is really puzzling.
@@uncruckus9345 Thats I thought, the one's closer to a true 35mm is the f1.8, the gm has focus breathing problem and thats why it has tighter view, yet it zooms closer than the f1.8
Thanks for comparing the 1.4 GM against the 1.8! Most of the other CZcamsrs didn’t think to do that. That’s the comparison of new glass that matters the most. The 1.8 held up well for the price!
I am a professional wedding photographer and IMHO the Sony 1.8 series is a lot better option for most people. In the real world you will never see a difference (and most importantly: you clients certainly wont) but they are lighter, smaller and a lot cheaper for almost the same performace. Yes they are not weather sealed but in all those years I have never shot in conditions a normal lens could not handle. And yes they can not gather as much light, but this is also not a problem with modern cameras and high ISO values. Great work from Sony with the 35 1.4 GM though
would like to see comparisons to other manufacturers, like sigma, samyang, tamron in your lens reviews, as those are hugely relevant to most people watching the videos.
@@TheKMov Yeah that's what I meant...Zeiss branded lenses are not Zeiss lenses per se. Their original lineups (Otos but even the lesser Batis) are just superior.
@Any RD I tend not to judge lenses according to Dxomark rankings. Most of the Zeiss lenses own are sharper than I need and have a lovely character and very nice color rendition. Something that some super-duper-sharp Sigma lenses for example don't have.
Why use the high res mode for the sharpness test? Since the camera is not actually taking one 240MP image the lens wouldn't have to resolve that much detail, right? Would the sharpness difference really be different than in just the 60MP images? Or does combining them amplify the sharpness differences? Also your model's expression makes me think I just asked her to give me a ride to the airport 🙃
The stacking amplifies the demands on resolving power on the lens, if it can't resolve pixel level differences really well then you end up with a worse HR stack (think garbage in garbage out)... It seems counter intuitive at first, just need to think about it for a min.
@@TiaHermana43 thanks! I don't think it's counter intuitive at all, I had just never seen a comparison of two lenses using both methods, so I was assuming the sharpness differences would just carry over 1:1
I've been debating on whether to go with Sony or Canon for quite some time now. The Canon wins in ergonomics and still outperforms with the lenses but this lens might have me grabbing a Sony. I'd love to see how this lens compares with Canon's 35 L II.
I jumped Nikon's ship over the summer to the Sony a7r4. Shortly there after Canon came out with the R5 and I started to get buyers remorse but realizing that with my budget I could have never gotten the body, a 24-70 2.8, and 70-180 2.8 in if I waited for canon. Having really good 3rd party lenses available is the game changer for me since I'm not a money making professional.
Great review. Covered most things in a clear way. I would like to see some real world shots on a lower mp camera to show what differences I would see in my own photographs. The Zeiss flaws are probably obvious but the 1.8 may hold up very well.
What a coincidence that you absolutely unbiasedly (if thats even a word) reviewed this lens along with Lok, Jared and god knows how many reviewers and released the video at the exact same time.
There are embargoes - and often they have to post on a specific day. Rules about when they can post and all have the same rules. There's nothing sneaky going on.
A comparison to the Sigma 35 1.4 would've been nice, as that one is already regarded as the higher quality alternative to the Zeiss. So is the GM worth it compared to the Sigma at basically double the price?
The GM images look very nice. Unfortunately it has focus breathing which makes it harder to use for focus stacking. If that wasn't the case I'd get it.
@tony & Chelsea:Did you realized this massive focus breathing in the second scene.Its from 40 seconds till 1 minute and 52 seconds.That looks really bad.
Thanks for the review! I own the Sony Zeiss and sample variation is really high. A test by the guys from LensRentals showed this. My copy happens to be excellent. However, having the 24 GM definitely would sell anyone on the G Master line.
Thanks for this video. I've been wanting to buy a prime lens and debating between the f/1.8 and f/1.4. Since I am an amateur, the f/1.8 has such amazing value and will probably be plenty powerful for my projects.
If 35mm is your favorite focal length, then this lens should be pretty compelling. I'm impressed by the size, price and performance. Wondering if the availability with follow other GM primes patterns. 🤔
Great review, and thanks for the KEH promo code. I really need to get going and clean my closet out. You're right, no reason to be a collector of unused stuff someone else my shoot with everyday. I owned the Sony/Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 several years ago, and while it did give a sort of "art" look to many images, one of the special looks in the way that Leica M lenses (other than the new APO series) can give. With a 42 megapixel sensor at the time (A7R III) is was for practical purposes pretty sharp in the center wide open, and very good stopped down to landscape type apertures. I didn't really care for it, as the poor contrast got in the way for me. This new lens looks like an incredible value for its price. Hopefully you'll shoot some actual photographs in a range of situations in a follow up review.
I think that the only reason to pay more for the Zeiss version would be the name. I’m not saying that it’s a good reason, but vaunted names have value. It’s the same reason that Leica has overcharged for years on slightly modified Panasonic and Minolta products. Also the Zeiss name could help at resale.
I used the Zeiss 35 1.4 for a while and liked the pictures I was getting, but didn't like the pictures I was missing because that lens focused quite slow. It would be interesting when reviewing primes to test how fast a lens focuses from power on, or when a subject pops into the frame.
Taiwan filled preorders on the Sony 35mm f/1.4 GM at the beginning of Feb. I've had mine for 2 weeks and love it. If you go budget and buy the f/1.8 lens, never pick up the GM lens and use it. You'll hate yourself for not spending the extra bit of cash to buy it. Is it worth twice as much as the Sony 35mm f/1.8? Most definitely! As for the Zeiss 35mm lens, forget about it.
Yes. All of these tests are imo, largely a waste of time. In real world use these differences with chromatic aberration and fringing are negligible. They are there, and they aren't a big issue. And if they do bother you enough, you can remove them in 10 seconds in post. All of these sony lens are very sharp, don't buy into the hype that you need to spend thousands for good optics.
Thanks Mate for such detailed comparison review, i am comparing Sony 35gm and Sony 35 1.8 ,If I am a video maker and don’t really mind focus breathing issue. Wondering the video images quality gonna make any noticeable difference on FX3 ‘s 4K 10bit ? Consider the resolution is very low on 4K. My key consideration is image quality on video.
Sony 35mm Distagon is a great lens but its expensive , big and heavy....35mm 1.8 is ideal modest choice ....24mm 1.4gm great lens but too wide ....I ordered the 35mm 1.4gm and i am curious about it. Great Review thank you very much.
Definitely get that lens if you can afford it. But aps-c users if your not ready to buy a lens that cost more then your body.....get a Sony 35mm F/1.8 oss. Fantastic image quality from corner to corner gorgeous Boca and only like 300$ definitely you can do a lot (Aps-c users) with that 35mm lens
i think considering the price for each, they all fit their range quite well. f1.8 is phenomenal and cheap. f1.4 zeiss increases the price incrementally for the extra aperture for a slight compromise on the IQ (seen videos in the past where it gives comparable results at f1.8), and the f1.4 gm gives no compromise at a price best suited for pros.
He said he will work on his hoarding issue. When a new replacement comes in then you get rid of the used one. Also helps save money on your new purchase, more room in the closet, and everyone on the house benefits.
wide angle lenses very very very often have problems in the corners, in chromatic and in speed that lens not having that is a very good result there are 85 mm lenses that have such results but to find 35 or lower focal lenghts are rare even in 2021 i wonder if they could make a 20 mm focal length lens also without that problems (dream)
Seen a lot of great reviews of this new lens! I am keen for a 35 and excited for the RF 35 1.2 DS that should be releasing this year... not as much light but pairs so nicely with the 28-70 and 85 DS
Great 3-way comparison, I definitely must sell my 35ZA... but not to buy the 35GM, I will rather go wider to the 24GM and skip the 35mm focal length for now. Next is 50GM, next is A7M4 or A9R, and only then will I consider 35GM
Curious why you did a comparison (at the 9:34 mark) by using 240 mp as in a laboratory situation when 99.9% of users don't shoot in a lab? I get that it will show the minute differences but why not also show a real world image scenario?
Nice comparison, but I was hoping on how it will preform in astrophotography. Is it better than the 24GM. just seeing if it be my new 360 astropano lens
tony I watched your videos all the time, but this company you recommended don't pay you what your lenses really worth. I try it recently with a canon 70-200mm 2.8 L Prime lens only a years use, offer me a ridiculous offer. you and your wife, have the best and coolest videos.
Wow! That was a great review. You covered the really important issues, not just sharpness. As an old guy, I am often blown away by even ordinary modern lenses. I have never had a GM lens from Sony that made me unhappy. It's so sad to see Zeiss falling so far behind. Do you know what's going on with the company? Have they been reducing R&D to cut losses? Are they getting out of the consumer camera business?
@@mirrorlessny agreed, smaller and lighter to match is brethren. Possibly better/smoother focus for video, that was really my only minus on the lens but I never intended to use it for video. It's size and wieght never bothered me. Talking about the Sony Zeiss 50 1.4 lens.
1) There's a difference between focusing close and magnification. Magnification is how big the subject appears in the frame, and that's all anyone really cares about. Many lenses suffer from focus breathing, where the focal length actually shrinks as you get closer to a subject, so a 35mm lens might only be 30 or 28mm at its minimum focusing distance. 2) Did they use manual focus? As I mentioned, it doesn't focus as close with AF. 2) You saw the results of my test, as well as my methodology, soo...
I added more detailed information on this to the pinned comment. Here it is for reference: FAQ: The 35mm f/1.8 has a closer focusing distance than the 35mm f/1.4, so why did my test show the 35mm f/1.4 filled the frame with the camera more? It's the difference between maximum magnification and close focusing distance. The 35 f/1.4 has a min focus distance of 9.8", while the 35 f/1.8 is 8.7". So, yes, the f/1.8 can focus at a shorter distance - BUT - the focal length must shrink to 25mm or 30mm or so because of focus breathing (we have a video on this topic). The 35 f/1.4 has a max magnification of 0.26x, whereas the 35 f/1.8 has a max magnification of 0.24x. Thus, the 35mm f/1.4 fills the frame with the subject more, even though it's further away. It probably stays closer to a true 35mm than the f/1.8 lens does. You don't actually care about minimum focusing distance - you care about maximum magnification. Here's a video on the topic: czcams.com/video/XP5-e4Q01Ac/video.html
"if you check any of the stats online it shows that the 1.8 has a greater magnification" The specs online show the f1.8 has maximum magnification of 0.24x. The f1.4GM has max magnification of 0.26x. That is exactly what our tests showed.
I dont understand why they keep the Zeiss lenses at their original prices, rarely ever dropping prices. "People loves Bokeh," photographers loves bokeh, clients hardly ever notice! Thanks T&C, your opinions are a service to the photo community!
Ok I know this isn’t a lab test and it’s a bit of fun but was your bokeh test a little unfair on the Zeiss? You seemed to move your head very close to the lens making the bokeh balls significantly bigger with the Zeiss. The onion ring texture was evident albeit less in the GM, but because you kept the Zeiss and the1.8 bokeh smaller it was less noticeable when you zoomed in.
The size of the bokeh balls is relative to how close I am to the camera, but the texture is the same regardless. I just froze the frame there so I wouldn't have to zoom in as much.
While you were filming the Christmas tree bokeh portion it looked like the camera was "pulsating" for lack of a better term? What is that called? Is that a defect or expected?
Idk what has been going on with Sony lately but damn they're almost doing everything right. The only thing I'd say that was underwhelming from them lately was the A7C but its still a great camera
FAQ: The 35mm f/1.8 has a closer focusing distance than the 35mm f/1.4, so why did my test show the 35mm f/1.4 filled the frame with the camera more?
It's the difference between maximum magnification and close focusing distance. The 35 f/1.4 has a min focus distance of 9.8", while the 35 f/1.8 is 8.7". So, yes, the f/1.8 can focus at a shorter distance - BUT - the focal length must shrink to 25mm or 30mm or so because of focus breathing (we have a video on this topic).
The 35 f/1.4 has a max magnification of 0.26x, whereas the 35 f/1.8 has a max magnification of 0.24x. Thus, the 35mm f/1.4 fills the frame with the subject more, even though it's further away. It probably stays closer to a true 35mm than the f/1.8 lens does.
You don't actually care about minimum focusing distance - you care about maximum magnification.
Here's a video on the topic: czcams.com/video/XP5-e4Q01Ac/video.html
It’s good you explain things to make it easier to follow. However, I would like to see more Nikon lens reviews. The Nikon 35 f1.8 and the 35 f1.4 both have the same 0.16x maximum magnification. However, with Nikon the 35 f1.4 still seems to fill the frame with the subject better than the 35 f1.8. Nikon pretty much puts the magnification theory on the back burner again. Yes, the Nikon 35 f1.8 gets in closer than the 35 f1.4, so I don’t know what’s going on. Maybe because the 1.4 lens is bigger or it’s more about the apertures? That is really puzzling.
@@ytr8989 the hood wants Sony and Canon chief. Nikon aint it.
@@ytr8989 Focal length of lens is always measured at infinity focus.
I think you got it mixed up, the Sony 35 doesn’t have focus breathing , the gm does
@@uncruckus9345 Thats I thought, the one's closer to a true 35mm is the f1.8, the gm has focus breathing problem and thats why it has tighter view, yet it zooms closer than the f1.8
Thanks for comparing the 1.4 GM against the 1.8! Most of the other CZcamsrs didn’t think to do that. That’s the comparison of new glass that matters the most. The 1.8 held up well for the price!
I am a professional wedding photographer and IMHO the Sony 1.8 series is a lot better option for most people. In the real world you will never see a difference (and most importantly: you clients certainly wont) but they are lighter, smaller and a lot cheaper for almost the same performace. Yes they are not weather sealed but in all those years I have never shot in conditions a normal lens could not handle. And yes they can not gather as much light, but this is also not a problem with modern cameras and high ISO values. Great work from Sony with the 35 1.4 GM though
would like to see comparisons to other manufacturers, like sigma, samyang, tamron in your lens reviews, as those are hugely relevant to most people watching the videos.
I'm actually kinda shocked how bad the Zeiss performed. I always thought they were supposed to be the premium option.
That's actually quite an old Sony-Zeiss lens. Lenses really made by Zeiss for their own lineups are on another level.
Try Zeiss Otus 😂
@@TheKMov Yeah that's what I meant...Zeiss branded lenses are not Zeiss lenses per se. Their original lineups (Otos but even the lesser Batis) are just superior.
@Any RD I tend not to judge lenses according to Dxomark rankings. Most of the Zeiss lenses own are sharper than I need and have a lovely character and very nice color rendition. Something that some super-duper-sharp Sigma lenses for example don't have.
Selling the Ziess right away, no questions, thank you so much Tony.
Crikey! You're garage is cleaner than my kitchen. I won't say how horrible my garage is.... Thanks for the video, happy newyear and stay safe.
Nice to see our warm, human and wonderful human Peter Gregg getting a mention!
Why use the high res mode for the sharpness test? Since the camera is not actually taking one 240MP image the lens wouldn't have to resolve that much detail, right? Would the sharpness difference really be different than in just the 60MP images? Or does combining them amplify the sharpness differences?
Also your model's expression makes me think I just asked her to give me a ride to the airport 🙃
The stacking amplifies the demands on resolving power on the lens, if it can't resolve pixel level differences really well then you end up with a worse HR stack (think garbage in garbage out)... It seems counter intuitive at first, just need to think about it for a min.
@@TiaHermana43 thanks! I don't think it's counter intuitive at all, I had just never seen a comparison of two lenses using both methods, so I was assuming the sharpness differences would just carry over 1:1
The Samyang 35 1.4 is my most used lens (15k photos a year) for 3 years now - I guess i make the switch :)
why?
So glad to hear the Z7ii review is coming soon
0:41 When you didn’t want to but you boss (Chelsea) grabbed you by your shirt told you get in there “make that video” 😂
I've been debating on whether to go with Sony or Canon for quite some time now. The Canon wins in ergonomics and still outperforms with the lenses but this lens might have me grabbing a Sony. I'd love to see how this lens compares with Canon's 35 L II.
I jumped Nikon's ship over the summer to the Sony a7r4. Shortly there after Canon came out with the R5 and I started to get buyers remorse but realizing that with my budget I could have never gotten the body, a 24-70 2.8, and 70-180 2.8 in if I waited for canon. Having really good 3rd party lenses available is the game changer for me since I'm not a money making professional.
@Photo Bunny no one is buying DSLR's anymore so nikon is DOA. Sony still has more mirror less lenses than they do.
@Photo Bunny Geez...you are buying tools not a religion.
@Photo Bunny you would not find equivalent of most Sony E lenses on Canon or Nikon mirroless .
@Photo Bunny none of the mentioned by you stuff is needed by me or 99.9% users. One can always attach grip to A9.
Great review. Covered most things in a clear way. I would like to see some real world shots on a lower mp camera to show what differences I would see in my own photographs. The Zeiss flaws are probably obvious but the 1.8 may hold up very well.
What a coincidence that you absolutely unbiasedly (if thats even a word) reviewed this lens along with Lok, Jared and god knows how many reviewers and released the video at the exact same time.
There are embargoes - and often they have to post on a specific day. Rules about when they can post and all have the same rules. There's nothing sneaky going on.
what about the focus breathing?
A comparison to the Sigma 35 1.4 would've been nice, as that one is already regarded as the higher quality alternative to the Zeiss. So is the GM worth it compared to the Sigma at basically double the price?
Test bokeh outside to see which lens do best at blurring out background and also smooth transitions. Thank you
First stop on the Sony 35mm f1.4GM Review videos train, 6 more videos to go!
I'll never buy this lens, but love the content
The GM images look very nice. Unfortunately it has focus breathing which makes it harder to use for focus stacking. If that wasn't the case I'd get it.
This was an excellent review and comparision! I guess I will be asking for a new 35mm GM for Christmas :)
@tony & Chelsea:Did you realized this massive focus breathing in the second scene.Its from 40 seconds till 1 minute and 52 seconds.That looks really bad.
Nice review, although I can almost feel Casey warming up at the sight of all that bokeh ... lol!
Thanks for the review! I own the Sony Zeiss and sample variation is really high. A test by the guys from LensRentals showed this. My copy happens to be excellent. However, having the 24 GM definitely would sell anyone on the G Master line.
That moment when my favorite part was the Peter Gregg reference 👍🏽👍🏽👍🏽🎄🎄🎄🎄
Great video guys, loved it!
love your videos JT
this video is so well directed
we need more like this!
Thanks!
I love that 60fps look of these videos
Thanks for this video. I've been wanting to buy a prime lens and debating between the f/1.8 and f/1.4. Since I am an amateur, the f/1.8 has such amazing value and will probably be plenty powerful for my projects.
If 35mm is your favorite focal length, then this lens should be pretty compelling. I'm impressed by the size, price and performance. Wondering if the availability with follow other GM primes patterns. 🤔
Definitely sold me on the 1.8 while the 1.4 is back ordered. Goal is to make enough money with that lens to justify the 1500 upgrade 😅
I can clearly hear the AF motor while you're filming with the new 35mm, is it only me?
The 35mm f1.8 is the best bang for the buck. An impressive lens.
Great review, and thanks for the KEH promo code. I really need to get going and clean my closet out. You're right, no reason to be a collector of unused stuff someone else my shoot with everyday. I owned the Sony/Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 several years ago, and while it did give a sort of "art" look to many images, one of the special looks in the way that Leica M lenses (other than the new APO series) can give. With a 42 megapixel sensor at the time (A7R III) is was for practical purposes pretty sharp in the center wide open, and very good stopped down to landscape type apertures. I didn't really care for it, as the poor contrast got in the way for me. This new lens looks like an incredible value for its price. Hopefully you'll shoot some actual photographs in a range of situations in a follow up review.
That's one of your best reviews/comparisons.
At 8:26, I said wow.
Thanks!
agree, it's very useful to see side by side comparison with other lenses, especially the bokeh 😵
For photography I would give it to the new GM lens but the focus breathing taking video is very annoying.
Great comparison, thank you. I particularly like the 240 Mpx test to really dig deep into the lens optical quality.
Great review. I would have loved to see the Samyang 35 f1.8 included in the comparisons.
At 8:06 I thought he would say "the sniff (or wind tunnel) test"
The full frame e-mount Sony Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 T* OSS ZA of 2015 is five year old. A very old lens which needs an update.
Just got the GM to serve my R4 in situations where I don't need the 2470, and double as the astrophotography lens!
"Welcome to the Christmas room!"
I think that the only reason to pay more for the Zeiss version would be the name. I’m not saying that it’s a good reason, but vaunted names have value. It’s the same reason that Leica has overcharged for years on slightly modified Panasonic and Minolta products. Also the Zeiss name could help at resale.
I used the Zeiss 35 1.4 for a while and liked the pictures I was getting, but didn't like the pictures I was missing because that lens focused quite slow. It would be interesting when reviewing primes to test how fast a lens focuses from power on, or when a subject pops into the frame.
Taiwan filled preorders on the Sony 35mm f/1.4 GM at the beginning of Feb. I've had mine for 2 weeks and love it. If you go budget and buy the f/1.8 lens, never pick up the GM lens and use it. You'll hate yourself for not spending the extra bit of cash to buy it. Is it worth twice as much as the Sony 35mm f/1.8? Most definitely! As for the Zeiss 35mm lens, forget about it.
So, final conclusion for me was: the 1.8 lens is almost 80-90% as good as the new lens and cost less than 50% (and weights less)? Cool :)
More like 40%.
@@heathwirt8919 Cost wise? :)
@@bernardosilva7306 Performance.
Yes. All of these tests are imo, largely a waste of time. In real world use these differences with chromatic aberration and fringing are negligible. They are there, and they aren't a big issue. And if they do bother you enough, you can remove them in 10 seconds in post. All of these sony lens are very sharp, don't buy into the hype that you need to spend thousands for good optics.
@@waawaaweewaa2045 very good point, especially considering that images/videos are largely viewed on smaller screens =cellphones/tablets/laptops
Happy to see in this 2021. Much love from Nigeria
Thanks Mate for such detailed comparison review, i am comparing Sony 35gm and Sony 35 1.8 ,If I am a video maker and don’t really mind focus breathing issue. Wondering the video images quality gonna make any noticeable difference on FX3 ‘s 4K 10bit ? Consider the resolution is very low on 4K. My key consideration is image quality on video.
Sony 35mm Distagon is a great lens but its expensive , big and heavy....35mm 1.8 is ideal modest choice ....24mm 1.4gm great lens but too wide ....I ordered the 35mm 1.4gm and i am curious about it.
Great Review thank you very much.
I would love to get a hands on this baby! Thanks for the video.
That 05:13 Focus breathing on 35 GM is a deal braker for video
Got to say the GM was amazing but I thought the F1.8 did a great job especially considering the price point
That's exactly how I felt.
I don’t see how GM can help Sony. 🙃
In my honest opinion I think the f1.8 has a lot of swag/character
@@ytr8989 GM has much better coma which is important as the 1.4 could be great for astro!
Need to get my pre-order In. Happy new year Tony and Chelsea
I guess this is a "must have" lens if you want to get that blurry background... Its hard to get it with 2.8F
Not really, just get closer to your subject. The closer you get the blurrier the background will be.
It seems that the new 35/1.4 is really good. I'd like to try this lens at Sony store tomorrow. Thanks a lot!
Definitely get that lens if you can afford it. But aps-c users if your not ready to buy a lens that cost more then your body.....get a Sony 35mm F/1.8 oss. Fantastic image quality from corner to corner gorgeous Boca and only like 300$ definitely you can do a lot (Aps-c users) with that 35mm lens
Whatabout the Sigma 35 f1.2 that's about the same price?
i think considering the price for each, they all fit their range quite well. f1.8 is phenomenal and cheap. f1.4 zeiss increases the price incrementally for the extra aperture for a slight compromise on the IQ (seen videos in the past where it gives comparable results at f1.8), and the f1.4 gm gives no compromise at a price best suited for pros.
The new 35GM can fully replace Zeiss 35; but never to replace Sony 35 1.8 due to the size and weight.
Great Review. I love the 35mm focal length. It's not super wide so you can tell a better story.
How *DARE* you suggest that I don't need all the gear I've collected!
He said he will work on his hoarding issue. When a new replacement comes in then you get rid of the used one. Also helps save money on your new purchase, more room in the closet, and everyone on the house benefits.
wide angle lenses very very very often have problems in the corners, in chromatic and in speed
that lens not having that is a very good result
there are 85 mm lenses that have such results but to find 35 or lower focal lenghts are rare even in 2021
i wonder if they could make a 20 mm focal length lens also without that problems (dream)
Seen a lot of great reviews of this new lens! I am keen for a 35 and excited for the RF 35 1.2 DS that should be releasing this year... not as much light but pairs so nicely with the 28-70 and 85 DS
That's a garage? Looks more like a perfume and powder room. Fru-fru! Good review with the other lenses.
Fun lens to watch reviews for, but way outside my humble budget.
I laughed so hard when tony couldn’t get the lens on the camera 😂
Such a helpful video. I’m going for the 1.8 👍🏻
Great 3-way comparison, I definitely must sell my 35ZA... but not to buy the 35GM, I will rather go wider to the 24GM and skip the 35mm focal length for now. Next is 50GM, next is A7M4 or A9R, and only then will I consider 35GM
Closets by design do your guys garage cabs?
Curious why you did a comparison (at the 9:34 mark) by using 240 mp as in a laboratory situation when 99.9% of users don't shoot in a lab? I get that it will show the minute differences but why not also show a real world image scenario?
Be sure and compare the Nikon lenses you are using on your upcoming Z7ii review with these lenses!
Looks like the f/1.8 is a great bang for your buck for us mortals/ amateurs and the new f1.4 forv the serious pros making $$$ with their business.
Thumbs up for the shoutout to Peter Gregg. Love that guy.
I sold my Sony Zeiss 35mm 1.4 to KEH several weeks ago. Just received my Sony 35mm 1.4 GM today.
what was your major selling point for the GM? i wanna get it too
@@Weensy I like the rendering. The sharpness. Also, its light weight. Kind of expensive though but.....
Lighted museum display case format for the power tools.
A new Sony 35mm 1.8 is about $300 cheaper than a new zeiss.
Another optical masterpiece following 24GM.
right? things are moving slowly but in the right direction 💪
Great video and review. I have the Sony 135mm f1.8 Gm (amazing lens btw), and it also focuses much closer in manual than AF. Must be a Sony thing.
Tony, will be interesting to get comparison of 35 mm Sigma f2 vs Sony f1.8 lens and maybe Sigma f2 bokeh against Sony and Sigma f1.4 lenses. Thanks.
Nice comparison, but I was hoping on how it will preform in astrophotography. Is it better than the 24GM. just seeing if it be my new 360 astropano lens
I love my 1.8 ... never miss focus
tony I watched your videos all the time, but this company you recommended don't pay you what your lenses really worth. I try it recently with a canon 70-200mm 2.8 L Prime lens only a years use, offer me a ridiculous offer. you and your wife, have the best and coolest videos.
Wow! That was a great review. You covered the really important issues, not just sharpness. As an old guy, I am often blown away by even ordinary modern lenses. I have never had a GM lens from Sony that made me unhappy.
It's so sad to see Zeiss falling so far behind. Do you know what's going on with the company? Have they been reducing R&D to cut losses? Are they getting out of the consumer camera business?
OBTW, KEH rocks! I have bought and sold through them.
Looks like the best value is the f/1.8.
Please do a comparison of the 35mm GM vs Leica 35mm f1.4 Summilux on the same Sony body using an adaptor.
Your the man, man. Thank you for all the help over the years. People talk $; keep being a good person :)
This makes me excited for the potential of a 50mm GM. I'll sell my Zeiss for that!
Have you tried the Sony Zeiss 50mm 1.4? It's an outstanding lens. I can't see myself getting a 50mm gm unless it's a 1.2 ...
@@jfranco3281 I love the lens as well, but if the upgrade to GM shows similar improvements I'll happily switch.
@Kyle Wolfe likely many improvements = smaller,lighter,higherImageQuality, I hope for 67mm filter thread 🙏
@@mirrorlessny agreed, smaller and lighter to match is brethren. Possibly better/smoother focus for video, that was really my only minus on the lens but I never intended to use it for video. It's size and wieght never bothered me. Talking about the Sony Zeiss 50 1.4 lens.
I currently do not have a 50 or 55 mm now and also waiting for a 50mm GM.
@7:28 That is just incorrect; the 1.8 focuses significantly closer than the new 1.4, and all of the other reviews confirm that
1) There's a difference between focusing close and magnification. Magnification is how big the subject appears in the frame, and that's all anyone really cares about. Many lenses suffer from focus breathing, where the focal length actually shrinks as you get closer to a subject, so a 35mm lens might only be 30 or 28mm at its minimum focusing distance.
2) Did they use manual focus? As I mentioned, it doesn't focus as close with AF.
2) You saw the results of my test, as well as my methodology, soo...
@@TonyAndChelsea Focus breathing on that GM 1.4 is pretty bad compared to the 1.8, don't you think?
I added more detailed information on this to the pinned comment. Here it is for reference:
FAQ: The 35mm f/1.8 has a closer focusing distance than the 35mm f/1.4, so why did my test show the 35mm f/1.4 filled the frame with the camera more?
It's the difference between maximum magnification and close focusing distance. The 35 f/1.4 has a min focus distance of 9.8", while the 35 f/1.8 is 8.7". So, yes, the f/1.8 can focus at a shorter distance - BUT - the focal length must shrink to 25mm or 30mm or so because of focus breathing (we have a video on this topic).
The 35 f/1.4 has a max magnification of 0.26x, whereas the 35 f/1.8 has a max magnification of 0.24x. Thus, the 35mm f/1.4 fills the frame with the subject more, even though it's further away. It probably stays closer to a true 35mm than the f/1.8 lens does.
You don't actually care about minimum focusing distance - you care about maximum magnification.
Here's a video on the topic: czcams.com/video/XP5-e4Q01Ac/video.html
@@TonyAndChelsea yes, and if you check any of the stats online it shows that the 1.8 has a greater magnification
"if you check any of the stats online it shows that the 1.8 has a greater magnification" The specs online show the f1.8 has maximum magnification of 0.24x. The f1.4GM has max magnification of 0.26x. That is exactly what our tests showed.
7:14 That’s a vintage Makita 90° drill on the wall - I’m guessing batteries are nonexistent and that’s just for display
Hi Tony,
What is the vintage lens on your vintage Russian camera?
I would love to know how do you think it compares to the sigma 35mm 1.2
I dont understand why they keep the Zeiss lenses at their original prices, rarely ever dropping prices. "People loves Bokeh," photographers loves bokeh, clients hardly ever notice! Thanks T&C, your opinions are a service to the photo community!
Would love to see a side by side comparison of 35mm f1.4 GM vs the Sigma Art 35mm f1.2
Gordon Laing did one in his
Cameralabs review
You looked a little bit like Billy Bob Thornton at the end of the video. 😆
Ok I know this isn’t a lab test and it’s a bit of fun but was your bokeh test a little unfair on the Zeiss? You seemed to move your head very close to the lens making the bokeh balls significantly bigger with the Zeiss. The onion ring texture was evident albeit less in the GM, but because you kept the Zeiss and the1.8 bokeh smaller it was less noticeable when you zoomed in.
The size of the bokeh balls is relative to how close I am to the camera, but the texture is the same regardless. I just froze the frame there so I wouldn't have to zoom in as much.
Gordon Leign from camera labs called. He wants his christmas tree back
Wow now that was effective, precise. Good job.
Hi,can you make a comparison between sony 16-35 f2.8 and this new sony 35 mm f1.4. Which one is the sharpest at 35 mm?
While you were filming the Christmas tree bokeh portion it looked like the camera was "pulsating" for lack of a better term? What is that called? Is that a defect or expected?
Idk what has been going on with Sony lately but damn they're almost doing everything right. The only thing I'd say that was underwhelming from them lately was the A7C but its still a great camera
My jaw DROPPED the moment I saw that garage.
That's an operating theatre not a garage.