The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

G Master lenses - 24-70mm f/2.8, 85mm f/1.4 & 70-200mm f/2.8

V

Vivek

Guest
what i wonder is if better and sharper lenses with more contrast wide open also improve af accuracy with the a7 cameras ? i have not done a test
but i do shoot the canon 70-200 2,8 II side by side with the sony 70-200 a lot and i got the impression that the canon zoom via metabones is slower but more accurate than
the sony lens especially at the long end.
I would think only to an extent.

The newer techs in the newer cams improve the AF (speed and accuracy) enormously.

You can see the progression all the way from NEX-5. :)
 

Hulyss Bowman

Active member
Houses ? What the hell are you talking about ? I love what Sony did with the last lenses, a strong signal for the future. I just ask Sony to make a more "professional grade" camera in the future to go with this new philosophy. There is no wrong or right this is just a wish. I'm not bashing or over reacting or whatever.

"We want to make lenses that can be used forever"
Motoyuji Ohtake, Distinguished Engineer, Opto Design Department, Core Technology Division, Digital Imaging Business Group at Sony.
Now I'm sure they plan to make a more rugged body, a sort of mirror-less A900 with XQD cards, whatever.

Wishing or comparing with other brands isn't bashing.

 
Last edited:

Quentin_Bargate

Well-known member
It is a little difficult to discern Sony's intentions here. Does the development of these new lenses and E-mount high resolution cameras indicate that is Sony intended direction, or is there life in the A-Mount?

It seems that the new G Master lenses, but in A mount, could work just as well on a future A mount camera and they may have been developed with that option in mind. They may have been released in E-mount first because there is not a suitable high resolution A mount camera available - yet.

Whatever, its a long time since I was this excited about a few new lenses.
 

Pradeep

Member
what i wonder is if better and sharper lenses with more contrast wide open also improve af accuracy with the a7 cameras ? i have not done a test
but i do shoot the canon 70-200 2,8 II side by side with the sony 70-200 a lot and i got the impression that the canon zoom via metabones is slower but more accurate than
the sony lens especially at the long end.
I too have tried my Canon 70-200 f4 with metabones on the A7RII. It is pathetically slow and would just never work for me for wildlife use - which is the only time I would use that lens. I have heard that Sony's own version is not that sharp and of course it weighs the same as Canon (minus the adapter). So will wait to see what the new 2.8 version is like. Would still not buy it unless the future upgrade to the A7RII is also capable.

The one other thing that is being lost in all the whining - Sony has shown with the release of the 70-200 2.8 that it is willing to switch gears and develop long lenses with fast apertures for the FE mount, so there HAS to be an upcoming robust camera body that can directly compete with Canon and Nikon. Which then means that there will also be other long lenses beyond 200mm in the future.

Sadly, it also means that for those hopeful of an A99 upgrade, it may not happen - but you never know with Sony :D

@Quentin: Sorry, just saw your post. Yes, maybe there will be A mount versions of the newer lenses, but I have a feeling Sony is going for something else altogether.
 

Hulyss Bowman

Active member
It is a little difficult to discern Sony's intentions here. Does the development of these new lenses and E-mount high resolution cameras indicate that is Sony intended direction, or is there life in the A-Mount?

It seems that the new G Master lenses, but in A mount, could work just as well on a future A mount camera and they may have been developed with that option in mind. They may have been released in E-mount first because there is not a suitable high resolution A mount camera available - yet.

Whatever, its a long time since I was this excited about a few new lenses.
Same here, I'm jealous. Those 3 lenses are just right. I do not know if Sony released any A mount lenses in the past few months or years. They did the LA-EA4 they might do the same for FE lenses on alpha body, an adaptor FE>>A mount.

I seriously doubt they will make those lenses in A mount but I might be wrong.

Like you Pradeep I'm pretty sure longer lenses for FE mount will see the light.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
The A mount is dead IMHO. My last try for A mount was more than 2 years ago and luckily I resisted to buy some used Sony/Zeiss glass. No camera followed since the A99 (+4 years old ????) and I would wonder really if they continue this mount now.
 
Last edited:

4season

Well-known member
Maybe there's room for smaller lenses offering "classic" performance, kind of like the Zeiss ZM series. G Master seems more like Sony's answer to Zeiss Otus: I like having these sorts of options!
 

Annna T

Active member
Same here, I'm jealous. Those 3 lenses are just right. I do not know if Sony released any A mount lenses in the past few months or years. They did the LA-EA4 they might do the same for FE lenses on alpha body, an adaptor FE>>A mount.

I seriously doubt they will make those lenses in A mount but I might be wrong.

Like you Pradeep I'm pretty sure longer lenses for FE mount will see the light.
You can't adapt a lens made for a shorter flange distance to a body made for a longer flange : you need to take something away, you can't add something. It can only go in one direction : A-Mount adapted to FE mount, but not the other way.

For the same reason (flange distance), I'm not sure that Sony can use the same design for an A-mount lenses, as Quentin Bargate wrote; they could use similar new technologies however in order to improve their actual lenses line.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Maybe there's room for smaller lenses offering "classic" performance, kind of like the Zeiss ZM series. G Master seems more like Sony's answer to Zeiss Otus: I like having these sorts of options!
Otii will not AF with any cameras they are made for. Manual focus with those DSLRs is no small feat. Practically useless.

So, no comparison at all.
 

hcubell

Well-known member
I still don't get it.

So the 24-70/4 isn't up to the expectations set by other lenses like the 16-35 or 70-200 or 90 macro. Well, it isn't unknown for companies to eventually update existing lenses with new formulations and designs. Heck even the dinosaurs such as Canon, Leica, Nikon or even Phase One/Mamiya or Rodenstock have a few perceived "dogs" in their lens line ups and eventually update/replace them. Now it must be said that historically that replacement takes place at a glacial rate, about a decade or longer if lenses like the Nikon 24-70/2.8 or 70-200/2.8 or Leica 50 Noctilux or 35 Summilux are anything to go by. :poke:

Of course if Sony did replace one the current f/4 lenses then I'm sure that there would be people up in arms complaining that their current lenses have now become paper weights and their residual value on the secondhand market gutted etc etc. Such is the nature of Internet forums I guess.

What's not to get? My needs are different from the needs of those that want big and heavy fast lenses. I am unhappy that Sony appears to be segmenting its lens line into (1) big and heavy fast lenses that are expensive and optically the best that Sony is capable of producing and (2) smaller and lighter and slower lenses that are relatively cheap and mediocre. My preference is for smaller, lighter, slower lenses that are optically the best that can be produced and priced accordingly. I don't think I am unique. I think there are large numbers of photographers that bought into the Sony A7 series of cameras based upon the concept of exceptional image quality in a compact form factor. This is not "whining."
Sure, Sony may someday update the 24-70 f/4, but I suspect that it will be positioned at a price point and performance level well below the 2.8 version. There is no apparent reason why a 24-70mm f/4 zoom can't be small, light and at least the optical equal of the 24-70mm f/2.8 zoom. It all comes down to.....money. The prevailing market wisdom among Canon, Nikon and Sony is that the people with the money to buy the best lenses are fixated on fast lenses. They should do some more market research. Give a group of photographers who would be serious potential buyers of these zoom lenses two lenses that both cost $2500 and one is the size of the existing 24-70 f/4 FE zoom and the other the size of the new G Master f/2.8. Tell them the two lenses are both exceptional, truly world class from an optical standpoint. They are equal in quality. Then ask, which would you buy?
 

fotografz

Well-known member
As a Sony "early adopter" I feel entitled to critique their offerings in the hopes it institutes change ... not to hurt anyone's enthusiasm for the brand, including my own.

I had one of the first A900s in the US, bought a second one and a slew of ZA lenses (8 to be exact); worked with a NEX5 and an APSc A mount DSLR, worked with an A99 for years, then a A7R, and now an A7R-II.

Of all the shoots I've been on where there were other pros, or shoots I supervised as an art director (100s), I have been the only one using Sony. That's fine with me. So what? Pros are rarely bleeding edge, and are more pragmatic regarding system swaps.

I must say it is disconcerting to hear the A mount is presumed dead. It isn't that old to be killed off.

IMO, Sony NEEDs critical feedback ... and not just by avoiding buying their products.

How well these new lenses match up to the marketing remains to be seen, but I'm sure they'll be good. Only then will the apparent value proposition reveal itself. If they are anything close to top Zeiss or Leica optics then it'll be a bargain. While these are FE mount, I suspect they are intended for a camera we have yet to hear a whisper about. I believe it will be their image leader. Not quite as small as the current A cameras, but not as big as current high performance DSLRs.

Yet, I think it is legitimate to wish for smaller AF FE lenses with excellent image qualities (and long term build quality) to use on the A7 cameras including the A7R-II. Maybe the Batis are that ... if you can get them.

Oh well ...

- marc
 

Slingers

Active member
I wonder why this new 85GM doesn't have OSS. To me it's right at the start of the range where you need it. Then when you start to use it in crop mode or even going further in video using the clear zoom it would have been a useful feature for me.

I suspect from the few samples it has a different colour signature than the Zeiss primes we have. So I'm interested to see it compared against the batis to be able to make a judgement.
 

Lucille

New member
I am most likely to get the 85/1.4 GM. The size would be fine for a portrait lens.


I agree, though I feel the IQ on this needs to be better then the Batis, which is a tough task, as IQ can be subjective to many of us, however, if the 85mm f/1.4 is noticeably worse then the Batis in IQ, then why would one buy it?

Its always exciting getting a new lens, and shooting with it, I have mostly been a wide angle person, so short telephoto and telephoto will be somewhat new to me and fun.
 

Lucille

New member
Totally off-topic with regard to the lenses, but I had to get this off my chest.

With all due respect to the people who use it I find this talk and use of the ignore list a bit over the top.

I also know members here and on other fora who's opinions I respect more (or less) but even contrary opinions are useful to sharpen your own mind.
There's no need to react to everything you don't agree with, and who knows, the next time a person you have on your ignore list posts something useful and you don't see it.
I know very few people who are always wrong or always right.

So putting people on your ignore list is in my mind is your own loss, and if certain posts are better ignored the scroll wheel is your best friend.



I hope I don't step on too many toes with this post ;)

You make a god point daddy-o, I haven't blocked/ignored anybody, but I must say it gets very old to hear the same old dribble ad nauseam, over and over, some of these folks always have to try and get in the last word, and try and look like angels doing it. I really enjoy this forum, and when somebody tries to take that joy away because they cant help but open their trap over and over, I can see why some folks will just block them. Maybe it is better to block somebody then to get into a online argument.

I come here to enjoy the images, enjoy the discussion, enjoy the talented people, I don't come here to worry about how I will respond to somebody who doesn't know when to shut up.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I agree, though I feel the IQ on this needs to be better then the Batis, which is a tough task, as IQ can be subjective to many of us, however, if the 85mm f/1.4 is noticeably worse then the Batis in IQ, then why would one buy it?

Onion rings (Batis) vs smooth OOF bokeh highlights (GM) is one big factor for me. :)

BTW, the Otus 85 also shows onion rings.
 

Annna T

Active member
I wonder why this new 85GM doesn't have OSS. To me it's right at the start of the range where you need it. Then when you start to use it in crop mode or even going further in video using the clear zoom it would have been a useful feature for me.

I suspect from the few samples it has a different colour signature than the Zeiss primes we have. So I'm interested to see it compared against the batis to be able to make a judgement.
A7rm2 has IBIS and at that focal length IBIS is perfectly able to stabilize the lens. Longer lenses are another story. The 90mm is a macro lens and thus needs a more perfect stabilization. At least, that is the rationalization I can find.
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
A7rm2 has IBIS and at that focal length IBIS is perfectly able to stabilize the lens. Longer lenses are another story. The 90mm is a macro lens and thus needs a more perfect stabilization. At least, that is the rationalization I can find.
Well, the FE 90/2.8 MACRO G OSS lens is great to use on an A7r that doesn't have IBIS!
Of course, nevertheless that's at a disadvantage relative to IBIS for macro shots.
Here the IBIS X- and Y-image stabilization corrections can matter a lot while they vanish for infinity focus.
That's why these two corrections also require focus distance in addition to focal length information.
OSS applies only pitch and yaw stabilization. IBIS also applies roll stabilization.
For roll stabilization neither focal length nor focus distance information is required.
 
Top