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!

  • We are looking for a committed forum member who would like to help with administration and moderation of our forum. Good communication and writing skills would be appreciated. Please message Olaf if you are interested.

Sony FE 100mm F2.8 STF GM OSS

V

Vivek

Guest
Sony outdid themselves with the new STF lens. AF, OSS and Macro capabilities.

:clap:

I like the lower priced, lightweight 85/1.8 as well.
 

seb

Member
If you shoot a lot of stuff on a close distance (not macro) in good light, the 100 STF will shine. On everything else, the 90/2.8 G Macro may be the better solution.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
If you shoot a lot of stuff on a close distance (not macro) in good light, the 100 STF will shine. On everything else, the 90/2.8 G Macro may be the better solution.
I agree. If one needs true and extensive macro capability then the 90 Macro is a better option. The 100mm is better for people that want a "portrait" or a "look" lens that can provide limited Macro capability (when compared to a dedicated Macro lens).
 
I agree. If one needs true and extensive macro capability then the 90 Macro is a better option. The 100mm is better for people that want a "portrait" or a "look" lens that can provide limited Macro capability (when compared to a dedicated Macro lens).
Thanks for the feedback!
J. Paul
 

pegelli

Well-known member
The STF only gets you 1:4, the macro magnifies up to 1:1

Also the STF loses two stops of light due to the filter, at f2.8 it's only T5.6.

The real purpose (and advantage) of the STF over the macro is the buttersmooth bokeh, if that's what you're after.
 

thomas

New member
The real purpose (and advantage) of the STF over the macro is the buttersmooth bokeh, if that's what you're after.
Absolutely!
It's really nice to see Sony - that once bought Minolta and (AFAIK) kept a large part of Minolta's lens designers - extending this part of its history. The old 2.8/135 STF back than was reason enough for quite a few people to buy into the Minolta system. Just as the Zeiss 4/120 APO Macro lens was reason enough for people to buy into Contax 645...
Special lenses make people buy into a system.
A great fast 50mm or 85mm is not what sets a system apart today (because all brands have very, very good offerings).
I wonder why they don't offer top quality Zeiss Tilt/Shift Lenses. These kind of lenses would make the system even more interessting. I would also love to see slow but (optically) extremely well corrected and small lenses... something like a f2.8 (or f3.5)/28mm or a f2.8 (or f3.5 or even f4)/35mm with literally no distortion and no CAs.
Anyway... the STF is a really nice specialty-lens that makes the system as a whole much more interessting...
 

gurtch

Well-known member
Absolutely!
It's really nice to see Sony - that once bought Minolta and (AFAIK) kept a large part of Minolta's lens designers - extending this part of its history. The old 2.8/135 STF back than was reason enough for quite a few people to buy into the Minolta system. Just as the Zeiss 4/120 APO Macro lens was reason enough for people to buy into Contax 645...
Special lenses make people buy into a system.
A great fast 50mm or 85mm is not what sets a system apart today (because all brands have very, very good offerings).
I wonder why they don't offer top quality Zeiss Tilt/Shift Lenses. These kind of lenses would make the system even more interessting. I would also love to see slow but (optically) extremely well corrected and small lenses... something like a f2.8 (or f3.5)/28mm or a f2.8 (or f3.5 or even f4)/35mm with literally no distortion and no CAs.
Anyway... the STF is a really nice specialty-lens that makes the system as a whole much more interessting...
The Sony Zeiss 35mm f2.8 fills the bill...small, light weight, and very sharp lens (and AF) as well. I really want a 24-70mm f4 lens as my walk around lens for the A7RII....but not the Sony Zeiss f4----it is VERY weak from all reviews; terrible distortion, depending on in camera profiles to correct them (JPG only---I shoot RAW only). A third party (Sigma, Tamron) could find a niche here.
Dave in NJ
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
So I actually got to try this lens for a bit today and I gotta say that it is actually pretty impressive as a portrait lens. Might actually be the "ultimate" portrait lens for Sony currently.

My only complaints were my user error that I quickly remedied in that you with have to be in "macro" mode or "portrait" mode. There's not really an option to cover the full focusing range. Then there was my preference that Sony would've made this an f/2 lens (even if it would mean a 77mm filter ring size) to be able to shoot at lower ISO and still retain the super creamy bokeh. Even still I'm seriously considering selling my 85 Batis and 135/1.8 A-mount to get this one.
 

thrice

Active member
Then there was my preference that Sony would've made this an f/2 lens (even if it would mean a 77mm filter ring size) to be able to shoot at lower ISO and still retain the super creamy bokeh. Even still I'm seriously considering selling my 85 Batis and 135/1.8 A-mount to get this one.
The lens is T5.6 and F/2.8. If it were F/2.0 it would still be T4.0 at best so not really suitable for low light.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
The lens is T5.6 and F/2.8. If it were F/2.0 it would still be T4.0 at best so not really suitable for low light.
Yeah I know but I want the f/2 DoF. It's useful for artistic portraits or when you want more shallow DoF. The Contax Yashica 100/2 is one of my favorite lenses ever. The light transmission would be T4.0 (or is it T3.9/T4.1... who knows without measurements) but the DoF would given would still be f/2 (despite ~T4 light transmission) if that were the case as well.

I would use this lens almost exclusive for portraits or a limited amount of product shots with strobes so I'm not so worried about the light transmission ratings. Besides the A7RII or the A9 are reasonably clean up to ISO 1600-3200. ISO 6400 is usable on either for most. ISO 12800 is subjectively usable and in those cases I still have f/1.4-1.8 lenses that could do the job.
 
Top