Sony 35mm f1.4 GM

Started 3 months ago | Discussions
noggin2k1
noggin2k1 Senior Member • Posts: 2,736
Sony 35mm f1.4 GM

Judging by a lot of the comments in this forum, there will be a fair few "please Canon, give us something like this".

Whilst I applaud Sony for starting to rollout some decent lenses, I do hope Canon sacrifices some of the size & weight saving for less of a reliance on heavy corrections when releasing their RF L 35mm.

f1.2 or f1.4, I'm not overly bothered at this focal length, but please just make it no bigger than the RF 50mm L.

Anyway, over to you Canon, to see what you've got...

 noggin2k1's gear list:noggin2k1's gear list
Canon EOS R5 Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM Canon EF 35mm F1.4L II USM Canon RF 50mm F1.2L USM Canon RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS USM +3 more
evertdoorn Junior Member • Posts: 49
Re: Sony 35mm f1.4 GM

a lighter 1.4 version would be great. Love my 50 RF, but it's about twice as heavy as this new lens.

Unfortunately Canon seems to go for either the super fast and heavy glass, or slower f 1.8/f 2.0 options which of course are also more affordable.

I think that a nice in-between option must come from third parties, probably Tamron.

Jamie87 Regular Member • Posts: 165
Re: Sony 35mm f1.4 GM
1

I loved the form factor of the EF 50mm 1.2, beefy but stubby.

I read on here that one of the rumours for Canons next 35mm was going to be a 1.2 lens. If thats true, I hope they don't go for the long slim design similar to the Sigma 35 1.2 for Sony.

VZA Forum Member • Posts: 75
Re: Sony 35mm f1.4 GM

I love the reviews claiming how small Sony's 35mm F1.4 is. It's a whopping 1.2 centimeters shorter than Canon's 50mm f1.2.

The 50mm f1.2 is roughly the same size as Sony's 50mm f1.4. If that's any indication then Canon's 35mm f1.2 would be around the same size as Sony's 35mm f1.4. If Canon opts to make a 35mm f1.4 instead then I would imagine it would be considerably smaller than Sony's offering.

I'm no expert but I think Canon having wider glass at the mount would make their designs heavier but at least that weight is near the back which makes holding the lenses easier (and that doesn't even factor in the better grips on their bodies).

Some of the images from Sony's 35mm f1.4 are quite nice but there's quite a few with nervous bokeh. I thought long and hard about going with Sony for the cheaper bodies and glass but at the end of the day I know I'm not going to be satisfied with the quality of the images coming from them.

architekt_1 Forum Member • Posts: 72
Re: Sony 35mm f1.4 GM
3

high end users only want 1.2 prime from now on.

diness Veteran Member • Posts: 3,726
Re: Sony 35mm f1.4 GM
4

VZA wrote:

I love the reviews claiming how small Sony's 35mm F1.4 is. It's a whopping 1.2 centimeters shorter than Canon's 50mm f1.2.

yes, but the RF 50mm is almost double the weight.  The Sony is the smallest 35mm f1.4 which is great

The 50mm f1.2 is roughly the same size as Sony's 50mm f1.4. If that's any indication then Canon's 35mm f1.2 would be around the same size as Sony's 35mm f1.4. If Canon opts to make a 35mm f1.4 instead then I would imagine it would be considerably smaller than Sony's offering.

I very very much doubt that Canon will make an f1.2 35mm lens that will be the size of this f1.4 lens or that they will make a smaller f1.4

I'm no expert but I think Canon having wider glass at the mount would make their designs heavier but at least that weight is near the back which makes holding the lenses easier (and that doesn't even factor in the better grips on their bodies).

Some of the images from Sony's 35mm f1.4 are quite nice but there's quite a few with nervous bokeh. I thought long and hard about going with Sony for the cheaper bodies and glass but at the end of the day I know I'm not going to be satisfied with the quality of the images coming from them.

 diness's gear list:diness's gear list
Canon EOS R Canon EF 135mm F2L USM Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro Canon RF 24-105mm F4L IS USM
diness Veteran Member • Posts: 3,726
Re: Sony 35mm f1.4 GM
8

architekt_1 wrote:

high end users only want 1.2 prime from now on.

I think this is incredibly oversimplified and untrue

 diness's gear list:diness's gear list
Canon EOS R Canon EF 135mm F2L USM Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro Canon RF 24-105mm F4L IS USM
sportyaccordy Forum Pro • Posts: 18,256
Re: Sony 35mm f1.4 GM

diness wrote:

architekt_1 wrote:

high end users only want 1.2 prime from now on.

I think this is incredibly oversimplified and untrue

That is how a lot of his posts go.

I don't see a fast 50 being this small. The size advantage for mirrorless changes with FL. The wider you go the smaller you can make lenses vs a DSLR verson. Then somewhere in the standard FL zone it flips and MILC lenses get bigger. I think fast 50s are always going to be gigantic. I am no expert on optics but that FL  just seems to be on the other side of that threshold.

It would be nice for Canon to make something between the 1.8 and 1.2 lenses though.

-- hide signature --

Sometimes I take pictures with my gear- https://www.flickr.com/photos/41601371@N00/

 sportyaccordy's gear list:sportyaccordy's gear list
Canon EOS R Canon EF 135mm F2.8 SF Sigma 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM | A Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro +1 more
shawnphoto Senior Member • Posts: 1,307
Re: Sony 35mm f1.4 GM

sportyaccordy wrote:

diness wrote:

architekt_1 wrote:

high end users only want 1.2 prime from now on.

I think this is incredibly oversimplified and untrue

That is how a lot of his posts go.

I don't see a fast 50 being this small. The size advantage for mirrorless changes with FL. The wider you go the smaller you can make lenses vs a DSLR verson. Then somewhere in the standard FL zone it flips and MILC lenses get bigger. I think fast 50s are always going to be gigantic. I am no expert on optics but that FL just seems to be on the other side of that threshold.

It would be nice for Canon to make something between the 1.8 and 1.2 lenses though.

The problem is the reviewers. It will be tough for Canon can make the reviewers happy about a f/1.4 lens at the right price point for a Canon lens.

-- hide signature --

Biden will save us!

 shawnphoto's gear list:shawnphoto's gear list
Canon EOS R Canon EOS RP Canon EOS R5 Canon EF 24-105mm F4L IS II USM Canon RF 28-70mm F2L USM +4 more
shawnphoto Senior Member • Posts: 1,307
Re: Sony 35mm f1.4 GM

diness wrote:

architekt_1 wrote:

high end users only want 1.2 prime from now on.

I think this is incredibly oversimplified and untrue

f/1.2 is very important for high end users. For one, it gives bokeh that rivals what medium format lenses can do. And of course it provides a lot of light. Plus the lenses sell for a lot of money, don't know if you noticed that or not.

-- hide signature --

Biden will save us!

 shawnphoto's gear list:shawnphoto's gear list
Canon EOS R Canon EOS RP Canon EOS R5 Canon EF 24-105mm F4L IS II USM Canon RF 28-70mm F2L USM +4 more
ProDude Senior Member • Posts: 2,203
Re: Sony 35mm f1.4 GM
2

You can be dollars to donuts Canon will have a RF35mm f1.2 IS USM on the way. It will be just as sweet as the 50 no doubt. I wouldn't worry too much about the size and such. The results will warrant it's existence.

-- hide signature --

Name the gear and I've probably owned it and used it.

 ProDude's gear list:ProDude's gear list
Canon EOS R5 Sigma 14-24mm F2.8 DG HSM Art Sigma 105mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Canon RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM +17 more
diness Veteran Member • Posts: 3,726
Re: Sony 35mm f1.4 GM

shawnphoto wrote:

diness wrote:

architekt_1 wrote:

high end users only want 1.2 prime from now on.

I think this is incredibly oversimplified and untrue

f/1.2 is very important for high end users. For one, it gives bokeh that rivals what medium format lenses can do. And of course it provides a lot of light. Plus the lenses sell for a lot of money, don't know if you noticed that or not.

Yes, I did notice that.  What you said is not the same as what he said, although I still think it's oversimplified.  He said "high end users ONLY want f1.2 primes from now on".  That's just not true.

Your points are true, but I would change your first sentence to "f1.2 is very important for some high end users" (whatever "high end users" means...)

 diness's gear list:diness's gear list
Canon EOS R Canon EF 135mm F2L USM Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro Canon RF 24-105mm F4L IS USM
diness Veteran Member • Posts: 3,726
Re: Sony 35mm f1.4 GM

shawnphoto wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

diness wrote:

architekt_1 wrote:

high end users only want 1.2 prime from now on.

I think this is incredibly oversimplified and untrue

That is how a lot of his posts go.

I don't see a fast 50 being this small. The size advantage for mirrorless changes with FL. The wider you go the smaller you can make lenses vs a DSLR verson. Then somewhere in the standard FL zone it flips and MILC lenses get bigger. I think fast 50s are always going to be gigantic. I am no expert on optics but that FL just seems to be on the other side of that threshold.

It would be nice for Canon to make something between the 1.8 and 1.2 lenses though.

The problem is the reviewers. It will be tough for Canon can make the reviewers happy about a f/1.4 lens at the right price point for a Canon lens.

Why is that?

 diness's gear list:diness's gear list
Canon EOS R Canon EF 135mm F2L USM Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro Canon RF 24-105mm F4L IS USM
shawnphoto Senior Member • Posts: 1,307
Re: Sony 35mm f1.4 GM

diness wrote:

shawnphoto wrote:

sportyaccordy wrote:

diness wrote:

architekt_1 wrote:

high end users only want 1.2 prime from now on.

I think this is incredibly oversimplified and untrue

That is how a lot of his posts go.

I don't see a fast 50 being this small. The size advantage for mirrorless changes with FL. The wider you go the smaller you can make lenses vs a DSLR verson. Then somewhere in the standard FL zone it flips and MILC lenses get bigger. I think fast 50s are always going to be gigantic. I am no expert on optics but that FL just seems to be on the other side of that threshold.

It would be nice for Canon to make something between the 1.8 and 1.2 lenses though.

The problem is the reviewers. It will be tough for Canon can make the reviewers happy about a f/1.4 lens at the right price point for a Canon lens.

Why is that?

Because Sigma and Tamron are happy to run their businesses at the brink of bankruptcy but other companies actually have to charge a certain amount of money if they want to meet the expectations for quality, service, and support that other companies foist on them.

-- hide signature --

Biden will save us!

 shawnphoto's gear list:shawnphoto's gear list
Canon EOS R Canon EOS RP Canon EOS R5 Canon EF 24-105mm F4L IS II USM Canon RF 28-70mm F2L USM +4 more
Dlee13
Dlee13 Contributing Member • Posts: 510
Re: Sony 35mm f1.4 GM
1

It’s not just about size/weight but price too. The 35GM is $1399USD brand new compared to $1799 for the 35L II which is now a much older lens.

I’m really hoping that once Canon are done with the f/1.2 lenses they make some mid range f/1.4 lenses that focus on being smaller and lighter but still great optical quality.

 Dlee13's gear list:Dlee13's gear list
Canon EOS M5 Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 STM Canon EOS R6 Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Canon EF 50mm F1.8 STM +3 more
Great Bustard Forum Pro • Posts: 45,197
The Sony 35 / 1.4 GM is a rockin' lens!
1

noggin2k1 wrote:

Judging by a lot of the comments in this forum, there will be a fair few "please Canon, give us something like this".

Yep!

Whilst I applaud Sony for starting to rollout some decent lenses, I do hope Canon sacrifices some of the size & weight saving for less of a reliance on heavy corrections when releasing their RF L 35mm.

I'm thinking Canon will put out a beast in the RF 35 / 1.2L and it will sell for over $2K and be around the size and weight of the RF 50 / 1.2L.

f1.2 or f1.4, I'm not overly bothered at this focal length, but please just make it no bigger than the RF 50mm L.

I don't think it will be.

Anyway, over to you Canon, to see what you've got...

I think that both the Sony 24 / 1.4 GM and 35 / 1.4 GM are brilliant -- would love to see the same for RF mount.  That said, I also think the RF 50 / 1.2L and RF 85 / 1.2L are brilliant, and am impressed with what Canon put out.  Now I'm waiting to be impressed by what Sigma and Tamron put out, and curious to see what Samyang/Rokinon will put out.

noggin2k1
OP noggin2k1 Senior Member • Posts: 2,736
Re: Sony 35mm f1.4 GM

I didn't realise it's 100% that the RF 35mm L will be f1.2.

Canon has always been the best at designing their lenses based on intended purposes in my view. EF 35mm f1.4 L II was designed to be fast, sharp, and needed little correction for it's typical journalistic/documentary type uses. the EF 50mm & 85mm 1.2's on the other hand, sacrificed speed and sharpness for rendering and bokeh, for their typical portrait applications.

Canon has correctly replaced the EF 1.2's with RF 1.2's keeping the same concept whilst adding more sharpness - and I'd expect them to do the same with the RF 35 L.

 noggin2k1's gear list:noggin2k1's gear list
Canon EOS R5 Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM Canon EF 35mm F1.4L II USM Canon RF 50mm F1.2L USM Canon RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS USM +3 more
Jamie87 Regular Member • Posts: 165
Re: Sony 35mm f1.4 GM

diness wrote:

architekt_1 wrote:

high end users only want 1.2 prime from now on.

I think this is incredibly oversimplified and untrue

Agreed. I can think of a few lenses I would choose the 1.4 over a 1.2. For example I really hope Canon bring out a RF 85 1.4 IS similar to what they did on the EF mount.

That being said, Canon have traditionally been the company that offered 1.2 primes so I can see them trying to incorporate it more now they've moved over to the RF mount.

sportyaccordy Forum Pro • Posts: 18,256
Re: Sony 35mm f1.4 GM

noggin2k1 wrote:

I didn't realise it's 100% that the RF 35mm L will be f1.2.

Canon has always been the best at designing their lenses based on intended purposes in my view. EF 35mm f1.4 L II was designed to be fast, sharp, and needed little correction for it's typical journalistic/documentary type uses. the EF 50mm & 85mm 1.2's on the other hand, sacrificed speed and sharpness for rendering and bokeh, for their typical portrait applications.

Did they? The RF 50 1.2 is pretty damn sharp compared to the ancient EF version, and the RF 85 1.2 has a separate "all in on bokeh" version. From what I've seen neither is a slouch on sharpness.... def not compared to EF versions and not really in comparison to MILC competition.

Canon has correctly replaced the EF 1.2's with RF 1.2's keeping the same concept whilst adding more sharpness - and I'd expect them to do the same with the RF 35 L.

35 is a much more versatile focal length so I imagine Canon is working to make its usefulness more broad. 35 is my go to FL (since 40 is so underserved).... so if the 1.2L is decent I might jump. I just hope that they get a decent handle on vignetting and minimize the software corrections. My old Sigma 35 ART was great on both fronts and was a great performer as well.

-- hide signature --

Sometimes I take pictures with my gear- https://www.flickr.com/photos/41601371@N00/

 sportyaccordy's gear list:sportyaccordy's gear list
Canon EOS R Canon EF 135mm F2.8 SF Sigma 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM | A Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro +1 more
Light Pilgrim
Light Pilgrim Senior Member • Posts: 1,274
Re: Sony 35mm f1.4 GM

This Sony lens looks great on paper. But it needs to be tested and compared optically. There is always some sort of a compromise. Question is where. If it would be so easy to do a flawless lens that weights just 500 g, I am sure Canon, Nikon and Sigma would do it.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads