Sony FE 12-24mm F4 G sample gallery

So why are you "on" a sony topic then?

I shoot canon but don't troll Fuji and say "I was on Fuji and not very happy."

#use-your-gear-and-act-mature-about-it

1 week ago*permalink

naththo

azinheira, Adobe Camera RAW and Lightroom does not have proper support for camera colour profile yet, it is still not final production yet. Thats what they said in the text I read last night, not a final production yet.

1 week agopermalink

Cameracist

My 50mm has even better contrast.
..since we are comparing different focal lengts already.

1 week ago*permalink

azinheira

Hi Thematic
Because I can express my opinion and because I still have Sony cameras and lens.

1 week agopermalink

good luck with that.

1 week agopermalink

Have the naysayers finally ceased as to the absence of Sony's lens development?

1 week agopermalink

CanonKen

I won't rest until Sony *finally* brings out some 50mm prime lenses!

1 week agopermalink

I know right?

1 week agopermalink

bubblyboo

They're still going to complain about a lack of tele-primes, which take a lot more time to develop. Sony has gone a long way with FE in 4 years.

1 week agopermalink

Menneisyys

It has mostly been the APS-C line that's lacking, not the FF one.

1 week ago*permalink

Dr Blackjack

This myth has been explained too many times. Fuji are literally the only company with a comprehensive APS-C lineup, since that's all they make (MF is special). CaNikon lineups all have holes too. And high quality APS-C only lenses provide very little benefit over FF lenses, especially when they share the same mount.

1 week agopermalink

VadymA

Hmm, on my iPhone they look too much like my iPhone pictures. At least color wise. I gues I don't like Sony Color's. Too much blue, which is common among small sensor cameras. Somehow Nikon and Canon FF images tend to look more rich. Just my personal onbservation.

1 week agopermalink

Small sensor?

1 week agopermalink

DPRevievver

Is your iPhone screen color calibrated ?

1 week agopermalink

Dr Blackjack

iPhone screens, at least new ones I think, actually are calibrated.

1 week agopermalink

bakanecko

you know you can make Sony's color look like Canikon if you try to know the camera better.

1 week agopermalink

David610

I really like the size and weight of the 12-24mm. I would buy this lens and a Sony body to put it on as I have Nikon gear, however corner sharpness at 12mm even at f/8 is extremely worrying. You can ignore lack of corner sharpness in a portrait lens but not for landscape. Sony should update its MTF charts as 30 lines per mm is for film era of decades ago. I expect that using this lens an A7R II with 42 MP would show even greater softness in the corners.

1 week agopermalink

And yet you say you would buy it and a Sony body?

1 week agopermalink

DPRevievver

Keep using Nikon 12-24 and accept its size and weight.

1 week agopermalink

kevin_r

Guy below this comment says corner sharpness is excellent - what are you complaining about?

1 week agopermalink

Kevin Sutton

DPReviewer - a bit hard to do as the Nikon is 14-24mm rather than 12-24mm...

1 week agopermalink

JonathanFV

Why not wait to see a comparison between the Sony and the Sigma 12-24? Or if money isn't an issue, maybe the Canon?

1 week agopermalink

Excellent corner sharpness. Great results from the a9 as well. Looking through these was a treat....nice variety of pictures.

Thank you dpreview.

1 week agopermalink

rfsIII

Yes fine lenses. Much more important: how were the Roblar sparkling wines? Did you prefer the rosé or the blanc de blancs?

1 week agopermalink

Carey Rose

Unfortunately, I only got to taste the rosé. It was quite lovely, though.

1 week agopermalink

Lan

Nice in the center, but the corner sharpness is disappointing and the sunstars could be prettier. Not bad for the size/price though!

1 week agopermalink

kevin_r

Disagree. Corner sharpness is more than acceptable. Are you not confusing the distortion for lack of sharpness? Perhaps rather look at the edges.

1 week agopermalink

Lan

When judging corner sharpness for some reason I prefer to look at the corners ;)

I shoot ultrawide regularly, so I'm familiar with distortion. What I'm seeing is looks like a combination of astigmatism and field curvature. It's a general haziness and smearing of detail at the corners.

This one (stopped down to f8) is disappointing in the corners given the 24MP camera, but acceptable:
https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/9004820076/sony-fe-12-24mm-f4-g-sample-gallery/8247681068

This one is not acceptable, and again it's stopped down (only to f/5.6). The corners are very nearly visibly soft at thumbnail size:
https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/9004820076/sony-fe-12-24mm-f4-g-sample-gallery/2440131595

Both samples were shot on the A9, so they'd look significantly worse on the A7R or A7R2. This lens certainly isn't going to beat the Canon 11-24mm. Heck, it doesn't even beat my Samyang 14mm!

1 week agopermalink

new boyz

A9 files are really clean.

1 week agopermalink

Anulu

$1000 cheaper and much lighter than Canon 11-24. That is cool

1 week agopermalink

chshooter

Doesn't look that sharp to me. Especially the photo of the terrace towards the end of the series looks quite soft for a shot even at f4. Other shots stopped down don't look much better. Little details are not that clear and detail is everything in landscape photography

1 week ago*permalink

ZeneticX

they shot these with the a9 instead of the 7rII, which I believe is the body where most of these lenses should and will be paired with, until the rIII or 9r release

1 week ago*permalink

Why the r9? I don't tend to take many wide angle fast action photos.

1 week agopermalink

TomB11

Just because the a9 can shoot at 20fps doesn't mean you have to permanently shoot at 20fps...

1 week agopermalink

Granted the a9 has better ergonomics, but if your subject doesn't require fast, accurate tracking and high fps, I would think the a7r2 would deliver better image quality.

1 week agopermalink

kevin_r

Right, then please don't buy it. Vote with your money.

1 week agopermalink

thx1138

Nothing really sharp anywhere in the frame. A9 missed focus a lot of times, none of the action shots were that sharp. Looks consumer grade quality, must have been fairy dust sprinkled on the MTF's. The sunstars are pretty bad too. If you can't get a truly sharp shot on a 24MP FF then you're going to be in a world of pain on the A7RII.

1 week agopermalink

juvx

I'm really excited about this lens. I really hope it's super sharp at 12mm. I'm preordering for sure.

16-35 2.8 i just far too expensive. the ONLY reason to buy it over the f4 imo is if you mostly shoot stars. And even then id rather get the Zeiss Batis 18mm f/2.8 and a 16-35 F4 used for the same amout of money almost.

1 week agopermalink

Dr Blackjack

The reason to have it is that it is a flagship wide-angle zoom. It's not the best tool for everything, but a jack of a lot of trades. Price/Performance wise I guess it makes sense for some very active users, but it seems to have a smaller niche than the other two GM zooms (24-70, 70-200)

1 week agopermalink

wow VERY nice.

The Sony lens lineup continues to grow and impress.

1 week agopermalink

panther fan

Just 565 grams.
The Sigma Art 12-24 F4 is 1150 grams. This lens is just tiny compared to DSLR lenses. I wonder if that can be achieved because of the short flange distance.

1 week agopermalink

Yes, it is achieved because of the short flange distance. The large flange distance in DSLR's mandates wide angle lenses have a retrofocus design, which increases their size and weight.

1 week agopermalink

quiquae

Well, actually, both new Sony lenses are retrofocus. They had to be, because the E-mount back flange distance is 18mm, which is longer than the wide end of either lens.

That said, the short back flange distance apparently did allow them to develop much smaller retrofocus lenses than for DSLR mounts.

1 week agopermalink