Finding the best 35mm lens for Sony E-mount
is something I've spent quite a bit of time on
over the last couple years.
I have several videos comparing the different options,
and have a lot of experience with the offerings
from ZEISS and SIGMA in this category as well.
But once Sony released their 35mm f/1.8,
I felt like the search was over--
we had a good lens at a great price.
But apparently Sony didn't think so,
because they just launched their 35mm f/1.4 G Master
and today we're going to see if it's worth the extra money
over the 1.8. Let's get undone!
[offbeat music]
♪ Gerald Undone ♪
♪ He's crazy ♪
What's happening, everybody?! I'm Gerald Undone
and for the first time ever, there is no intro.
Okay, as usual, some disclosure.
Sony lent me this lens to make this video.
I do not get to keep it. No money changed hands,
and Sony does not get creative input on this video
or get to see it before it's published.
This video does have a sponsor though, and that's Storyblocks.
So, let me start off by saying this lens is excellent.
In terms of overall quality,
it's the best 35mm lens available
for Sony E-mount, however it costs nearly twice as much
as the f/1.8 version, more if you live in Canada, actually.
And depending on your purpose,
it might not offer you that compelling of an upgrade.
Oh, and the reason why I'm pointing to the box
for the f/1.8 and not the lens itself
is because I'm actually using it to shoot this video.
I've been using it for quite a while to shoot
my YouTube videos. But while we're talking about boxes,
let me tell you what's included with the G Master.
So, I just have, kind of, like, an unmarked box here,
but inside you get a soft case.
In the case you get a little strap for the case.
And it's reasonably well-padded and nice,
and then you get a somewhat shallow lens hood
that doesn't have the leaflet design, it's flat across the top
but it does have a push button release, so...
Nothing too fancy but you get what you need.
Now, for me the biggest advantage the G Master has
over the f/1.8 lens is the form factor.
Something I complained about
when I reviewed the 1.8 originally
was that I found it a bit small
and not as comfortable in my hands
when paired with one of the larger Sony bodies.
In fact, when Sony released their 20mm f/1.8,
I said that I wished the 35mm version
was built like the 20mm. Well in a sense, it now is.
Making the 20mm, the 24mm 1.4,
and now the 35mm G Master all using a very similar design,
feel, and layout, including the same filter thread size
for all three lenses as well. And that's great.
It makes life easy when your primes have a similar form
and compatibility, especially considering these lenses
use the much more common 67mm filters,
where the 35 f/1.8 lens uses the 55mm,
which can be annoying at times.
And I really like the way this 35mm feels in the hand.
I weighed it at 550 grams with the caps on,
which is a noticeable step up from the f/1.8's 300 grams,
but it still falls well below the ZEISS Distagon
or that extended Sigma Art lens.
And the weight is distributed nicely
and doesn't feel as front heavy as those lenses.
Both lenses are weather-sealed, this and the 1.8 version,
to some degree. I'm not sure how much better
the G Master is here, I imagine it got Sony's best sealing,
where I would suggest the f/1.8 lens
is merely adequately sealed.
It has an AF/MF selector switch, a function button,
and a declickable aperture ring, but the aperture range
is different than the f/1.8 version.
Obviously, it opens up to f/1.4 instead of 1.8,
but on the narrow end it only closes down to f/16,
where the f/1.8 version goes all the way down to 22.
This does have an impact on your ability to make sun stars.
So, if that's something that you're really into
perhaps you'll prefer the f/1.8 version.
But it's still possible at f/16 of course.
The focus ring is well dampened,
and offers a nearly 160° linear focus throw
that allows for smooth, repeatable manual focus pulls.
By my measurements it appears to have
a slightly longer throw than the f/1.8 as well,
and it's easier to accomplish this because the focus ring
has a larger circumference
and rests in a better position in the hand.
However, the 35 f/1.8 is still the best choice
for video shooters who like to pull focus manually
between these two, because of focus breathing.
The f/1.8 barely breathes at all, but sadly the G Master
has quite pronounced breathing,
which is a little unfortunate, because honestly,
if it wasn't for that, this lens would be essentially perfect.
Of course, for photography this won't really be an issue
or even if you just use a more rapid autofocus method
of shooting video. And as expected
the autofocus performs excellently on this lens.
It features the best linear focusing motors
that Sony has to offer and produces very smooth, fast,
and uniform results with an operation
that's essentially silent.
However, it's worth noting that in my testing,
I didn't really find the f/1.8 lens to be any worse.
That isn't saying anything bad about the G Master,
it's more suggesting that the f/1.8 is good enough
in the autofocus department
and delivers impressive results for the money.
The 35mm f/1.8 also has
a closer minimum focusing distance of 0.22m or 0.73ft,
vs the 0.27m or 0.89ft on the G Master.
Not a huge difference, but there is one.
I wouldn't call the magnification
particularly great on the G Master.
Here's an image of a ruler as close as possible
and you can see the framing still feels pretty loose.
If you're into astrophotography though, the G Master features
the same excellent coma reducing attributes
of the 24mm G Master, making it great for capturing stars
with fewer aberrations. And it's the same price
as the 24mm, giving you two great options for that.
And in fact, fewer aberrations
is kind of the name of the game with this new lens.
Here, let me show you some test images.
And while I get everything running here,
let me tell you about today's sponsor, Storyblocks.
Have you ever found yourself in a situation
where you could really use some footage,
but maybe it's January in London, Canada,
and outside is dark, slushy, and covered in dirty snow
and broken branches and you have a lens to test?
Well, Storyblocks can probably help you out with footage
from much nicer looking places,
as well a massive catalogue of other stock video clips,
backgrounds, overlays and After Effects templates.
The interface is easy to use and navigate
and the clips are royalty-free
for both personal and commercial use,
so you can use them as much as you want, wherever you want.
So, if you think you could take advantage
of a fantastic library of quality stock footage
and effects, check out Storyblocks
using the link in the description below.
So, as I just alluded to, there wasn't really anything
nice to shoot and we're on lockdown here in London,
but I did my best to get some test shots
that, I think, highlight the strengths of this lens.
OK, and one thing I should let you know
is that I shot all of these on the... well, most of them
on the a7R IV, so we're getting, like, 61MP so we can really
look at the differences in terms of resolving power
with these lenses. And then you'll feel comfortable
too to know that this lens will work
on a really high megapixel camera.
Also, something I didn't really script here
but I wanted to mention is that I'm not really
doing a comparison against the ZEISS Distagon,
or the Sigma Art lens, but as I'll show you here,
this G Master lens is superior optically to both of those
and also has, sort of, like, fewer quirks,
like the Sigma Art lens, you know, has the MC-11
built onto it, and it's kind of long and front heavy.
I like that lens but that is an issue.
And it also has, sort of, like an older feel.
The Distagon has, like, some quality control issues
and decentering issues and feels a little bit dated.
There's that ZEISS, like, pancake lens,
which became completely superfluous
after the 35mm f/1.8 came out.
Anyway, so I've tested them all, like I said,
I have those other videos. In my opinion, the 35mm f/1.8
was the way to go for Sony.
So, that's why we're comparing it to this,
but when I-- I'm going to show you these images now
and you'll see just how good optically the G Master is.
OK, so, let's start off with a little sharpness test
of both the G Master and the 1.8 wide open
for comparisons sake. And keep in mind,
I really like the 1.8, by the way, so when you see these,
like, the 1.8's good, this is how much better the G Master is.
So, we'll punch in here. OK, so, first up we can see right away--
The G Master's on the left, that it has, sort of,
a better contrast right out the gate.
But also, there is more fringing
on the 1.8 on the right. And this is 1.4 vs 1.8,
both wide open. And if we go and jump over,
look up some details more on the side,
it's clear how much sharper the G Master is to the 1.8.
And we can even punch in more
and really see the difference here. And this is,
to show you where that is in the image, that's over here,
that's on the edge. If we go to the extreme corner,
then, again, the 1.4 is doing really well wide open.
But also, there's a colouring benefit that I quite like,
let's punch in a little bit. The G Master...
Not that there's anything wrong, again, with the 1.8,
the 1.8 is good, but the G Master is producing
slightly richer, little bit more saturated,
little bit more... I dunno, accurate, vibrant,
contrasty colours. It's pulling more out of the image,
a little bit more. You can see that on the Polaroid box,
you can see that here on the ColorChecker,
as well as, just, overall the details are a bit better.
And, again, like, this is much sharper than this,
especially look at the flash cube here.
And what's interesting is that it doesn't really, like,
stopping down the difference. In fact, I'll show you
something interesting here.
Let's change the image on the right from 1.8 to 2.8
So, now it's 1.4 on the G Master vs 2.8 on the 1.8.
And not only is it still just as sharp,
like maybe they're more even in the middle now,
again, still, the fringing isn't as good on, like--
the f/1.8 still suffers from a bit of fringing,
and if we go and look at some of those edges again,
the 1.4 is still sharper and better detail at 1.4
than the 1.8 is at 2.8. And that's pretty crazy.
Uh, so, basically the whole image is just--
You're getting a stellar image from edge to edge.
Here's a little comparison for chromatic aberration,
G Master is on the left, you can see, again,
that even at 1.4 it has less fringing
and it's a more, you know, pure image than the 1.8 on the right.
Does really well there. And if you stop them both
down to 1.8, again, the G Master on the left
is just better here when shooting at the same aperture.
OK, we've got a few more, sort of, like, practical versions
of the same, kind of, information here.
So, here is a little chromatic aberration evaluation
that we can make, and you can see-
And most of these shots are all wide open, just to test it.
And you can see that there's really nothing going on
in the image here at any point at the different depths.
Same with-- I did, you know, your classic fence shot.
Let me pull out a little bit.
And same thing. There's no issues anywhere.
And it is very, very, very sharp.
Uh, this is, like, 600%. It's, it's great.
There's really nothing to complain about,
I'm just trying to show you, you know, some samples.
Um, what have we got here? Brick wall.
Looks great all the way across.
You can see a little bit of vignetting here,
and I can give you a quick sense of-- there's not
correct lens correction profiles in Lightroom yet,
but obviously the camera has built-in lens corrections,
but if I wanted to give you, like, sort of a rough sense,
I'll put on a different 35mm profile.
So, this one's over correcting, so, maybe let's not
look at the distortion, and instead just look
at the vignetting difference, so...
There is a bit of vignetting at 1.4, but it's not too bad,
and it's very smooth, and I don't find it
to be completely bothersome. Uh, most of the time
I've been evaluating these images
without the lens corrections on and they've been quite good.
And again, we can just have a look
at the centre sharpness there, and it's... it's ridiculous.
It's ridiculous how sharp this lens is.
The sharpest 35mm... maybe I've seen on any platform,
but definitely the sharpest I've seen for Sony E.
And then I just did a couple, like, close up shots,
so we can try and see how, you know,
how the transitions to out of focus areas look,
and, of course, they're very smooth.
Everything looks really nice in my opinion,
and I took some shots-- I think this is an example of one
to show you some of the character
of some of the, you know, out of focus orbs
when you're doing, like, some close-up,
like little details that you might see in, like, a landscape,
and they have some fun character.
They're mostly flawless. I'll show you
some bigger bokeh in a second, but, uh...
nice little character in there, but without being distracting.
Just nice and pleasing for the small little details there.
What else do we got?
Again, smooth transitions from-- to in and out of focus.
I would never shoot this at 1.4, like it's just a slice.
But, uh, I think it shows something here.
And then this one I just put in here
because I thought it really showed, again, the detail,
but also, just the general contrast of this lens.
It does really well. There's like ice and different lighting
hitting things, and the image just is very punchy
just right out of camera. And, again, look at the...
look at the detail here. It's crazy.
And I just did, like, a weird, sort of, architecture shot,
so you can see what the lines look like when you're wide open
at 35mm f/1.4. Again, not the most interesting images.
I don't really like any of them.
But hopefully they, kind of, showed off...
from my experience with the lens,
I have no issues with it, other than the focus breathing thing.
Another thing I noticed, is that the f/1.4 G Master
doesn't seem to be quite 2/3rds of a stop brighter
than the 1.8.
I was getting more, like, half a stop,
in that T1.5 to T1.6 range in terms of light transmission.
Or maybe the f/1.8 lens is actually transmitting better
than f/1.8. All I know is that it's not quite 2/3rds
of a stop difference, which suggests yet again
just how good of a value the f/1.8 lens is.
But there is a difference in the size
of the out of focus orbs in the shot.
The G Master is slightly better here,
but I would argue that the actual quality of the bokeh
is somewhat similar. No real complaints with either.
Both are excellent with very few imperfections
and just minor cat eyeing in the corners.
The main difference is the f/1.4 is shallower.
I don't have a lot of human samples to show you
for the reasons I previously mentioned.
Although, I did shoot my last video
with this lens... I don't know what I'm pointing at,
and I was very pleased with the result.
The image looked great and the autofocus was flawless.
Actually, hang on. I have an idea.
All right, so, I wanted to get you on here
because I assume that you probably shot
some human subjects. What do you think of the image
that you got out of it for, you know, shooting some people?
I shot my wife. Rented-- we went to a bed and breakfast,
why not? 35mm f/1.4 and the new 35mm f/1.4 GM.
So, I notice better colour out of camera in my raw file,
I am noticing, like, a richer colour,
especially in the skin tones
and that is obviously very important to me.
Um, I'm also getting better autofocus, better hit rate.
[Gerald] Did you do any, like, pixel peeping
between the G Master? Like, do you find it sharper,
the same sharpness? What do you think
compared to the Distagon?
I shot with the a7R III just so I can pixel peep.
Yeah, noticeably sharper. The rendering.
There's something about the way the image looks.
It's very pleasing. This is the best 35mm
that Sony makes right now.
[Gerald] I don't want you to do too much more
because I'm assuming you're posting the video.
Yeah, but no one's going to watch it,
so I might as well just tell them here.
[Gerald] Well, go-- Well, I'll tell--
I'm telling my audience right now to go watch your video.
-All right, thanks Manny. -All right dude. Later man.
The G Master is noticeably better
than the f/1.8 when it comes to flare control though.
I wouldn't call the f/1.8 bad,
but the G Master definitely demonstrates better control
and is very impressive. I had to use a flashlight
just to trigger it because outside
I was actually having a very difficult time
even creating flare in this lens, which is nice
because it guarantees great contrast in most scenarios.
Alright, so where does that leave us?
Well, this new lens from Sony is fantastic.
It's easily one of the sharpest 35mm lenses I've ever seen,
and it has stellar control over chromatic aberration and flare,
with very pleasing bokeh. It's essentially perfect,
save for the unfortunate focus breathing.
So, if you've got the money and that's all you needed to know,
then go ahead and buy this lens
and feel confident in your choice.
However, if you're more video focused
and need that focus breathing reduced
or if you just really want to get the best bang for your buck
and you're willing to tolerate softer corners
and a bit more fringing, the 35 f/1.8
is still the best value 35mm option on the Sony system
and is an excellent little lens.
I probably wouldn't upgrade to the G Master
if I shot video and already had the f/1.8 version.
But if you're a photographer looking for the best 35mm lens
you can get for your Sony camera,
this new G Master is it. But that's gonna be it for me.
I hope you found this video entertaining
or at least helpful. And if you did,
make sure you leave it the old thumbs up
and consider subscribing if you haven't already.
But if you did not find this video helpful or entertaining,
try setting the playback speed to 75%.
Alright... I'm done.