Industry News: Sony Expands Full-Frame Lens Lineup with Launch of 24mm F1.4 G Master™ Prime

Canon Rumors Guy

EOS-1D X Mark II
Jul 20, 2010
7,001
53
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
#1
New Large Aperture Wide-Angle Prime Lens is the most compact and lightest in its class, with superb sharpness even at F1.4
SAN DIEGO, Sept. 20, 2018 – Sony Electronics, Inc. – a global leader in digital imaging and the world’s largest image sensor manufacturer – has today introduced an exciting new addition to their acclaimed G Master series of full-frame E-mount lenses, a 24mm F1.4 prime lens.
Expertly engineered to deliver best in class performance across all aperture settings, the new FE 24mm F1.4 GM (model SEL24F14GM) utilizes Sony’s most advanced optical technologies to satisfy the needs of the most demanding photographers. The new lens is the most compact and lightweight in its class, measuring approx. 3.0 inches x 3.64 inches and weighing only 15.7 ounces, with a filter diameter of 67mm. Built to meet the strict standards of Sony’s flagship G Master series, the FE 24mm F1.4 GM offers exceptionally high resolution and beautiful bokeh, two qualities...
Continue reading...
 

jolyonralph

Kodak Brownie
Aug 25, 2015
945
131
49
London, UK
www.everyothershot.com
#4
I can see Canon doing a bunch of L primes for RF. The 14mm f/2.8 is a prime (pun intended) example of something that could really shine on RF compared to EF mount. Maybe they can make it faster than 2.8 of course. I'm sure 14mm and 24mm will be next.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,118
116
118
#5
I can see Canon doing a bunch of L primes for RF. The 14mm f/2.8 is a prime (pun intended) example of something that could really shine on RF compared to EF mount. Maybe they can make it faster than 2.8 of course. I'm sure 14mm and 24mm will be next.
I wanted to like the EF14mm L MkII but never could, it was always severely compromised in the corners and should, in theory, be much easier to design a better IQ lens for the RF mount. The problem is going to be the EF 11-24, few people need f2.8 over f4 and the EF 11-24 on R cameras has the benefit of VND and CPL filter use via the adapter and is very good in the IQ department even in the corners.

That ability to easily use filters with the 11-24 is one of the most compelling reasons I am looking at one of the new line of bodies.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,118
116
118
#7
Agreed, we won't see an RF 11-24, there's a chance we could see a 14-24 f/2.8 though, that makes more sense.
If they do it is just to make a point about their ability to make lenses, the trouble is it has been done before and I doubt there is much of a market for the difference between 11-24 f4 and 14-24 f2.8, especially if the 14-24 can't take filters.
 

Random Orbits

EOS 6D Mark II
Mar 14, 2012
2,098
33
#8
I wanted to like the EF14mm L MkII but never could, it was always severely compromised in the corners and should, in theory, be much easier to design a better IQ lens for the RF mount. The problem is going to be the EF 11-24, few people need f2.8 over f4 and the EF 11-24 on R cameras has the benefit of VND and CPL filter use via the adapter and is very good in the IQ department even in the corners.

That ability to easily use filters with the 11-24 is one of the most compelling reasons I am looking at one of the new line of bodies.

Will the VND and CPL produce X-banding/banding when the filter is placed closer to the sensor as opposed the front of a lens at short focal lengths?
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,118
116
118
#9
Will the VND and CPL produce X-banding/banding when the filter is placed closer to the sensor as opposed the front of a lens at short focal lengths?
No that's not the point, the entire justification/ethos behind the RF mount is that it gives lens designers 20mm of space to move the rear element rearwards, which is especially important for wide to ultra wide lenses, this means the EF lenses get a 'free' 20mm for the adapter/filter when mounted on the R bodies, if they make an RF ultra wide lens with space in the optical path for drop in filters it negates the overwhelming benefit for the lens designers, ergo it would basically be an EF appropriate designed lens.
 
Sep 16, 2016
23
16
Mars
#10
pretty obvious knock at canon's inability to mount R glass on M bodies. Classic sony marketing ;)
They had to do everything they can while the RF system is still reeling from its early growing pains because once the Canon ML system finally matures, history might repeat again.

However they are heavily marketing their new lens as ~200G lighter than competition, well, 24 1.4 II is almost a decade old now and perhaps Canon is about to update it with (again) 60g less than Sony's.
 

Random Orbits

EOS 6D Mark II
Mar 14, 2012
2,098
33
#11
No that's not the point, the entire justification/ethos behind the RF mount is that it gives lens designers 20mm of space to move the rear element rearwards, which is especially important for wide to ultra wide lenses, this means the EF lenses get a 'free' 20mm for the adapter/filter when mounted on the R bodies, if they make an RF ultra wide lens with space in the optical path for drop in filters it negates the overwhelming benefit for the lens designers, ergo it would basically be an EF appropriate designed lens.
Sorry, I don't think I got my question across correctly. I found that VND filters produced X banding at the shorter focal lengths (~24mm or less), which is one reason why I now prefer using a couple ND filters instead of the VND. I was just wondering whether or not a VND positioned at the rear of lens would be similarly affected. I'm guessing yes...

I have many EF lenses, and the idea of not having to tote a bunch of filters and step rings is appealing. Of course, I'm sure the RF counterparts will be even more stellar...
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,118
116
118
#12
Sorry, I don't think I got my question across correctly. I found that VND filters produced X banding at the shorter focal lengths (~24mm or less), which is one reason why I now prefer using a couple ND filters instead of the VND. I was just wondering whether or not a VND positioned at the rear of lens would be similarly affected. I'm guessing yes...

I have many EF lenses, and the idea of not having to tote a bunch of filters and step rings is appealing. Of course, I'm sure the RF counterparts will be even more stellar...
The only example I have seen so far that I know uses the VND and the 11-24 on the R is here
But of course he is using the crop 4K so I'm not sure.

My plan is to sell one of my 1DX MkII's and get the higher spec version of the R when it comes out, mainly because I can use these adapters, there will be regular ND's available for them too.
 
Likes: Random Orbits
Sep 6, 2018
24
13
#13
If Canon RF has advantage, can Canon develop 1.4/20 or 1.4/24, to beat Sony 24mm F1.4 GM in such ways:

(1). Similar size and weight, but better image quality; Or,

(2). Similar image quality, but smaller or lighter?

Can Zeiss take advantage of Canon RF and develop better image quality, smaller, lighter Zeiss RF 1.4/20 or 1.4/24 than Milvus 1.4/25?