Thanks for the test! This would be a great lens for Aurora time-lapses and real time movies. The rumoured Sigma 15mm F/1.4 full frame fisheye will be another great choice.
Cheers, Alan! I’ll be getting my hands on the new Sigma fisheye as soon as is feasible. I’ve been chasing real-time aurora footage and playing around with speedboosting various fisheye lenses for that exact purpose (with the benefit of getting a circular field of view), so it’ll be interesting to see what a proper fast full-frame version can provide!
Thank you for great astro reviews of lenses. I hope that you will continue this effort further with some longer focal lengths like 35 or 50mm. Astro reviews of lenses are quite rare. I have 20g which is good and I need to pick something longer for astrolandscapes on a tracker. I have tried 35gm, but my copy was quite uneven (it was good for any other use than astro though) so I returned it. There is popular choice for astro the Sigma 40/1.4 but its weight would make it quite dedicated lens so I take that as a last option to try.
Cheers! That’s exactly why I’m doing this, as a consumer myself it’s always frustrating to not have the information I need to make an informed choice. Somebody has to do it and I guess it’s me, lol. I do have some samples and footage ready to put together for reviews of other lenses, including some 50mm and 35mm choices. So you can stay turned for that!
@@FerventAstronomyI have found an interesting Japanese video, where several GM primes are compared. Video id is FlMSOHtCQJU (not sure if full link would work here). The interesting part is that they also show chromatic aberration by showing separate RGB channels. Some of the tested lenses have sharp one channel but other is less sharp. It also has advantage that separately viewed channel displayed in grays is less impacted by video compression.
Hey Darren (did I spell it correctly?)! Based on this review, I sold one of my kidneys and bought this chonker. Quite impressively sized and heavy indeed, but surprisingly easy to handle, given how compact it is. I asked Sigma, and they told me they have no intention of making it for Z, so I also had to buy the Megadap ETZ21 Pro, but now I have a gazillion Sony E mount lenses on which to spend the money I’ll get selling the other kidney. YAY!
Awesome! Who needs kidneys anyway? You’ll enjoy the lens, it’s great. There’s an aurora time lapse that I posted in May taken with that lens if I recall correctly, it brings in a lot of light. I’ll have to use your feedback to show Sigma they should lend me lenses to test, hah! But the world’s open to you now, there’s a lot of great lenses to explore. And yes, that spelling is correct 😉
I was undecided between the Sigma 14mm vs the Sony 14 Gm and just the weight for travel made me choose the Sony. The lens is enormous, great quality but too big for travel.
@FerventAstronomy Indeed, and what are your thoughts on the 20mm f 1.4 Sigma vs 20mm Sony G? That's the next lens I am considering for Landscape and Astro.
This was really great, thanks a lot for taking the time to share this review. I'm just a little unsure about the right choice of camera which would pair well with this lens. To shoot both landscape and some astro (milkyway, aurora), should one go for the high-res bodies like a7cr, or what would be your recommendation in that regard? I particularly want to keep the noise level down. My old a7 has disappointed me with the noise level quite a few times. Would astro-modification help lowering the noise?
A modded camera won’t help with noise. In general, my recommendation is to get the newest-generation sensor available, as that’s where the biggest improvements are to be found. My opinion is that higher resolution is better as well, as noise will be de-emphasized because it will have smaller “grain” size when viewed how people normally experience photos (ie: not pixel peeping zoomed in 800%). DPReviewTV did a video on this a couple years ago if you can find it, where they demonstrated the differences. In your position I would be comfortable with the A7CR, as I primarily use an A7RIV/A7RV for those types of photography myself.
Again great review! Incredible lens also! My hope for this lens is that it would be fast enough to not need a tracker for milkyways and thus lighter overall (instant buy if that were true). Seems like a tracker is still needed though as the 15sec shots just weren't cutting it for me. Guess I'll stick with the GM for now. Crazy question: Do you think it is possible for sony to use IBIS + plate solving to do inbody tracking (similar to how pixel shift works) to get tighter stars for ~30 second exposures? With all the computational power in the new models and a7RV having ~8-stops IBIS not too crazy?
I’ve happily and successfully used this lens for untracked Milky Way, so I wouldn’t hesitate. You have to remember that it’s 15 seconds with a 50 megapixel sensor, prioritizing shorter exposures (at a relatively low ISO) to avoid any star trailing. The sample images are shot to help unravel optical aberrations, and as such they’re pretty conservative. The pinky purple thumbnail image next to my head was taken with the lens using the A7RV, and I’m perfectly happy with it. Only Pentax cameras are capable of “sky, tracking“ using ibis, and they do so via a combination of GPS and a lot of patents. This will not be something that will come to any current Sony camera and more than likely will not be something that will come to any future Sony camera.
@@FerventAstronomy for pretty much all digital media you are bang on. I confess to being a pixel peeper, and with the A7Riv + 14GM I want at least 60 seconds at 1.8 so it was unlikely the 1.4 would have personally satisfied me. Also man you have a ton of knowledge! I have never heard of that Pentax feature and it's a shame it will not come to other brands. 300+ seconds of tracking is super impressive!
Ha, I say. You call this sigma big and heavy? Not as heavy as my Sigma 40mm f/1.4. And that's without a lens collar. Add in a 3rd party lens collar and it's not even close. So, if you do some comparisons in the 35 to 50mm range, might I suggest you include Sigma's 40mm beast. The image quality is very high. I'd really like to see how it stacks up against the Sony GM's...35 and both 50"s. Yeah....I don't know if you have access to any of them. But I would like to see a comparison. Keep up the good work!
I've got the Sigma 35mm f/1.2, but its.. got problems. Not sure if I have a lemon or not. I'll be releasing a review of it, as well as Sony's 50mm f/1.2 hopefully over the course of the next few weeks or months. I have samples and intro/outros filmed, but I need to do the actual review bit and editing first.
@@FerventAstronomy Okay, I guess I've heard that the Sigma 35mm has issues. I have the 40mm f/1.4 and it seems good to me. I'd really like to hear about the Sony 50mm.
Yeah, looks like a tilt in the elements on my 35mm, I’ll try to get it serviced. But meanwhile, it’s only as good as it is and I suppose it’s not exactly designed around astrophotography so that context comes into play.
Viltrox 16mm and the Sony GM seem similar stigmatism? This looks better but might go with Viltrox for bang for buck. Would like to see direct comparison of the 3 thx
I’ve reviewed all 3 and have full resolution samples that you can download and compare, just follow the link in any one of the video descriptions. I do intend to make a comparison video for convenience’s sake, but that won’t be happening this week. But in the meantime you can compare the samples and decide for yourself which one is the the best for you 😄
Thanks for the test! This would be a great lens for Aurora time-lapses and real time movies. The rumoured Sigma 15mm F/1.4 full frame fisheye will be another great choice.
Cheers, Alan! I’ll be getting my hands on the new Sigma fisheye as soon as is feasible. I’ve been chasing real-time aurora footage and playing around with speedboosting various fisheye lenses for that exact purpose (with the benefit of getting a circular field of view), so it’ll be interesting to see what a proper fast full-frame version can provide!
Thank you for great astro reviews of lenses. I hope that you will continue this effort further with some longer focal lengths like 35 or 50mm. Astro reviews of lenses are quite rare. I have 20g which is good and I need to pick something longer for astrolandscapes on a tracker. I have tried 35gm, but my copy was quite uneven (it was good for any other use than astro though) so I returned it. There is popular choice for astro the Sigma 40/1.4 but its weight would make it quite dedicated lens so I take that as a last option to try.
Cheers! That’s exactly why I’m doing this, as a consumer myself it’s always frustrating to not have the information I need to make an informed choice. Somebody has to do it and I guess it’s me, lol. I do have some samples and footage ready to put together for reviews of other lenses, including some 50mm and 35mm choices. So you can stay turned for that!
@@FerventAstronomy Great! Thank you.
@@FerventAstronomy Cool, I'll be watching
@@FerventAstronomyI have found an interesting Japanese video, where several GM primes are compared. Video id is FlMSOHtCQJU (not sure if full link would work here). The interesting part is that they also show chromatic aberration by showing separate RGB channels. Some of the tested lenses have sharp one channel but other is less sharp. It also has advantage that separately viewed channel displayed in grays is less impacted by video compression.
Hey Darren (did I spell it correctly?)! Based on this review, I sold one of my kidneys and bought this chonker. Quite impressively sized and heavy indeed, but surprisingly easy to handle, given how compact it is.
I asked Sigma, and they told me they have no intention of making it for Z, so I also had to buy the Megadap ETZ21 Pro, but now I have a gazillion Sony E mount lenses on which to spend the money I’ll get selling the other kidney.
YAY!
Awesome! Who needs kidneys anyway? You’ll enjoy the lens, it’s great. There’s an aurora time lapse that I posted in May taken with that lens if I recall correctly, it brings in a lot of light. I’ll have to use your feedback to show Sigma they should lend me lenses to test, hah! But the world’s open to you now, there’s a lot of great lenses to explore. And yes, that spelling is correct 😉
Awesome. Really helpful, and amazing that we are getting to see lenses this well corrected at large apertures.
Glad it was helpful!
I was undecided between the Sigma 14mm vs the Sony 14 Gm and just the weight for travel made me choose the Sony. The lens is enormous, great quality but too big for travel.
Agreed! It’s a luxury, but I keep both around just for that purpose. Big Sigma when the size and weight aren’t limiting factors, Sony when they are.
@FerventAstronomy Indeed, and what are your thoughts on the 20mm f 1.4 Sigma vs 20mm Sony G? That's the next lens I am considering for Landscape and Astro.
Same calculus basically. I have reviews of both so you can compare samples and weigh the pros and cons, I personally replaced the Sony with the Sigma.
@@FerventAstronomy I will take a look, thank you!
This was really great, thanks a lot for taking the time to share this review. I'm just a little unsure about the right choice of camera which would pair well with this lens. To shoot both landscape and some astro (milkyway, aurora), should one go for the high-res bodies like a7cr, or what would be your recommendation in that regard? I particularly want to keep the noise level down. My old a7 has disappointed me with the noise level quite a few times. Would astro-modification help lowering the noise?
A modded camera won’t help with noise. In general, my recommendation is to get the newest-generation sensor available, as that’s where the biggest improvements are to be found. My opinion is that higher resolution is better as well, as noise will be de-emphasized because it will have smaller “grain” size when viewed how people normally experience photos (ie: not pixel peeping zoomed in 800%). DPReviewTV did a video on this a couple years ago if you can find it, where they demonstrated the differences. In your position I would be comfortable with the A7CR, as I primarily use an A7RIV/A7RV for those types of photography myself.
Many thanks! I've learned a lot from your channel @@FerventAstronomy
Again great review! Incredible lens also! My hope for this lens is that it would be fast enough to not need a tracker for milkyways and thus lighter overall (instant buy if that were true). Seems like a tracker is still needed though as the 15sec shots just weren't cutting it for me. Guess I'll stick with the GM for now.
Crazy question: Do you think it is possible for sony to use IBIS + plate solving to do inbody tracking (similar to how pixel shift works) to get tighter stars for ~30 second exposures? With all the computational power in the new models and a7RV having ~8-stops IBIS not too crazy?
I’ve happily and successfully used this lens for untracked Milky Way, so I wouldn’t hesitate. You have to remember that it’s 15 seconds with a 50 megapixel sensor, prioritizing shorter exposures (at a relatively low ISO) to avoid any star trailing. The sample images are shot to help unravel optical aberrations, and as such they’re pretty conservative. The pinky purple thumbnail image next to my head was taken with the lens using the A7RV, and I’m perfectly happy with it.
Only Pentax cameras are capable of “sky, tracking“ using ibis, and they do so via a combination of GPS and a lot of patents. This will not be something that will come to any current Sony camera and more than likely will not be something that will come to any future Sony camera.
@@FerventAstronomy for pretty much all digital media you are bang on. I confess to being a pixel peeper, and with the A7Riv + 14GM I want at least 60 seconds at 1.8 so it was unlikely the 1.4 would have personally satisfied me.
Also man you have a ton of knowledge! I have never heard of that Pentax feature and it's a shame it will not come to other brands. 300+ seconds of tracking is super impressive!
I have an unhealthy relationship with camera gear and photography lol
Ha, I say. You call this sigma big and heavy? Not as heavy as my Sigma 40mm f/1.4. And that's without a lens collar. Add in a 3rd party lens collar and it's not even close.
So, if you do some comparisons in the 35 to 50mm range, might I suggest you include Sigma's 40mm beast. The image quality is very high. I'd really like to see how it stacks up against the Sony GM's...35 and both 50"s. Yeah....I don't know if you have access to any of them. But I would like to see a comparison. Keep up the good work!
I've got the Sigma 35mm f/1.2, but its.. got problems. Not sure if I have a lemon or not. I'll be releasing a review of it, as well as Sony's 50mm f/1.2 hopefully over the course of the next few weeks or months. I have samples and intro/outros filmed, but I need to do the actual review bit and editing first.
@@FerventAstronomy Okay, I guess I've heard that the Sigma 35mm has issues. I have the 40mm f/1.4 and it seems good to me. I'd really like to hear about the Sony 50mm.
Yeah, looks like a tilt in the elements on my 35mm, I’ll try to get it serviced. But meanwhile, it’s only as good as it is and I suppose it’s not exactly designed around astrophotography so that context comes into play.
Love ya man, thought this was just a re-upload.. of the Sony, for some dumb reason. Busy I guess. My bad.
An understandable mistake, back to back releases are rare for me lol. And I am wearing the same shirt 😝
Viltrox 16mm and the Sony GM seem similar stigmatism? This looks better but might go with Viltrox for bang for buck. Would like to see direct comparison of the 3 thx
I’ve reviewed all 3 and have full resolution samples that you can download and compare, just follow the link in any one of the video descriptions. I do intend to make a comparison video for convenience’s sake, but that won’t be happening this week. But in the meantime you can compare the samples and decide for yourself which one is the the best for you 😄
Please try ttartisan 11mm 2.8 ❤
If I come across one I can try it
If I come across one I can try it