Canon and Sony News for Jun 2021
The new Lowepro PhotoSport III 15L and 24L Photo Backpacks have been announced. Get the details at B&H.
Image quality test results have been added to the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art Lens page.
You are going to like these results. Here are some comparisons to get you started:
Compared to Sony FE 90mm f/2.8 Macro G OSS Lens
Compared to Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM Macro Lens
Compared to Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Macro F017 Lens
The Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art Lens is in stock at B&H | Adorama | Amazon USA | WEX
Rent the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art Lens from Lensrentals.
Please share!
Image quality test results from a second lens have been added to the Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM Lens Review.
The second lens results, shown as sample 1, are nearly identical to the first lens results, now denoted as sample 2. Here is that comparison.
It is a rare lens that our test chart results do not accurately represent, but the FE 14mm GM lens is one of them. The test chart results for the two lenses were only mediocre (to be kind) and well below expectations for a prime G Master lens. Obvious is that a flat test chart highlights field curvature, a feature that few (none?) of us want. That the depth of sharp focus at the periphery become shallower and moves slightly rearward at close focus distances is the cause of the chart anomaly.
If carefully focused in the corner of the frame, as illustrated here, this lens produces sharp corner image quality. However, this improvement comes at the expense of the center of the frame performance. Fortunately, this lens performs significantly better at long distances.
The Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM Lens is an outstanding choice for photographing the milky way. Check out sample crop showing pin-point star rendering in the full-frame corners. Add this lens to the already long list of impressive Sony milky way lens options, including the FE 20mm f/1.8 G, FE 24mm f/1.4 GM, FE 12-24mm f/2.8 GM, and FE 16-35mm f/2.8 GM lenses.
The Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM Lens is in stock at B&H and available for order at Adorama | Amazon USA | WEX
Rent the Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM Lens from Lensrentals.
From CyberLink:
CyberLink Expands its Entire Library of Shutterstock Royalty-Free Premium Content to All Director Family 365 Products
For the first time ever, all Director Family 365 customers can now access CyberLink’s full collection of Shutterstock premium royalty-free content of high quality photos, video, and audio
Taipei, Taiwan—June 29, 2021—CyberLink Corp. (5203.TW) today announced the availability of their entire Shutterstock premium content library across all Director Family 365 products, making the extensive royalty-free collection of high quality photos, video, and audio available to users for free with unlimited access. This expanded collection is integrated directly into the software’s library for a streamlined workflow and easy user access. All content will be available for both personal and commercial use. The new release from CyberLink also features brand new ad templates for PowerDirector 365 Business and the AdDirectorapp so users can now leverage a whopping 600 pre-designed templates combined with an extensive library of Shutterstock content for creating professional-grade video ads.
Beyond the expansion of their full Shutterstock premium content library across all 365 products and new ad templates for PowerDirector 365 Business and the AdDirector app, CyberLink’s update comes with several new features and add-ons, together with notable user interface enhancements across its creative software offerings:
- PhotoDirector 13 features new photo editing capabilities, including:
- Light hit effects
- Three-way color grading
- Content aware removal enhancement
- PowerDirector for Mac features new video and audio editing capabilities, including:
- Blending effect
- Simple Video Stabilizer
- Masking: Create text, image, linear and parallel masks. Generate free form selection mask with keyframing.
- Nested projects able to resize/rotate/freeform, etc.
- Audio editor added DRC, EQ, Echo and Reverb
- PowerDirector for PC features new video editing capabilities, including:
- Mask Designer: Auto subject detection and selection tool (PowerDirector 365 only)
- Auto image subject detection and selection – creates a mask and has brush tool to edit (PowerDirector 365 Business only)
- Overall UX improvements
“At CyberLink we pride ourselves as a highly customer-centric creative software brand that consistently delivers on user demand,” said Dr. Jau Huang, CEO of CyberLink. “Our customers of all skill levels have provided overwhelmingly positive feedback on our expansive Shutterstock premium content library, so we are now offering the entire collection to all our Director Family 365 users. Today’s release is unprecedented for the CyberLink ecosystem and we plan to continue developing new, exciting updates for users so they have the tools, features and content to foster their creative potential.”
Product Availability The above products are available online at B&H
Sony has made Sony Alpha 1 firmware update version 1.10 available for download: Windows | Mac.
Sony Alpha 1 Version 1.10 incorporates the following fixes and enhancements:
- Improved AF performance and operational stability
- Improved operability when using the Remote Camera Tool * Please update the Remote Camera Tool to the latest version.
- Improved operational stability when using Imaging Edge Mobile
- Improved detection performance of the eye sensor under strong light sources such as the sun
- Improved operational stability when using SEL100400GM, SEL200600G, SEL600F40GM
- Other improvements in operational stability
This is a nice update – the eye sensor fix alone is huge.
Canon celebrates National Camera Day with a lens announcement. From Canon USA:
Canon Introduces New RF14-35mm F4 L IS USM Lens Broadening Imaginative Possibilities For Still And Video
MELVILLE, NY, June 29, 2021– Canon U.S.A., Inc., a leader in digital imaging solutions, today announced the RF14-35mm F4 L IS USM lens. This dramatic new lens brings 14mm, ultra wide-angle coverage to full-frame EOS R-series users. On top of the ultra-wide capabilities, the 14-35mm zoom range is the broadest ever in a Canon wide-angle zoom for full-frame AF cameras. For many Canon users, one single lens can potentially handle all wide-angle needs, from vivid, creative ultra-wide imagery to traditional street photography.
The new wide-angle lens is designed for use within the expanding family of EOS R full-frame mirrorless cameras, including the upcoming EOS R3, currently in development. Whether you capture stills, video, or like many creatives today – both – this new wide-angle lens from Canon can help elevate users’ content game when capturing images or video in a wide variety of situations, such as landscape, architecture, and travel.
A compact overall design, and extremely modest overall weight of just 1.2 lbs. — along with excellent balance, during hand-held or even gimbal-mounted operation — add to RF14-35mm F4 L IS USM inviting character. A key feature, sure to appeal to many landscape and nature photographers, is this lens’s ability to accept conventional, 77mm screw-in filters. This is especially noteworthy on a lens for full-frame cameras with 14mm ultra-wide coverage. Additionally, the lens’s close-focusing capability is exceptional for an ultra-wide zoom of its type.
Image Stabilization further enhances the RF14-35mm’s appeal for low-light still imagery, and for steady yet striking wide video footage. Up to 5.5 stops[i] of optical Image Stabilization is built-in, and Coordinated IS with cameras such as the EOS R6 and EOS R5 delivers up to 7 stops[ii] of shake-correction. This can mean sharper hand-held images in low light, even at extremely slow shutter speeds.
The Canon RF 14-35mm F4 L IS USM lens features a bright, constant f/4 maximum aperture, L-Series optical construction — highlighted by three UD-glass elements, and three Aspherical elements — and many of the company’s most advanced proprietary lens coatings, including Sub-wavelength Structure Coating (SWC) and Air Sphere Coating (ASC). These superb lens coatings help minimize ghosting and flaring. Lens placement and coatings are also optimized to help users get clear, high-contrast images, even when there is a bright light source either in, or immediately outside, the frame. Additional features of the Canon RF14-35mm F4 L IS USM include:
- Compact design — Approximately 1.2 lbs. in weight.
- Minimum focusing of 7.9 inches at all focal lengths and a maximum magnification of 0.38x at 35mm zoom setting.
- Optical Image Stabilizer with up to 5.5 stops[i] of shake correction.
- Up to 7 stops[ii] of shake correction when paired with Canon EOS R series cameras that feature In-Body Image Stabilizer (IBIS).
- High speed, smooth and quiet autofocus with Canon’s Nano USM.
- Control Ring for direct setting changes of aperture, shutter speed, ISO speed and exposure compensation.
- Superb dust and weather-resistance on par with other Canon L-series lenses.
Pricing and Availability
The Canon RF14-35mm F4 L IS USM lens is scheduled to be available in August 2021 for an estimated retail price of $1,699.00*.
Orders
Order the Canon RF 14-35mm F4 L IS USM Lens from B&H | Adorama |Amazon USA | WEX
*Specifications, availability and prices are subject to change without notice. Actual prices are set by individual dealers and may vary.
[i] Based on CIPA (Camera & Imaging Products Associations) standards. Testing performed at focal length of 35mm, using the EOS R camera.
[ii] Based on CIPA (Camera & Imaging Products Associations) standards. Testing performed at focal length of 35mm, using the EOS R5 camera.
Ironically, the day after sharing the comparison below, Sony released Alpha 1 firmware update version 1.10. While IBIS was not called out in the list of updated features, discussions hinted that an IBIS performance update was possibly included in the "Other improvements in operational stability" line item. Sony would not divulge the answer to that question. That possibility left a little doubt in my mind, and ... I don't like doubt more than I don't like testing image stabilization.
Round 2. Jump over to the latest Canon vs. Sony IBIS Comparison Test for the round 2 results.
When shooting handheld, image stabilization performance can be a significant image quality factor. Sony has incorporated In-Body Image Stabilization (IBIS) in their cameras for many years — the a7 II and a7R II had this feature. Canon's first IBIS implementations arrived last summer in the Canon EOS R5 and EOS R6.
Especially given Sony's long head start with this technology, I wanted to know: Is Sony's IBIS better than Canon's? Or is Canon's IBIS better? The two systems could also perform equally, and that piece of information would also be helpful to know. It was time to create a comparison featuring the latest high-end models from each company, the Canon EOS R5 vs. Sony Alpha 1.
CIPA's image stabilization ratings attempt to provide an objective measure of a camera's stabilization assistance capabilities. However, CIPA is considerably steadier than I am. There are no objective image stabilization tests that measure a camera's stabilization assistance specifically for me — or for you, and it is only a camera's stabilization assistance performance for the person holding the camera that matters. Even our personal stabilization needs are situational, with wind, physical exertion, footing stability, and other factors influencing our ability to hold a camera steady.
While I had opinions on the overall image stabilization performance of various Canon and Sony camera and lens combinations, explicitly testing the difference between the Canon and Sony camera IBIS has been interesting me. With nearly identical Canon and Sony non-stabilized lenses in the lab at the same time, this comparison hit the top of my to-do list, becoming the priority.
While completely objective testing was not possible, it seemed that subjective testing could be dialed in to have meaning.
This IBIS testing was performed in the studio, with ideal handheld testing conditions, including solid (concrete) footing and no wind. During testing, elbows were not resting on the body, and the viewfinder was in use (vs. the rear LCD).
The Canon EOS R5 with an RF 50mm F1.2 L USM Lens was tested against a Sony Alpha 1 with an FE 50mm f/1.2 GM Lens. The cameras were set to single-shot mode, with the electronic first curtain shutter selected in Tv mode. A detailed test target (exceeding camera resolution) was positioned at eye level about 10' (3.3m) away, with the distance marked for consistency.
Starting at 1/25 second exposures (roughly 2 stops of stabilization assistance expected for me), 10 images were captured with each camera. The shutter duration on both cameras was then increased by 1/3 stop, and the testing was repeated, alternating cameras until 1 second exposures were on the cards. That procedure amounted to 150 pictures taken with each camera (10 shots x 15 shutter speeds), 300 pictures total.
The measure of sharpness is not boolean, true or false, meaning an arbitrary determination of pass or fail was required, and adding an intermediary grade seemed a good idea. In addition, everyone loves a score, a firm number that can quickly be compared and quoted.
If the image was unsalvageable, it went into the "Delete" category. If an image is blurry, it was a waste of time to capture, load, and process. Worse is that I may have counted on the image being sharp, meaning that the desired image was lost. The blurry image also consumed space on the memory card and later on the computer's SSD. Thus, in the "Score" column, five points are deducted for each image falling in this category.
If the image was salvageable via increasing the sharpness or down-sizing the image, it went into the "Useable" category. No points were given for these images. While they will often get the job done, these results were mediocre.
Crisply sharp images are what we want. Test images making the "Sharp" grade were awarded 5 points.
Most images were not hard to place in one of these three categories. The "benefit of the doubt" rule was implemented for those hard to grade, and the higher grade was given.
Here is the resulting Canon vs. Sony IBIS comparison table:
| Canon | Sony | Diff (Canon - Sony) | Score | |||||||||
| Exposure | Delete | Useable | Sharp | Delete | Useable | Sharp | Delete | Useable | Sharp | Canon | Sony | Diff |
| 1/25 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 1 | 2 | 7 | -1 | -2 | 3 | 50 | 30 | 20 |
| 1/20 | 0 | 1 | 9 | 1 | 1 | 8 | -1 | 0 | 1 | 45 | 35 | 10 |
| 1/15 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 1 | 4 | 5 | -1 | -4 | 5 | 50 | 20 | 30 |
| 1/13 | 0 | 1 | 9 | 2 | 3 | 5 | -2 | -2 | 4 | 45 | 15 | 30 |
| 1/10 | 1 | 3 | 6 | 6 | 1 | 3 | -5 | 2 | 3 | 25 | -15 | 40 |
| 1/8 | 0 | 3 | 7 | 3 | 4 | 3 | -3 | -1 | 4 | 35 | 0 | 35 |
| 1/6 | 0 | 3 | 7 | 3 | 3 | 4 | -3 | 0 | 3 | 35 | 5 | 30 |
| 1/5 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 6 | 1 | 3 | -4 | 3 | 1 | 10 | -15 | 25 |
| 1/4 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 2 | -1 | -1 | -5 | 10 | -15 |
| 1/3 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 6 | 1 | 3 | -4 | 3 | 1 | 10 | -15 | 25 |
| 0.4 | 8 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 4 | -4 | 0 | -30 | -10 | -20 |
| 0.5 | 6 | 0 | 4 | 9 | 0 | 1 | -3 | 0 | 3 | -10 | -40 | 30 |
| 0.6 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -50 | -50 | 0 |
| 0.8 | 8 | 0 | 2 | 9 | 1 | 0 | -1 | -1 | 2 | -30 | -45 | 15 |
| 1 | 8 | 2 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 | -2 | 2 | 0 | -40 | -50 | 10 |
| Total | 49 | 24 | 77 | 73 | 29 | 48 | -24 | -5 | 29 | 140 | -125 | 265 |
The testing was so much fun that I decided to do it again. OK, the fun part was missing, but meaningful test results should be repeatable, right? While I made a significant effort to capture every test shot to the best of my current abilities (I was not especially steady on this day), I had enough doubt in my mind to leave me unsatisfied. Testing for consistency seemed necessary.
Thus, after fully evaluating the first set of results, the same test was repeated — another 300 images were captured. The results are as follows:
| Canon | Sony | Diff (Canon - Sony) | Score | |||||||||
| Exposure | Delete | Useable | Sharp | Delete | Useable | Sharp | Delete | Useable | Sharp | Canon | Sony | Diff |
| 1/25 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 1 | 9 | 0 | -1 | 1 | 50 | 45 | 5 |
| 1/20 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 50 | 50 | 0 |
| 1/15 | 0 | 2 | 8 | 2 | 3 | 5 | -2 | -1 | 3 | 40 | 15 | 25 |
| 1/13 | 1 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 2 | 8 | 1 | 1 | -2 | 25 | 40 | -15 |
| 1/10 | 0 | 4 | 6 | 7 | 0 | 3 | -7 | 4 | 3 | 30 | -20 | 50 |
| 1/8 | 1 | 3 | 6 | 4 | 3 | 3 | -3 | 0 | 3 | 25 | -5 | 30 |
| 1/6 | 0 | 3 | 7 | 1 | 6 | 3 | -1 | -3 | 4 | 35 | 10 | 25 |
| 1/5 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 2 | -3 | 2 | 1 | 5 | -15 | 20 |
| 1/4 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 2 | -3 | 0 | 3 | 15 | -15 | 30 |
| 1/3 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 7 | 2 | 1 | -4 | 3 | 1 | -5 | -30 | 25 |
| 0.4 | 6 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -20 | -20 | 0 |
| 0.5 | 8 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 0 | -35 | -40 | 5 |
| 0.6 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 2 | 1 | 3 | -2 | -1 | -50 | -30 | -20 |
| 0.8 | 9 | 1 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 | -1 | 1 | 0 | -45 | -50 | 5 |
| 1 | 9 | 1 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 0 | -1 | 1 | 0 | -45 | -50 | 5 |
| Total | 51 | 33 | 66 | 73 | 27 | 50 | -22 | 6 | 16 | 75 | -115 | 190 |
While these numbers are as meaningful as the first table, it was the consistency with the first test results that most interested me. The following table shows the deviation between the two tests. The second result was subtracted from the first result, with 0 or close to 0 indicating similar performance.
| Canon | Sony | |||||
| Exposure | Delete | Useable | Sharp | Delete | Useable | Sharp |
| 1/25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | -2 |
| 1/20 | 0 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 1 | -2 |
| 1/15 | 0 | -2 | 2 | -1 | 1 | 0 |
| 1/13 | -1 | -2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | -3 |
| 1/10 | 1 | -1 | 0 | -1 | 1 | 0 |
| 1/8 | -1 | 0 | 1 | -1 | 1 | 0 |
| 1/6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | -3 | 1 |
| 1/5 | 0 | -1 | 1 | 1 | -2 | 1 |
| 1/4 | 2 | 0 | -2 | -3 | 1 | 2 |
| 1/3 | -1 | -1 | 2 | -1 | -1 | 2 |
| 0.4 | 2 | -2 | 0 | -2 | 2 | 0 |
| 0.5 | -2 | -1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 0.6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | -2 | -1 |
| 0.8 | -1 | -1 | 2 | -1 | 1 | 0 |
| 1 | -1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | -2 | -9 | 11 | 0 | 2 | -2 |
To account for any testing anomalies, after compiling the second test results, the three exposure durations with the most deviation (though none were significantly differing) for each camera were tested a third time (60 additional test shots). The worst of the three results for each camera was thrown out, leaving the results shown in the above tables.
I am very impressed at how consistent the results for the two tests are. The similarity adds credence to the test results.
Here is a summary table showing the combined first and second test results, along with the final scoring.
| Canon | Sony | Diff (Canon - Sony) | Score | |||||||||
| Exposure | Delete | Useable | Sharp | Delete | Useable | Sharp | Delete | Useable | Sharp | Canon | Sony | Diff |
| 1/25 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 1 | 3 | 16 | -1 | -3 | 4 | 100 | 75 | 25 |
| 1/20 | 0 | 1 | 19 | 1 | 1 | 18 | -1 | 0 | 1 | 95 | 85 | 10 |
| 1/15 | 0 | 2 | 18 | 3 | 7 | 10 | -3 | -5 | 8 | 90 | 35 | 55 |
| 1/13 | 1 | 4 | 15 | 2 | 5 | 13 | -1 | -1 | 2 | 70 | 55 | 15 |
| 1/10 | 1 | 7 | 12 | 13 | 1 | 6 | -12 | 6 | 6 | 55 | -35 | 90 |
| 1/8 | 1 | 6 | 13 | 7 | 7 | 6 | -6 | -1 | 7 | 60 | -5 | 65 |
| 1/6 | 0 | 6 | 14 | 4 | 9 | 7 | -4 | -3 | 7 | 70 | 15 | 55 |
| 1/5 | 4 | 9 | 7 | 11 | 4 | 5 | -7 | 5 | 2 | 15 | -30 | 45 |
| 1/4 | 6 | 6 | 8 | 7 | 7 | 6 | -1 | -1 | 2 | 10 | -5 | 15 |
| 1/3 | 5 | 9 | 6 | 13 | 3 | 4 | -8 | 6 | 2 | 5 | -45 | 50 |
| 0.4 | 14 | 2 | 4 | 10 | 6 | 4 | 4 | -4 | 0 | -50 | -30 | -20 |
| 0.5 | 14 | 1 | 5 | 18 | 0 | 2 | -4 | 1 | 3 | -45 | -80 | 35 |
| 0.6 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 17 | 2 | 1 | 3 | -2 | -1 | -100 | -80 | -20 |
| 0.8 | 17 | 1 | 2 | 19 | 1 | 0 | -2 | 0 | 2 | -75 | -95 | 20 |
| 1 | 17 | 3 | 0 | 20 | 0 | 0 | -3 | 3 | 0 | -85 | -100 | 15 |
| Total | 100 | 57 | 143 | 146 | 56 | 98 | -46 | 1 | 45 | 215 | -240 | 455 |
So, we just got highly analytical with 660 subjective test results. Still, there seems to be some meaning here.
The sharp column from this table is illustrated in the graph included at the top of this post. From these results, it is arguable that the IBIS technology in the Canon EOS R5 is superior to that in the Sony Alpha 1, at least in many of the shutter speed comparisons (for me, on this day, in this location, with the referenced lenses mounted). For example, follow the "10" line in the chart to see the shutter speed I required for a 50% sharp image rate.
The bottom line is that IBIS is valuable in both camera brands. This feature adds substantially to the versatility of non-stabilized lenses, such as the 50mm f/1.2 models tested here. IBIS is one more reason to love the latest mirrorless camera models.
With air-to-ground lightning strikes averaging under 10-seconds apart, this thunderstorm was awesome.
After dark, lightning becomes easy to photograph. Mount the camera to a tripod, frame a composition that includes the location with the most frequent lightning, focus to a long distance, set the aperture and ISO to control the lightning and overall image brightness, and then open the shutter long enough to catch at least one strike. Easy is to use 30-second exposures controlled by the camera (the strategy implemented for this example), but the Bulb setting controlled with a remote release enables the exposure timing to be adjusted as desired. For example, lock the remote release button down until there is a strike or the time duration exceeds the tolerance for long exposure noise.
Make safety a priority. Photographing lightning from a safe distance (far away) is advised. Locations with long distance visibility are advantaged in this regard, and the flat midwest prairie gets impressive thunderstorms.
Along with this storm came wind, wind strong enough create significant camera vibrations with even a sturdy tripod and strong enough to put a significant amount of dirt in the air. The solution to this issue was to drop down into the canyon a bit. The difference in wind speed 25 yards (25 m) down from rim was substantial and a solution to the problem.
Right, the title says four minutes, but a 30-second shutter speed was in use. This image is a four-minute exposure created by blending eight 30 second exposures using the "Lighten" layer blending option in Photoshop. This blending option is simple to use, allowing the lightning strikes from the layers below to show through.
As usual, the Canon EOS R5 and RF 24-70mm F2.8 L IS Lens performed impressively on this shoot.
A larger version of this image is available on Flickr.
ISO 200
8192 x 5464px
Just posted: MindShift Gear BackLight Elite 45L Review
A first-choice full-size backpack for nearly any adventure.
The MindShift Gear BackLight Elite 45L is in stock at B&H | Adorama | Amazon USA | WEX
Please share!
The new Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM Lens is in stock at B&H.
Just posted: Sony FE 50mm f/2.5 G Lens Review.
This is a very nice little lens.
The Sony FE 50mm f/2.5 G Lens is in stock at B&H | Adorama | Amazon USA | WEX
Rent the Sony FE 50mm f/2.5 G Lens from Lensrentals.
Please share!
Just posted: Sony FE 50mm f/1.2 GM Lens Review.
Excellent lens.
Get in line if you want this one. Order the Sony FE 50mm f/1.2 GM Lens at B&H | Adorama | Amazon USA | WEX
Rent the Sony FE 50mm f/1.2 GM Lens from Lensrentals.
Please share!
Just posted: Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM Lens Review.
A second FE 14mm lens is on order, and I intend to update the review upon testing that lens.
The Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM Lens is available for order at B&H | Adorama | Amazon USA | WEX
Rent the Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM Lens from Lensrentals.
Sony has made Sony FE 50mm f/1.2 GM Lens firmware update version 02 available for download.
Firmware Version 02 incorporates the following fixes and enhancements:
- Improved the phenomenon that the aperture value becomes unstable in rare cases when operating the aperture ring.
Sony has made Sony Alpha a9 II firmware update version 3.10 available for download.
Firmware Version 3.10 incorporates the following fixes and enhancements:
- Improved operability when using the Remote Camera Tool
* Please update the Remote Camera Tool to the latest version. - Fixed the problem that the battery level display may not be correct when using the vertical grip.
- Improved operational stability
 |
|