I’m one of the crazy people who bought this lens. Before this I had the 16-35 F2/8 GM which was an absolute stellar lens. So this one seemed the next logical step to the extreme. Being able to sell my 16-35 for $1,800 took the edge off just a bit moving up to the 12-24. So far all the magic that I have made with it has been nothing short of stellar. One point I don’t think you touched on is what it does with light stars because of the coating. But if you are one of those who wants the best of the best this definitely fills that void 😂
That is great perspective, I never considered moving from a 16-35, which is likely the more common move and this is a great 'upgrade' from there. You are very right I totally missed the opportunity to talk about the stars 😢 They are wildly nice, I found also while merging photos for HDRs too the edges on the stars are so crisp that image stacking is far easier
I don’t think it’s that crazy, frankly I’m surprised more people don’t buy this - although I got the F4 since it was quite a bit less. Here’s what I don’t get - usually the “trinity” of lenses is considered the 16-35, the 24-70, and the 70-200, but why the 16-35 when almost half of that is overlap with what you get from the 24-70? Getting the 12-24 you have more wide angle and no overlap in lenses. Maybe people feel like having overlap at the 24-35 range is fine since It’s a popular range and the net effect would be you don’t need to change your lens as much, but for me I just felt like it made more sense to get the 12-24. At that really wide range the 4 extra mm can make a big difference in terms of focal length, especially when shooting landscapes.
Hey Shane, you mentioned you don't know who this lens is for, and i would like to offer you a simple answer. It is for someone like me, who does interior photography. basically, i shoot interior spaces and this is my go-to lens. Cost becomes a lesser issue when it is tied to productivity and quality. Beyond having good sharpness and contrast, it is the flair resistence, sun stars, and overall build quality that appealed to me. I still keep my 12-24 f4 G as a back-up. Like you said, the difference between the 2 lenses, while not significant, is noticable IF i look closely. Sigma is never in consideration not because it is 14mm vs 12mm, but because in my kind of shoots, every photo will be having perspective correction done during post processing. This means a 12mm shot will end up being 13mm on a good day, or 15mm on a bad day. If i start at 14mm.... it is almost certain i will get the bulk of my finished shots closer to 16mm.
That make perfect sense, I can very much so see this lens being the perfect high-end interior photographers lens! The crop imposed by perspective corrections has been a bigger and bigger concepts for myself since using the lens more and I can see how especially in tight spaces that the 12mm vs 14mm would be far more critical. Thank you very much for you comment! I hope you have a great day!
really great review. Thank you for this. I did buy this lens a while ago and never ever regretted it. It is so much fun to use and the results are always incredible. Love to use it for really quirky perspectives. Using a 60 megapixel sensor, I sometimes use it in APS-C mode and get a good 36mm look out of it, which is a great option too (I use the programmable button on the lens to switch between normal and APS-C mode). I keep using it more and more and still learn how much the lens has to offer.
Nice review, also subbed your channel! You are wrong about the AF system though. The 4 XD linear motors are very accurate, yes, but they are also Sonys fastest tech, and for example utilised in both the new 70-200 GM II, and the 50/1.2 GM. I agree about the MF ring though, that could be a bit better. You were wondering who the lens is designed for. First and foremost it is the perfect cityscape, architecture, interior lens. People who do these kinds of photography professionally, often don't have the option the rely on a 14GM, 20G combo for example. They need 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 etc mm focal lengths. For those people the lens is perfect. It is also perfect for photographers who shoot landscape with lots of foreground interest. There the adjustable focal length makes a huge difference too. I own both the 14GM and the 20G, but was missing the adjustability more and more lately. Thats why I got this 12-24GM (but still kept the primes, because I too love to use primes).
Just bought it and yes, I constantly have that nagging feeling like i should be using it more, or should i have just gone for the f4. But like you say, at the end of the day, it's amazing, and I am also really loving the 24mm on it, so it actually makes it a great street lens on holiday, weight aside. I think i was either going for the 16-35 GM and the 12-24 f4, or the 16-34 f4 and the 12-24 GM. I think I'm glad I went this way cause the 16-35 f4 is so tiny and useful, so it's all good.
Thanks Shane for this video. Your point on the lens's lack of ablity to have a good manual focus - really discouraged the purchase. I will stick with a prime lens! )))
Great rundown, Shane. I considered it, but that price was just too hilariously ridonkulous, and I say that as someone that owns several GM lenses. I opted for the Sigma 14-24 DG DN Art instead. It's a fantastic lens, and crazy sharp... almost TOO sharp..., but as it turns out, I quickly found out how infrequently I actually shoot at 14mm. Honestly, more often than not, I end up packing the 24GM instead, unless I know for sure I'm going to want to shoot ultra-wide, so I have a feeling it's probably best I didn't get the 12-24 lol.
I think you made the right choice 😅 I feel that since I got this lens I've shot at 24mm more than I used too even which is a nice change, but it certainly feels like a 'waste' every time I take a photo not at 12mm and I think I could have just got the sigma 🙃
Your biggest downside i sidestepped: price. I payed 2250€ (and got filter set Haida for 'free'). For this price (even cheaper then new Sony 16-35mm GM) it's absolutely amazing. And 12mm, i was sceptical it would be usefull, but man i already used it a lot. It does things no other lens can. And F2.8 aperture just saved some low light images. I bought this as upgrade over the Sigma 14-24mm. That last lens is absolutely stunning. The sharpness is great, even autofocus and build quality. Price/performance (with a focus on a wide and sharp lens) this lens is incredible good, and recommended without thinking twice. But as an ultimate 'ultra wide' lens the Sony 12-24mm trumps is. The biggest gain is 12mm, there is something about it, that cannot be described (but still 14mm of Sigma is plenty wide and will rarely be an issue). Second biggest gain is AF. It wanst necessary (Sigma in Af-c is more then fast enough for me), but the GM is lightning fast. It might gain me some rushed snap shots or quick macro shots. The third gain is a small gain in sharpness. This last one is not a reason to buy it, Sigma is already incredible good, (and much better then most of it's competitors). Sigma 14-24mm and Sony 12-24mm gm are above the rest of the pack. But in absolute sense the Sony manages to push out that last bit of contrast and sharpness (especially closer to the wide side, at 24mm they are both amazing). Also amazon.de sometimes has it for 2699e i even saw it at 2650€ while cashback -200€ = 2450€. For that price it's amazing. Only condition is that you love and usa UWA. If uwa is a niche in your photography then pay less and buy Sigma or prime :D But alas i love it. Just used it on fireworks at 12mm standing very close, the few and atmosphere is amazing. Since in my city there's lots of 'disturbing objects' near the firework place (for new year's eve), standing closer but with UWA is a really good solution.
Hey Shane, great review - thanks! I was thinking of picking up the 12-24GM and selling my stellar 14GM and 16-35GM lenses to pay for it. Nice to see some images of my hometown Toronto shot with the 12-24. If you ever decide to trade your great copy of the 12-24 for the 14 and 16-35 GM's, let me know and we can meet up.
Thank you! I have still been on the fence if I would like to get the 14mm, it seems like a great lens still and I have some regrets not getting it, however I’ve really gotten used to the 12-24 and using rear filters with it so I think I am going to hang on to it for the time being!
@@ShaneBethlehem Thanks Shane. I actually just picked up a mint 12-24 GM on Kijiji yesterday. Now I am looking into ND and CPL filter options (I have some older 150mm front filters), but I am struggling with a compatible filter holder/adapter option. I was thinking of the Haida rear filters, but I've read they can soften the edges and corners of ultra WA lenses like this one. How are you finding the rear filters on this lens?
Nice review! But I have questions, does most of the pictures and videos in this reviews even the low light indoor stabilised video with people and tables are taken not on F2.8 but stopped down? If so then the F4 version will do? I find it hard to understand people recommend faster lens but when they actually use it they stop down, then what's the benefit there at all, is not like you get a F2.8 lens will provide more light when you use it at F4 isn't it? By the way, when you use it with video and shift the focus with the inbody lens correction turned on, do you see there's weird curvature magnify looks? Because this review show it, you can watch it at the 10:42 part, is it real and should I turn off the correction then?: m.ua-cam.com/video/4FbYfkMDreU/v-deo.html Also, is the 12-24mm still a good buy or Sony will update it soon because the same 6 years old 16-35 GM got updated few months ago? Also how you adjust the color of your photos and videos, they looks so real yet cinematic in same time, I love Hasselblad HNCS color but then their XD line isn't practical for me yet and I can get good looking with other system too and it's about find the balance between performance and accessbilities, Sony A7RV full frame camera can give me there well with zoom lenses, I decided to get the 12-24mm F4 and Tamron 50-400mm F4.5-6.3, might get the Laowa 35mm F0.95 for one of my creative need later too, but can I achieve the similar look of your vudeo and photo with the Tamron? It's golden looking and the Sony lenses is cooler digital looking natively.
I did end up buying the rear end filter and it’s a little sketchy to install but not necessarily difficult. The insert that came from Sony by default is made out of plastic and when I was pulling my out it did crack
Now that the lens has been out for a while and is showing up used, you should revisit this review. I just bought mine used in mint condition for $2000 and IMO, this completely changes the value proposition. At $2000, I don't see the point in buying any of the alternatives anymore.
Got the 1224G for a good price to film bike videos and urban cityscapes. This thing is cool, but absurd. What I'm really hoping for is a 12mm f2 for half the price, or something along those lines
great review! the 12-24 is so useful for architectural photo/video. And for that purpose, the 12-24G f4 is the sweet spot and more than enough for me.
I’m one of the crazy people who bought this lens. Before this I had the 16-35 F2/8 GM which was an absolute stellar lens. So this one seemed the next logical step to the extreme. Being able to sell my 16-35 for $1,800 took the edge off just a bit moving up to the 12-24. So far all the magic that I have made with it has been nothing short of stellar. One point I don’t think you touched on is what it does with light stars because of the coating. But if you are one of those who wants the best of the best this definitely fills that void 😂
That is great perspective, I never considered moving from a 16-35, which is likely the more common move and this is a great 'upgrade' from there.
You are very right I totally missed the opportunity to talk about the stars 😢 They are wildly nice, I found also while merging photos for HDRs too the edges on the stars are so crisp that image stacking is far easier
I have a good copy of the 16-35/2.8. How do you find the image quality compared between the two?
I don’t think it’s that crazy, frankly I’m surprised more people don’t buy this - although I got the F4 since it was quite a bit less. Here’s what I don’t get - usually the “trinity” of lenses is considered the 16-35, the 24-70, and the 70-200, but why the 16-35 when almost half of that is overlap with what you get from the 24-70? Getting the 12-24 you have more wide angle and no overlap in lenses. Maybe people feel like having overlap at the 24-35 range is fine since It’s a popular range and the net effect would be you don’t need to change your lens as much, but for me I just felt like it made more sense to get the 12-24. At that really wide range the 4 extra mm can make a big difference in terms of focal length, especially when shooting landscapes.
Love this review!! Loads of images to look at and all the information one would look for before buying this!! Gr8 job
Excellent and comprehensive review.
Hey Shane, you mentioned you don't know who this lens is for, and i would like to offer you a simple answer. It is for someone like me, who does interior photography. basically, i shoot interior spaces and this is my go-to lens.
Cost becomes a lesser issue when it is tied to productivity and quality. Beyond having good sharpness and contrast, it is the flair resistence, sun stars, and overall build quality that appealed to me. I still keep my 12-24 f4 G as a back-up.
Like you said, the difference between the 2 lenses, while not significant, is noticable IF i look closely. Sigma is never in consideration not because it is 14mm vs 12mm, but because in my kind of shoots, every photo will be having perspective correction done during post processing. This means a 12mm shot will end up being 13mm on a good day, or 15mm on a bad day. If i start at 14mm.... it is almost certain i will get the bulk of my finished shots closer to 16mm.
That make perfect sense, I can very much so see this lens being the perfect high-end interior photographers lens!
The crop imposed by perspective corrections has been a bigger and bigger concepts for myself since using the lens more and I can see how especially in tight spaces that the 12mm vs 14mm would be far more critical.
Thank you very much for you comment! I hope you have a great day!
@@ShaneBethlehem glad to contribute. great day to you too!
Excellent review!
really great review. Thank you for this. I did buy this lens a while ago and never ever regretted it. It is so much fun to use and the results are always incredible. Love to use it for really quirky perspectives. Using a 60 megapixel sensor, I sometimes use it in APS-C mode and get a good 36mm look out of it, which is a great option too (I use the programmable button on the lens to switch between normal and APS-C mode). I keep using it more and more and still learn how much the lens has to offer.
Nice review, also subbed your channel! You are wrong about the AF system though. The 4 XD linear motors are very accurate, yes, but they are also Sonys fastest tech, and for example utilised in both the new 70-200 GM II, and the 50/1.2 GM. I agree about the MF ring though, that could be a bit better.
You were wondering who the lens is designed for. First and foremost it is the perfect cityscape, architecture, interior lens. People who do these kinds of photography professionally, often don't have the option the rely on a 14GM, 20G combo for example. They need 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 etc mm focal lengths. For those people the lens is perfect. It is also perfect for photographers who shoot landscape with lots of foreground interest. There the adjustable focal length makes a huge difference too. I own both the 14GM and the 20G, but was missing the adjustability more and more lately. Thats why I got this 12-24GM (but still kept the primes, because I too love to use primes).
Just bought it and yes, I constantly have that nagging feeling like i should be using it more, or should i have just gone for the f4. But like you say, at the end of the day, it's amazing, and I am also really loving the 24mm on it, so it actually makes it a great street lens on holiday, weight aside. I think i was either going for the 16-35 GM and the 12-24 f4, or the 16-34 f4 and the 12-24 GM. I think I'm glad I went this way cause the 16-35 f4 is so tiny and useful, so it's all good.
Excellent review Shane.
Thank you 😊
Its tempting!
It really is 😅
Thanks Shane for this video. Your point on the lens's lack of ablity to have a good manual focus - really discouraged the purchase. I will stick with a prime lens! )))
Great rundown, Shane. I considered it, but that price was just too hilariously ridonkulous, and I say that as someone that owns several GM lenses. I opted for the Sigma 14-24 DG DN Art instead. It's a fantastic lens, and crazy sharp... almost TOO sharp..., but as it turns out, I quickly found out how infrequently I actually shoot at 14mm. Honestly, more often than not, I end up packing the 24GM instead, unless I know for sure I'm going to want to shoot ultra-wide, so I have a feeling it's probably best I didn't get the 12-24 lol.
I think you made the right choice 😅 I feel that since I got this lens I've shot at 24mm more than I used too even which is a nice change, but it certainly feels like a 'waste' every time I take a photo not at 12mm and I think I could have just got the sigma 🙃
14mm f1.8 vs 12-24mm ?
Great video, maybe if you maje another video for using this lens for video 🙏🏼 it will be awesome!
Great content , keep on 💪🏼
Thanks! I definitely would like too, maybe a little less in depth with some more example footage!
Your biggest downside i sidestepped: price. I payed 2250€ (and got filter set Haida for 'free'). For this price (even cheaper then new Sony 16-35mm GM) it's absolutely amazing. And 12mm, i was sceptical it would be usefull, but man i already used it a lot. It does things no other lens can. And F2.8 aperture just saved some low light images. I bought this as upgrade over the Sigma 14-24mm. That last lens is absolutely stunning. The sharpness is great, even autofocus and build quality. Price/performance (with a focus on a wide and sharp lens) this lens is incredible good, and recommended without thinking twice. But as an ultimate 'ultra wide' lens the Sony 12-24mm trumps is. The biggest gain is 12mm, there is something about it, that cannot be described (but still 14mm of Sigma is plenty wide and will rarely be an issue). Second biggest gain is AF. It wanst necessary (Sigma in Af-c is more then fast enough for me), but the GM is lightning fast. It might gain me some rushed snap shots or quick macro shots. The third gain is a small gain in sharpness. This last one is not a reason to buy it, Sigma is already incredible good, (and much better then most of it's competitors). Sigma 14-24mm and Sony 12-24mm gm are above the rest of the pack. But in absolute sense the Sony manages to push out that last bit of contrast and sharpness (especially closer to the wide side, at 24mm they are both amazing).
Also amazon.de sometimes has it for 2699e i even saw it at 2650€ while cashback -200€ = 2450€. For that price it's amazing. Only condition is that you love and usa UWA. If uwa is a niche in your photography then pay less and buy Sigma or prime :D But alas i love it.
Just used it on fireworks at 12mm standing very close, the few and atmosphere is amazing. Since in my city there's lots of 'disturbing objects' near the firework place (for new year's eve), standing closer but with UWA is a really good solution.
Hey Shane, great review - thanks! I was thinking of picking up the 12-24GM and selling my stellar 14GM and 16-35GM lenses to pay for it. Nice to see some images of my hometown Toronto shot with the 12-24. If you ever decide to trade your great copy of the 12-24 for the 14 and 16-35 GM's, let me know and we can meet up.
Thank you! I have still been on the fence if I would like to get the 14mm, it seems like a great lens still and I have some regrets not getting it, however I’ve really gotten used to the 12-24 and using rear filters with it so I think I am going to hang on to it for the time being!
@@ShaneBethlehem Thanks Shane. I actually just picked up a mint 12-24 GM on Kijiji yesterday. Now I am looking into ND and CPL filter options (I have some older 150mm front filters), but I am struggling with a compatible filter holder/adapter option. I was thinking of the Haida rear filters, but I've read they can soften the edges and corners of ultra WA lenses like this one. How are you finding the rear filters on this lens?
Would you consider an overlay within the video showing today’s price? It’s no longer selling for $3400. It’s selling for $2898 USD at B&H Photo.
Nice review! But I have questions, does most of the pictures and videos in this reviews even the low light indoor stabilised video with people and tables are taken not on F2.8 but stopped down? If so then the F4 version will do? I find it hard to understand people recommend faster lens but when they actually use it they stop down, then what's the benefit there at all, is not like you get a F2.8 lens will provide more light when you use it at F4 isn't it? By the way, when you use it with video and shift the focus with the inbody lens correction turned on, do you see there's weird curvature magnify looks? Because this review show it, you can watch it at the 10:42 part, is it real and should I turn off the correction then?: m.ua-cam.com/video/4FbYfkMDreU/v-deo.html
Also, is the 12-24mm still a good buy or Sony will update it soon because the same 6 years old 16-35 GM got updated few months ago?
Also how you adjust the color of your photos and videos, they looks so real yet cinematic in same time, I love Hasselblad HNCS color but then their XD line isn't practical for me yet and I can get good looking with other system too and it's about find the balance between performance and accessbilities, Sony A7RV full frame camera can give me there well with zoom lenses, I decided to get the 12-24mm F4 and Tamron 50-400mm F4.5-6.3, might get the Laowa 35mm F0.95 for one of my creative need later too, but can I achieve the similar look of your vudeo and photo with the Tamron? It's golden looking and the Sony lenses is cooler digital looking natively.
I would like to know if it’s easy to install the filter you have I am considering buying it
I did end up buying the rear end filter and it’s a little sketchy to install but not necessarily difficult. The insert that came from Sony by default is made out of plastic and when I was pulling my out it did crack
Now that the lens has been out for a while and is showing up used, you should revisit this review. I just bought mine used in mint condition for $2000 and IMO, this completely changes the value proposition. At $2000, I don't see the point in buying any of the alternatives anymore.
picked mine up mint for $2100 as well. very happy at that price point
Got the 1224G for a good price to film bike videos and urban cityscapes. This thing is cool, but absurd. What I'm really hoping for is a 12mm f2 for half the price, or something along those lines
Same, an extreme ultra-wide prime is what I want in my kit, hopefully one day, Sony really does seem to like putting out interesting lense lately!
Samyang 12mm f2.8 manual fisheye
A great option! They also have their 14mm f2.8 that comes in both manual & a version with AF ever too
first
😅
This lens will be the last gm lens i am going to buy. 12mm is unparalleled.