If you think the 50 looks big on the A7, count your lucky stars. I have the 85 Milvus and it just looks ridiculous on my A7RII. As a convert to mirror less and leaving the OVF behind due to the magic of an EVF, I can see myself picking up a Nikon digital camera just so I can use the 85. It is simply out of this world. I hope to get out tomorrow if it does not rain and shoot it. I will say it does feel nice and balanced on my F6 with the grip.
Oh, the 35 Milvus with the adapter is perfect on the A7RII, decided to get rid of the Loxia in favor of the Milvus.
Those are some lovely images. I like this Milvus. It's definitely an Otus 85 Lite. 95% of the performance at less than half the cost.
On the plus side, it has crisp colour rendition, great bokeh in most situations, and if you control the lighting and contrast transition points, practically no fringing. Plus the colours and bokeh have a certain signature to them that's missing from the Otus.
On the negative side, it fringes. I even see it at least one of the indoor portrait shots, which tells me that even in more uniform lighting you can get fringing. I'd be afraid to have strong backlights, be they against people or foliage. You can also see it in the bench shot, in the bokeh.
Sam_W wrote:
Those are some lovely images. I like this Milvus. It's definitely an Otus 85 Lite. 95% of the performance at less than half the cost.
On the plus side, it has crisp colour rendition, great bokeh in most situations, and if you control the lighting and contrast transition points, practically no fringing. Plus the colours and bokeh have a certain signature to them that's missing from the Otus.
On the negative side, it fringes. I even see it at least one of the indoor portrait shots, which tells me that even in more uniform lighting you can get fringing. I'd be afraid to have strong backlights, be they against people or foliage. You can also see it in the bench shot, in the bokeh.
Jorge Torralba wrote:
If you think the 50 looks big on the A7, count your lucky stars. I have the 85 Milvus and it just looks ridiculous on my A7RII. As a convert to mirror less and leaving the OVF behind due to the magic of an EVF, I can see myself picking up a Nikon digital camera just so I can use the 85. It is simply out of this world. I hope to get out tomorrow if it does not rain and shoot it. I will say it does feel nice and balanced on my F6 with the grip.
Oh, the 35 Milvus with the adapter is perfect on the A7RII, decided to get rid of the Loxia in favor of the Milvus.
The Loxia is sharp and contrasty but the bokeh is below average for a 50mm lens. The Milvus in contrast is quite nice when I am not shooting fountains with very likeable bokeh and really good sharpness for a f/1.4.
From an ergonomics point of view I think the Loxia is about perfect on the a7, the Milvus is far from it. The weight and size actually doesn't bother me that much, for shorter trips I simply use a bigger camera bag. But focusing is really slow and the aperture ring too sensitive.
If i could get the Milvus' performance from f/2 in the Loxia package I would instantly buy that lens. As it is now I can see that both lenses will find a following but they both come with serious tradeoffs....Show more →
Have you tried the Zeiss 50mm f/2 ZM or the Leica 50 Lux ASPH M or 50 Cron M on the Sony A7? I nabbed a used 50 Lux ASPH M and I love both the size and performance on the a7II. I wouldn't say it's a perfect 50 from edge to edge wide open, certainly not in the extreme corners. But... it's tack sharp in the center of the frame with gorgeous bokeh - I love the rendering, as it's loaded with character. For me, it's the perfect 50. especially size wise.
craigjohn wrote:
Have you tried the Zeiss 50mm f/2 ZM or the Leica 50 Lux ASPH M or 50 Cron M on the Sony A7? I nabbed a used 50 Lux ASPH M and I love both the size and performance on the a7II. I wouldn't say it's a perfect 50, but certainly not on the extreme edges, but it's loaded with character while being tack sharp in the center of the frame - I love the rendering.
No, I haven't. I think the Lux-M 50 Asph is the nicest drawing 50mm around but totally out of my leaque when it comes to price. I think I will try the CV 1.5/50 in 2016, it could be a very good compromise between price, size, sharpness and bokeh.
Phillip Reeve wrote:
So far I have never tested for field curvature, my idea would be a infinity aperture series once focused at the center/ the midrfame region /the corner region. Or doesn anyone have a better idea?
Only that you might want also to do a series at 10 metres, 5 metres and 2 metres: field curvature can vary at a lot at different focussing distances.
DavidBM wrote:
Only that you might want also to do a series at 10 metres, 5 metres and 2 metres: field curvature can vary at a lot at different focussing distances.
Sounds like a lot of work and I am still not sure how to do it exactly. It would help a lot to see it done in someones review. i have heard that Lloyd Chambers analyzes field curvature but his reviews are behind a paywall.
Phillip Reeve wrote:
No, I haven't. I think the Lux-M 50 Asph. is the nicest drawing 50mm around but totally out of my leaque when it comes to price. I think I will try the CV 1.5/50 in 2016, I think it could be a very good compromise between price, size, sharpness and bokeh.
I rented the Zeiss 50/1.5 ZM, didn't love it. Didn't hate it. Rented the Leica 50 Lux M, and that was it. It convinced me to bite the bullet and buy a used Leica 50 ASPH - was a thousand more than I wanted to spend. But meh. In this case, you only live once. I sold a few lenses quickly to help pay for it. ...just saw a couple of sub-$2,500 50 Luxes in the Buy-Sell forum. If I couldn't go there, I'd get the 50 Cron M in a heart beat. They're about $1,500 for a 9 to 9+ copy.
GAH! Almost forgot. Have you looked at the 50mm Cron R? Stupidly awesome lens with a beautiful draw. It's a bit larger than the 50 Lux M, but so gorgeous. Those can be had for $500 ish. The bokeh is beautiful.
I've wanted to try the CV 50/1.5, and may rent it next spring.
