I love Amazon prime and Sunday delivery.
I've had the lens a few hours, which is long enough for me to realize this AF is a crippling deficiency of the lens. It is just too slow. I'm impressed by how slow of AF Sony can put in a $250 lens in 2016.
Returning. I'd rather have the kit zoom for this money.
ISO1600 wrote:
I love Amazon prime and Sunday delivery.
I've had the lens a few hours, which is long enough for me to realize this AF is a crippling deficiency of the lens. It is just too slow. I'm impressed by how slow of AF Sony can put in a $250 lens in 2016.
Returning. I'd rather have the kit zoom for this money.
unlike the 55/1.8, all the glass has to be moved to AF this lens. if they don't put a really powerful motor on it, it's got to be slow. wonder how small it would be converted to manual focus...
And the AF is quite noisy and switching to MF won't help a lot, since the lens is focus by wire. After seeing a youtube video demonstrating this, I decided not to get this lens.
Its unit focusing; like all classic design double gaussian derived "nifty fifties" have to be. So it's slow. But no slower than other equivalent lenses. And the focus by wire might be annoying, but I'm sure you can get used to it.
For relatively little money stopped down it'll be about as good as you can distinguish in a decent sized print, and likely better in the middle at wide apertures than most classic nifties that don't have the aspherical element.
Would someone with a fair bit of disposable income and for whom photography is a big part of their life buy it over the 55 to save money? Probably not.
But if you aren't in both of those categories, it could be a very sensible purchase as an adjunct, step up, or alternative to a kit lens.
ecarlino wrote:
Actually not sure what you expect for $250.
And i'm not trying to be a jerk - but seriously, $250?
That's like a nice steak a great bottle of wine.
I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a double gauss 50mm to perform well in this price range. The Canon 50mm f/1.8 STM lists for $125 and is a stellar performer.
multiplying by the 'sony premium' that we all must endure for now, the canon would cost $375+, so i guess it should perform better than the sony.
that canon does seem like a hell of a bargain under any circumstance, although according to dxo the canon at f/5.6 isn't as sharp in the corners as the zony 55/1.8 is at f/1.8, so what do i know!? (a very apples & oranges comparison to be sure)
snapsy wrote:
I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a double gauss 50mm to perform well in this price range. The Canon 50mm f/1.8 STM lists for $125 and is a stellar performer.
seems like it performs well, it just has a weak AF motor for the amount of glass it needs to move.
I understand and agree that $250 in 2016 is still impulse buy territory, especially when it comes to a newly-released AF lens...
Also, yeah i'm fully aware that it's unit focusing, but surely they could have done something to either incorporate a rear/internal focus design, or a faster (or quieter?!) motor. This thing operates like a 1990 EF lens.
I bought this lens mostly to allow me to shoot one-handed while fishing (caught fish in left hand, camera in right). I think the kit zoom will serve me better, at the expense of low light/bokeh. Oh well.
ecarlino wrote:
multiplying by the 'sony premium' that we all must endure for now, the canon would cost $375+, so i guess it should perform better than the sony.
that canon does seem like a hell of a bargain under any circumstance, although according to dxo the canon at f/5.6 isn't as sharp in the corners as the zony 55/1.8 is at f/1.8, so what do i know!? (a very apples & oranges comparison to be sure)
I don't know where you got those DXO numbers, but they both have a Sharpness score of "29 P-Mpix", when tested on the 5DSR and A7R. The main difference is that the Canon 50 needs f/2.8 before it gets sharp across the frame. For the price, Sony went cheap on the design and production (meaning high profit margin) of the 50/1.8.
pdmphoto wrote:
I don't know where you got those DXO numbers, but they both have a Sharpness score of "29 P-Mpix", when tested on the 5DSR and A7R. The main difference is that the Canon 50 needs f/2.8 before it gets sharp across the frame. For the price, Sony went cheap on the design and production (meaning high profit margin) of the 50/1.8.
The overall score is meaningless to most thinking people.
The only thing that is of some value is looking at the field map at various apertures.
The Zony is tack sharp corner to corner wide open.
The canon isn't as good at 5.6
I tend to put my money towards lenses which either get the most use, or are used in critical shooting situations. As a 50mm-ish lens is used for me in both those situations, I decided to stick with the Zony 55mm as opposed to this new 50mm. However, I'm fine with the 28mm f/2 as opposed to the 25mm Batis as it doesn't get used for more than casual shooting in social situations.
My point is that if you are expecting a near-flawless lens for critical shooting on the Sony system, and need 50mm, pick up a clean used Zony 55mm. For those needing a more casual 50mm lens, I'm sure this Sony lens will work fine. I think both lenses are very good for what they offer $-wise if you're a Sony shooter.
PDM and Ecarl, I don't know why you guys are comparing a $125 Canon and a $900 Zony. They are both awesome lenses, but one is tiny, plastic, and cheap. If anything, it shows why I don't want to drop the cash on the Zony.
Additionally, to gocolts' remark, I don't want to spend the money on a nice 50 for the Sony system, because I prefer 35mm. If they put out a $400-$600 35/2 of similar (or better?) quality to the 28/2, I'd buy it in a heartbeat.
Literally the only thing this FE50 does better than my FD50/1.4, in casual use, is hands-free focusing. It is a little lighter, and has better CA control, but those factors really don't matter so much for me, it's all about the focus speed/capability. The kit zoom runs circles around this thing.
ecarlino wrote:
The overall score is meaningless to most thinking people.
The only thing that is of some value is looking at the field map at various apertures.
The Zony is tack sharp corner to corner wide open.
The canon isn't as good at 5.6
You linked to their CZ 55mm review rather than the 50mm. It doesn't look like they've reviewed the Sony 50mm yet. As for performance I'm going to guess that the Canon will outperform the 50mm including across-the-frame sharpness when stopped down. Here's a sample from my Canon @ f/5.6 on the 5DSR - focus is on mountainside.
ecarlino wrote:
The overall score is meaningless to most thinking people.
The only thing that is of some value is looking at the field map at various apertures.
The Zony is tack sharp corner to corner wide open.
The canon isn't as good at 5.6
Of course a single score is meaningless.
The sharpness profiles at f5.6 on this body at least put it over the A7r for most of the frame compared to f1.8 on the 55 (why we would compare that, I don't really understand). The small difference in the direct corner is meaningless without error bars. Using the 5diii, it looks different, of course.
However, there is a more direct comparison when using the Nikon 50/1.8g, very cheap, too. Using the D800e combo it provides similar center sharpness at f1.8 already but expectedly falls off towards the corners. Stopped down, the differences are there but most people wouldn't see a difference at f5.6 unless looking at 100% or for very large prints. In my opinion one of the best bargains from Nikon. But except for weight, my 50/1.4 ART is even better and beats the 55/1.8 all over the frame from f2 on. At f1.8 it is clearly stronger until for the extreme corners, which I don't care about at f1.8 anyway.
But I like the 55mm better than the 50mm. The difference is small, but I prefer the extra 5mm and the weight difference.
