Fred Miranda wrote:
Guy,
The 50/1.4 ZA is superb center and extreme edges starting at f/2 at infinity as well. It's similar to what I see with the 85GM. The difference is higher micro-contrast for the 50/1.4 ZA which gives it an edge on sharpness perception.
However I see some mid-field weakness when comparing to the 55/1.8 and Loxia 50/2. Did you check the mid-field? I will dig some crops from my infinity tests.
The Loxia can't really compete wide-open, except for the center area. It's strength is after f/6.3 for sharpness across the field.
Okay I only did the Sony 50 and GM 85 on center sharpness. Here is where the rubber hits the road in my mind. These lenses are very similar but at 1.4 the 50 has the clarity and micro contrast that makes this a great all a rounder lens where as the 85 is the portrait lens and I believe this was designed by Sony to be exactly this.
F2 and 2.8 for the heck of it. They are both amazing at 1.4 and 1.7 but the edge is the 50 but I like this setup like this. Im grabbing the 85 for people
GMPhotography wrote:
Im thinking even at F2 the 50 is the sharper lens on center
I have one more series that I will post later , gotta run to a graduation function
Yes and at f/2.8 as well. (center)
While you attend your event, here are some crops showing the 50/1.4 ZA at infinity distance. I wanted to show the mid-field weakness I detected when compared to the 55/1.8 and Loxia 50/2. See below the comparison at f/5.6.
(No post-processing except for the same sharpening for both)
GMPhotography wrote:
Would that not fall under the EFSC to correct that.
I have no idea...I just thought of this when I noticed you having to shoot at 1/8000 and iso 64 and remember reading about it.
Fred Miranda wrote:
And here is the same mid-field compared to the Loxia 50/2 at f/5.6
Yeah, the Loxia certainly is stronger midfield at f/5.6, and I suspect f/8. The Loxia for me would win by a hair and make it worth having for landscape use especially when you consider the size difference and the possibility of having to walk a ways to get to your landscape shoot, but you wouldn't lose much by shooting with the FE 50 f/1.4 ZA. That mid zone dip is consistent with the MTFs from lens rentals as well, so I suspect it will hold up across copies of the lens even if it isn't extreme.
Personally, I like to keep one set of lenses with fast apertures and a parallel set with slower apertures, smaller size, and excellent performers stopped down for landscape. I think the FE 50 f/1.4 ZA and the Loxia 50 f/2 make a great pair in that way. The GM 85 f/1.4 and the Zeiss ZM 85 f/4 would also make a great pair.
I have the ZM 85 for landscape that keeps the GM 85 out of the bag for landscape work. I'll go with the GM 24-70 at 50 and the new 50 as my 50 combo. Although I'm not a big 50 landscape person. So I have the RX2 at 35 and ZM 85 that makes a nice travel hiking type kit with the VC15 and Loxia 21. I like having a option to mix and match.
Personally, I like to keep one set of lenses with fast apertures and a parallel set with slower apertures, smaller size, and excellent performers stopped down for landscape
Well said Steve. But, in my case, or others, I also have the Contax 35-70/3.4 which at both 35 and 50mm is just a hair off of the Loxia for stopped down work, and it covers a broader range. Keeping the ZA50 with the 35-70(which I know Fred also has along with the gm24-70) gives me fast and slow.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Yeah, the Loxia certainly is stronger midfield at f/5.6, and I suspect f/8. The Loxia for me would win by a hair and make it worth having for landscape use especially when you consider the size difference and the possibility of having to walk a ways to get to your landscape shoot, but you wouldn't lose much by shooting with the FE 50 f/1.4 ZA. That mid zone dip is consistent with the MTFs from lens rentals as well, so I suspect it will hold up across copies of the lens even if it isn't extreme.
Personally, I like to keep one set of lenses with fast apertures and a parallel set with slower apertures, smaller size, and excellent performers stopped down for landscape. I think the FE 50 f/1.4 ZA and the Loxia 50 f/2 make a great pair in that way. The GM 85 f/1.4 and the Zeiss ZM 85 f/4 would also make a great pair....Show more →
Yes, the Loxia 50/2 is stronger at mid-field even when comparing to the 55/1.8. It also has more micro-contrast which I find it a plus for landscapes.
Couldn't agree more with the 50/1.4ZA + L50/2 and 85/1.4GM + 85/4ZM sets. Different lenses for different purposes.
However, for portraits at ~50mm, one may also consider the 55/1.8 or 50/1.5C Sonnars.
Greggf wrote:
Well said Steve. But, in my case, or others, I also have the Contax 35-70/3.4 which at both 35 and 50mm is just a hair off of the Loxia for stopped down work, and it covers a broader range. Keeping the ZA50 with the 35-70(which I know Fred also has along with the gm24-70) gives me fast and slow.
@Greggf,
I compared the Loxia 50 against the CY 35-70/3.4 a while ago and saw very similar mid-field discrepancies. The Loxia being much stronger on that area. Remember that test?
