Totally understand and as well I'm neutral in this as well. It's very interesting . I think I'll keep mine . I got some time to test and see if I should return it or not. The wide open performance is striking though and makes me want to keep it as it can be useful to me.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Keep in mind that I have zero bias one way or the other. I'm just reporting what I see and posting some samples so hopefully everyone can see it as well. I'm no "artisan" and for the record, I have no contract or agreement with any camera company.
Guy,
I agree with you. There are not many super sharp f/1.4 lenses out there aside from the Otus 55/1.4.
The 50/1.4 also has higher contrast at all apertures when compared to the 55/1.8.
To be honest, this comparison is not apple to apples. If you need f/1.4, game over.
I just started this thread to share my own findings and hopefully this will help other photographers make better decisions....Show more →
Thank you Fred for posting those shots. I was ready to jump on the 50/1.4 after seeing the great NYC shots posted by Guy. Your comparison with 55/1.8, especially the smoothness of the OOF areas, made me rethink whole idea. Thank you again.
Now, as I just checked the infinity shots, to my unprofessional eyes, 55/1.8 looks bit sharper (talking about windows in the white building in the last set).
It is the first test having the all three, Loxia 50, FE 55 and FE 50/1.4 tested under very similar conditions. Also these settings would be very typical for events/weddings and portraits comparable to the work duty the FE 50/1.4 was intended for.
My take so far is the I love the GM 85 as it has a gentle but very sharp at intended focus at f/1.4 with smooth roll into the background. The FE 50/1.4 for myself maybe too brutal for portraits as the local contrast is high, more so than the FE 55. Also the comparison with the Loxia 50 surprised me and compares really well wide open and maybe I need to use this lens more for portraits.
In essence the GM 85 replaced my 85L II and although it has a different look it is a superb must have lens. I just don't think the FE 50/1.4 will replace the look of the 50L when I need it.
I suspect the optic designers are facing similar constraints to what Karbe from Leica was facing when he designed the latest 50 Lux Asph/50 Cron Asph. As sharp as these lenses are wide open there is balance of losing the smoother background bokeh and feel. No doubt why the 50 Lux/Cron Pre Asph versions are so popular. Then Karbe redesigned the 50 Cron APO and this lens is sharp and also renders beautifully in a small package but at a price point.
Fred, thank you again for the infinity tests.
The FE 55 is sharper IMO, and it would be an interesting comparison with the Loxia 50.
I actually like the 50 better it seems to have a little more dimension to it and I see some color and contrast pop I like more. The 55 seems a touch muddy to it. I'm on a iPad though so a little tough to tell.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Here are some infinity tests showing the 50/1.4 ZA vs. 55/1.8 ZA at f/5.6 (sweet spot for both)
GMPhotography wrote:
I actually like the 50 better it seems to have a little more dimension to it and I see some color and contrast pop I like more. The 55 seems a touch muddy to it. I'm on a iPad though so a little tough to tell.
I was looking at the 50mm but after this test, I am keeping my 55mm (best of 3 I have had at some point) because extra pop takes nothing to add if you feel like it in Post but that smoothness of bokeh for the 55mm (surprising victory) matters a lot more for me. Of course we are all different.
GMPhotography wrote:
Totally understand and as well I'm neutral in this as well. It's very interesting . I think I'll keep mine . I got some time to test and see if I should return it or not. The wide open performance is striking though and makes me want to keep it as it can be useful to me.
BTW: That was not directed to you. I should always add this disclaimer when running tests on the site.
GMPhotography wrote:
I actually like the 50 better it seems to have a little more dimension to it and I see some color and contrast pop I like more. The 55 seems a touch muddy to it. I'm on a iPad though so a little tough to tell.
The 50/1.4 ZA has more micro-contrast at the best apertures and that is perhaps what you are seeing. It's pretty remarkable how much contrast this lens outputs since the 55/1.8 is no slouch.
f/4 and f/5.6 are the sweet spots for both lenses at infinity. The Loxia 50/2 is very similar in contrast to the 50/1.4 but needs f/6.3 for the very corners.
Absolutely. I try not to think to much about post but you are correct. In that case it's easy to add clarity and contrast. This is going to be a tough choice for some folks. We have 3 very good 50/55 lenses. Couple things make me want to keep it for sure 1.4/1.7 sharpness, almost zero aberrations and not tested but distortion is almost nill.
Functionally I like the AF /MF switch and aperture control but more important to me is focus feel, tension, drag. I like to feel the lens and I like the fly by wire better on the GM glass and this lens. This is a touch thing. Downside it's big
shaolin95 wrote:
I was looking at the 50mm but after this test, I am keeping my 55mm (best of 3 I have had at some point) because extra pop takes nothing to add if you feel like it in Post but that smoothness of bokeh for the 55mm (surprising victory) matters a lot more for me. Of course we are all different.
Do think that's it, you can see it even at 1.4 in all your shots and my NY happy snappy shots. Quite a interesting lens
Fred Miranda wrote:
The 50/1.4 ZA has more micro-contrast at the best apertures and that is perhaps what you are seeing. It's pretty remarkable how much contrast this lens outputs since the 55/1.8 is no slouch.
f/4 and f/5.6 are the sweet spots for both lenses at infinity. The Loxia 50/2 is very similar in contrast to the 50/1.4 but needs f/6.3 for the very corners.
Steve Spencer wrote:
I am not surprised about the bokeh. The bokeh pattern with this FE 50 f/1.4 reminds me a lot of the Minolta Rokkor 58 f/1.2. That lens too has much nicer bokeh stopped down a little than wide open. This FE 50 f/1.4 will be great for low light shooting, but the smart photographer like Guy will shoot it at f/1.8 or f/2 with even moderate light and it will be very sharp and the bokeh will be much better. This is a lens for when you want extreme sharpness at wide apertures and good aberration control. It should be great for a lot of types of shooting, but for portraits I think the 85 GM will be much better. So, I definitely see a place for this lens, but for portraits I expect their will eventually be a 50 GM that will be the bees knees and have bokeh that even puts the FE 55 f/1.8 to shame....Show more →
Perhaps, the main difference is really planar vs sonnar rendering.
