Mirror wrote:
Also do not forget the different FL. Some tests showed that the Planar is more a 47mm! The 55mm was always a tac too long for my needs and I rather take a 85mm then. The Planar, positioned slightly under 50mm comes very close to my prefered FL around 40mm.
I am not disputing that the 50/1.4 ZA is a bit wider than 50mm at closer distances but I've been shooting with the CV 40/1.2 and 50/1.4 ZA lenses for a while and to me, they feel very different regarding AOV...
The CV40 gives me a wide-angle look while the 50/1.4 ZA does not at all. When tested side-by-side with the 55/1.8 ZA is only slightly wider.
rjenson wrote:
Had the 55 1.8. Bought the 50 1.4. Sold the 55 1.8. The 55 is a very good lens but the 50 has better sharpness, color, contrast and bokeh. The 50 is a chunk, but to me worth the weight/girth. Comes down to your priorities. If best image quality get the 50. If price and portability get the 55.
This. I totally agree. Had the 55 which I was considering selling because of lack of use after getting the 35/1.4 and 85/1.8. Tried the 50/1.4 and sold the 55/1.8 but kept the 50 because I love everything I shoot with it. 55 is good and shot a lot for a few years with it, but it never really wowed me. Not like the 50. YMMV.
I have the 55 1.8 and I love it. I received it Saturday. The sharpness is incredible, the focus is swift and its light. Hard to believe that 55mm cost $999. I considered the 50mm ZA and the Sigma 50mm art for e-mount, but the smaller size won. Plus the reviews I’ve read stated that the 55mm is sharper than the 50. I went with the 55 because I don’t want to pay $1600 for a 50mm. I saving for the sigma 105mm f/1.4 art E-Mount when it becomes available in September.
It is your lens or lenses and you can do with them as you please, of course. But why would you get a fast lens that excels at wide open or close to wide open and use it stopped down? Still, I just checked mine on the A7r III and A9, and the lens doesn’t have any problems focusing at f/8 though. For real life shooting, I do not stop down my 50mm f/1.4 smaller than f/2.8, mostly down to f/2, if that but I understand YMMV.
I don't see the advantage to anyone (except Sony and their retailers) in defending bad design. It's bad design to keep a lens stopped down when focusing for obvious reasons and that's the reason that virtually all camera systems (SLR, medium format or 35mm) over the last 40 or 50 years have their lenses stay wide open and only stop down when shooting.
And can you please clarify, does the 1.4/50 ZA stay stopped down when actually focusing manually on the A7RIII and A9 or does it stay (relatively) open and only stop down to the working aperture for the exposure (as does the 1.8/55 ZA)?
JohnJ wrote:
I don't see the advantage to anyone (except Sony and their retailers) in defending bad design. It's bad design to keep a lens stopped down when focusing for obvious reasons and that's the reason that virtually all camera systems (SLR, medium format or 35mm) over the last 40 or 50 years have their lenses stay wide open and only stop down when shooting.
And can you please clarify, does the 1.4/50 ZA stay stopped down when actually focusing manually on the A7RIII and A9 or does it stay (relatively) open and only stop down to the working aperture for the exposure (as does the 1.8/55 ZA)?...Show more →
I am not defending Sony; why would I? But the main reason for that design is to combat the dreaded focus shift issue with fast lenses. The Canon 50mm f/1.2 is a well known example for that. You focus at wide open on the eye, for example and you stop down to f/2.0 and the eye is no longer in focus but the the ear is. I am sure you heard about this issue.
Sony actually addressed the issue in a firmware fix a year or two ago. The lens does open up more than the actual shooting aperture but not all the way, just enough for the lens to focus without any issues. I am not at my home right now but I will check that for you when I do tomorrow.
I went with the 55 because I like having both the 55 and 85 FE. If I loved the 50mm focal length alone, I would have the 50 ZA and if I loved the 85 focal length alone, I would rather have the 85 GM. I also prefer the weight compromise of the 55 and it is my go to lens combined with my FE 28 when I want to go with a lightweight setup.
JohnJ wrote:
I don't see the advantage to anyone (except Sony and their retailers) in defending bad design. It's bad design to keep a lens stopped down when focusing for obvious reasons and that's the reason that virtually all camera systems (SLR, medium format or 35mm) over the last 40 or 50 years have their lenses stay wide open and only stop down when shooting.
And can you please clarify, does the 1.4/50 ZA stay stopped down when actually focusing manually on the A7RIII and A9 or does it stay (relatively) open and only stop down to the working aperture for the exposure (as does the 1.8/55 ZA)?...Show more →
Calling that a bad design is ridiculous. Focus shift affects many lenses drastically.
I cannot understand at all, why you would want the lens to stay wide open during _manual_ focus. No manual lens from Leica, Zeiss, Voigtländer etc. works that way.
However: With the 50/1.4ZA my cameras in MANUAL focussing:
- closes to shooting aperture and stay there when using the aperture ring, irrespective of setting effect off/on.
- When changing the aperture using the camera, the camera uses the shooting aperture if effect is set to on, BUT it stays around f2 when setting effect to off. Half pressing the shutter button then closes the aperture to the shooting aperture. So this mimics what you want: focussing at open aperture even in manual, but loosing exposure preview.
Me too,except I dont love the Sony 28. Its not as reliable or sharp as the 55 & 85FE,which I use a lot during my jobs.
40Driggs wrote:
I went with the 55 because I like having both the 55 and 85 FE. If I loved the 50mm focal length alone, I would have the 50 ZA and if I loved the 85 focal length alone, I would rather have the 85 GM. I also prefer the weight compromise of the 55 and it is my go to lens combined with my FE 28 when I want to go with a lightweight setup.
JohnJ wrote:
I don't see the advantage to anyone (except Sony and their retailers) in defending bad design. It's bad design to keep a lens stopped down when focusing for obvious reasons and that's the reason that virtually all camera systems (SLR, medium format or 35mm) over the last 40 or 50 years have their lenses stay wide open and only stop down when shooting.
And can you please clarify, does the 1.4/50 ZA stay stopped down when actually focusing manually on the A7RIII and A9 or does it stay (relatively) open and only stop down to the working aperture for the exposure (as does the 1.8/55 ZA)?...Show more →
Sony issued a firmware fix for this a long time ago. Basically if you turn Setting Effect "Off" while shooting stopped down, the lens aperture will open up during focus acquisition. (f/1.4 lenses' aperture open to about f/2)
The downside would be slight focus shift but since there is broader DOF from shooting at smaller apertures, the focus area will still be tack sharp. One can apply this function to a custom button if used a lot.
Holger wrote:
...
- When changing the aperture using the camera, the camera uses the shooting aperture if effect is set to on, BUT it stays around f2 when setting effect to off. Half pressing the shutter button then closes the aperture to the shooting aperture. So this mimics what you want: focussing at open aperture even in manual, but loosing exposure preview.
This explains it. This is how I expected the lens to function however I didn't realise the manual aperture control on the lens didn't work the same as the aperture control on the camera body. So I just need to use the body, not the lens aperture control.
Fred Miranda wrote:
From my personal experience, the 55/1.8 has higher copy variability. I went through many copies to find a good one.
That was not the case with the 50/1.4 where the two copies I tested were great. This could explain the big difference when shooters describe these two lenses.
From my side-by-side tests, the 55/1.8 and 50/1.4 had very similar resolution wide open throughout the image field but at f/1.7 or f/2, the 50/1.4 jumps ahead. Contrast and lack of aberrations are what sets the 50/1.4 apart.
I always think of the 55/1.8 as a more complete lens with the help of post-processing. I can make the 55/1.8 get close to the 50/1.4 with some automated tweaks. If we didn't have the option of post-processing, I would choose the 50/1.4 over the f/1.8 ZA....Show more →
Hi Fred. Saw you mention post twice about these two lenses and wondering if you could elaborate? This is an older post, but I found it when considering this lens (to replace my 55) Thanks
Thanks