The lens allows you to calibrate focus with an RF mechanism so you can optimize it at your most used aperture, and technically, the distance shouldn't matter as long as it's measurable. It's not something we e-mount shooters need to worry about. Though, if you weren't achieving infinity with your adapter, you can use the calibration to adjust it.
The black is anodized aluminum, so far as I can tell. No idea how it will wear compared to the silver.
ministrinity wrote:
Tested the 7artisans 50mm 1.1 with my Tech art pro! Can't believe how much i paid for this lens. it's really got a bit of a dreamy feel in this lens. My copy tends to have a soft warm red flare/light leak that makes it very special for portraits. Eye AF on the sony a7 iii is pretty phenomenal! I can somehow forsee myself selling off my mitakon 50mm 0.95 if it wasn't for the wierd lens flare which i occasionally love in my concert photography photos. now to see if there is really much of a difference between those two lenses.
I just got one and also the 35/2! Haven't really done anything with them other than check and tweak RF calibration, which was already very good out of the box. Really impressed by the build quality for the price. I think it's as good as anything I've owned from Voigtlander or Zeiss ZM.
The ability to tweak RF calibration is appreciated and extremely useful for a Sonnar lens given the inevitable focus shift on stopping down. This lets you fine-tune the RF to the aperture of your preference. Of course this is irrelevant to mirrorless users.
The 28/1.4 is in a different league compared to this one! It does way better, even wide open.
Mathieu18 wrote:
Thanks and interesting you can see some outward field curvature on a thin sensor, no wonder it’s a bit abysmal on the edges on Sony...
Any thoughts on how the 28/1.4 fares on stock Sony vs this 50?
Just went through this whole thread and to say I'm impressed is an understatement. I really need this lens in my collection. Looking to use it on my z6.
I took my 7A 50 1.1 out for the first time, took a couple snapshot sooc jpegs on a walk in mid-day sun. I got the lens after reading this thread
I think I like it for closer subjects, wide open (just stopped down a tad) but it does seem need to be stopped down a lot for corner sharpness. I was wondering if others are also seeing pretty soft 10-15% outer corners and sides at f/8, thus making f/11 best for across frame sharpness? If I could get the corners a bit sharper it'd be a super fun lens to shoot while aimlessly out and about. I've also had a hard time exposing properly and not blowing out highlights in the center, should have underexposed a bit.
It's definitely harder to use than many other lenses, I need to work on utilizing it creatively - but I've seen some amazing results posted before.
TBH, there are better, smaller, slower lenses for stopped down use and at least IMO it's not one I would choose as a do-it-all 50. 50 Lux ASPH, Voigtlander 50/1.2 IMO would be better M mount options for broad uses requiring speed and stopped down performance out of a single lens. I've yet to really try it stopped down beyond f/2.8, but should try it out of curiosity. Given it may have a relatively short exit pupil distance, I do wonder whether the thick stock Sony sensor stack has a negative effect on edge sharpness, as seen with many other M-mount lenses. That said, it's a super-fast non-aspherical Sonnar design. I've yet to use a 'classic' Sonnar that was sharp across-frame like other more modern 50mm designs.
I did a fairly controlled test on the Leica M240 across the full aperture range of a residential scene across the street from me, including a lot of bare tree branches. Edges were good (relative to wider apertures on this lens) at f/8 and corners were better at f/11. Better still at f/16, but by then the entire image suffered from diffraction softening. The central area seemed to peak around f/5.6 but was already pretty good in the center sweet spot around f/2-2.8.
To my eyes, f/5.6 at the edges and corners looked better on the M240 than the trees you posted above at f/6.7, possibly due to sensor stack differences.
I still wouldn't recommend this lens as an all-purpose solution. At least for my tastes I know the relatively poor outer performance would annoy me for some of the things I photograph.
It’s seems like some of these are relatively sharp in the center at F1.1 and some are extra glowy and soft. Product inconsistencies, processing, filter stack differences, something else? What do you guys think?
As I have mentioned a few times, my samples are NOT representative of what this lens can deliver. Very little was done in the post.
Better results have everything to do with thinner (or none in case of the A7R above) cover glass and non Bayer (monochrome) sensor.
If you like old manual focus lenses, get a monochrome converted camera.
Even a humble $25 Olympus OM 50/1.8 just shines!
FWIW, my sample of 7A was bought used off eBay.
LedZepp007 wrote:
It’s seems like some of these are relatively sharp in the center at F1.1 and some are extra glowy and soft. Product inconsistencies, processing, filter stack differences, something else? What do you guys think?
