So, with all that experience, how do you rank them — do you have favourites? 😊
swldstn wrote:
I have added it recently and comparing to my other 50s. I have quite a collection. 50/2 Loxia, 50/1.2 GM, 50/1.4 GM, 55/1.8 ZA, 50/2.5 G, and even 40/2 CF Baiis. Haven’t come to a decision yet because but hopefully will soon. By the way those are just the 50s I have in FE mount. Have older ones from the film days in K, F, M, and EF mounts.
rob_ww wrote:
So, with all that experience, how do you rank them — do you have favourites? 😊
Well with all of those right now the two GMs are my favorite but can be big to carry. Next would be the 55/1.8 an Batis 40/2.
After that I would need to give more thought. Will get back to you but the Sigma is good and bought as my smallest AF and like the GM has an aperture ring and I prefer f/2 to f/2.5.
Thanks! I was just curious -- I switched to Sony around Easter last year and have been on quite a journey to build up a lens set, including in the 50mm range some that you mention. FWIW I settled on the 55 and the Batis 40, both because I like the way Zeiss lenses render and for reasons of weight. I'm sure the 50GM f1.2 is wonderful but it would stay at home unless I really, really needed f1.2. Thoughts for another thread, really! Mixed feelings about the Sigmas. The Sigma 45 renders nicely and the 85/1.4 is a gem, but some of the others I tried did not appeal to me.
Very happy with the 55 and 40 image-wise. I had to let go of the desire for an aperture ring, of course, which was hard to do after 40 years of using one. You're never too old!
Playing, in a new space, with different lights, giving the Sigma i90/2.8 a chance. I'm not Avedon, and this guy is not Truman Capote; but i like the rendering...
ILCE-7RM590mm F2.8 DG DN | Contemporary 021 lens90mmf/2.81/160s125 ISO0.0 EV
50/1.2 GM has a unique look that no other AF 50mm lens in Sony range can quite reproduce, but 50/1.4 GM comes close enough. Sony f/1.4 GMs provide the perfect balance in weight, size, and IQ. When I go with lighter and smaller lenses, I miss the IQ. When I go with f/1.2 lenses, I feel the extra weight and bigger size.
I prefer 35mm FL to 50mm FL and don't shoot 50mm frequently enough to worry about bigger size and weight of 50/1.2 GM. If I were primarily a 50mm shooter, I would get 50/1.4 as my single lens solution.
Sigma 45mm is a good lens with broken AF. AF on that lens only works for static subjects and without AF there is no reason for me to use that lens over outstanding manual lenses from Zeiss and Voigtlander, so I ditched it (I need to sell it. It's been sitting in my dry cabinet for months).
rob_ww wrote:
Thanks! I was just curious -- I switched to Sony around Easter last year and have been on quite a journey to build up a lens set, including in the 50mm range some that you mention. FWIW I settled on the 55 and the Batis 40, both because I like the way Zeiss lenses render and for reasons of weight. I'm sure the 50GM f1.2 is wonderful but it would stay at home unless I really, really needed f1.2. Thoughts for another thread, really! Mixed feelings about the Sigmas. The Sigma 45 renders nicely and the 85/1.4 is a gem, but some of the others I tried did not appeal to me.
Very happy with the 55 and 40 image-wise. I had to let go of the desire for an aperture ring, of course, which was hard to do after 40 years of using one. You're never too old! ...Show more →
ramesesthe2nd wrote:
Does anybody ever really, really need f/1.2?
50/1.2 GM has a unique look that no other AF 50mm lens in Sony range can quite reproduce, but 50/1.4 GM comes close enough. Sony f/1.4 GMs provide the perfect balance in weight, size, and IQ. When I go with lighter and smaller lenses, I miss the IQ. When I go with f/1.2 lenses, I feel the extra weight and bigger size.
I prefer 35mm FL to 50mm FL and don't shoot 50mm frequently enough to worry about bigger size and weight of 50/1.2 GM. If I were primarily a 50mm shooter, I would get 50/1.4 as my single lens solution.
Sigma 45mm is a good lens with broken AF. AF on that lens only works for static subjects and without AF there is no reason for me to use that lens over outstanding manual lenses from Zeiss and Voigtlander, so I ditched it (I need to sell it. It's been sitting in my dry cabinet for months).
For me 500+g is not that much big of a differences compared to 800-g.
On the other hand, there is this 175g 50G 2.5 which if really nice as a walk around lens.
I have not tried 1.4 but extra 1/3 stop is valuable in poor light, especially for autofocus.
ramesesthe2nd wrote:
Does anybody ever really, really need f/1.2?
50/1.2 GM has a unique look that no other AF 50mm lens in Sony range can quite reproduce, but 50/1.4 GM comes close enough. Sony f/1.4 GMs provide the perfect balance in weight, size, and IQ. When I go with lighter and smaller lenses, I miss the IQ. When I go with f/1.2 lenses, I feel the extra weight and bigger size.
I prefer 35mm FL to 50mm FL and don't shoot 50mm frequently enough to worry about bigger size and weight of 50/1.2 GM. If I were primarily a 50mm shooter, I would get 50/1.4 as my single lens solution.
Sigma 45mm is a good lens with broken AF. AF on that lens only works for static subjects and without AF there is no reason for me to use that lens over outstanding manual lenses from Zeiss and Voigtlander, so I ditched it (I need to sell it. It's been sitting in my dry cabinet for months). ...Show more →
Not all Sigma 45s have broken AF, it seems to depend on the copy a bit, and also on what body you're using. On recent bodies - A7iv, A7c, A7Riv, continuous AF worked perfectly well for me. Maybe not GM level of course, but good enough that it never bothered me in a variety of shooting conditions.
Does anybody ever really need f1.2? Of course not, but it's very nice if you can afford the size/weight penalty. If 35 is your bag and you haven't tried the Bigma, you really should. It's really too big to be practical as an every day lens, but for special occasions oh boy it's wonderful
I have tried two 45s on my Sony A9 and both of them have broken POS AF. I have given up on this lens as there are plenty of nice choices in this range.
I am huge Bigma fan. My favorite lens on the Sony E Mount.
I've had two copies of the 45mm 2.8. Not as consistent as my 40 or 50 G but def. not bad either. IDK, maybe I'm missing something here. Like, really high speed then yes...Sony. However, the 45mm 2.8 is IMO still fine.
Love the 65, interested in the 90mm as well. I don’t like the 24mm focal length enough to warrant a purchase, but I’ve never had a super fast 24 (only 2.8 on a 24-70). I love the look and feel of these lenses.
ReleaseDrive wrote:
I've had two copies of the 45mm 2.8. Not as consistent as my 40 or 50 G but def. not bad either. IDK, maybe I'm missing something here. Like, really high speed then yes...Sony. However, the 45mm 2.8 is IMO still fine.
Yes, as long as you don't pixelpeep, it's mostly okay.
