fotografur wrote:
In the US "shipping will begin Thu May 13"
Thanks. I'll set the day aside for the flood of pics! Actually, I am quite interested in this lens, especially if it does manage to have relatively few LoCA type aberrations, especially PF wide open. I really don't have a shortage of fast 50mm lenses but they all have 'issues'.
3D Pop is a very difficult thing and I can`t say anything in that regard after one day with the lens. But as a mentioned the lens has nothing "wow" or special for my taste. It`s a good lens not more..
abase21 wrote:
..so my first impressions are: the lens is not as sharp as the 35 GM, I don`t have the wow effect!
Hmm, looking at the charts (lenstip), larger apertures should actually be a bit better on the 50, except for the midfield which seems to starts losing to 35mm past f2.
abase21 wrote:
3D Pop is a very difficult thing and I can`t say anything in that regard after one day with the lens. But as a mentioned the lens has nothing "wow" or special for my taste. It`s a good lens not more..
I share the same opinion based on the sample I've seen so far on DPreview and youtube channels. I sold my 50ZA to preorder the GM but maybe I've made a mistake.
I just received the lens in the UK* and have taken a few brief shots. First impressions are that this is insanely sharp at f/1.2 even out to the edges. I'm not a 50 shooter (35 is more my FoV), and my only comparisons are the Noctilux f/0.95 and the Sony 55/1.8 and this lens is so far ahead that I had to check that I was actually shooting at f/1.2 and not f/2.8.
I'll try to get some sample images here and hopefully a comparison with the 55/1.8. I could do one with the Noctilux as well if people are interested, but that lens is for a completely different look and shooting experience so is not a fair comparison.
I also want to compare it agains my 85GM which is my most used lens for portraiture. I tend to shoot environmental full body portraits rather than headshots, which is why the 50GM interested me in the first place.
* I had a preorder with a UK retailer, but got impatient and ordered a grey import which arrived 4 days later.
Here is a video in Japanese comparing the Planar to the GM. He also stops down to f/8 and says he can’t tell the difference. You can tell a slight difference wide open in the blur. All in all, to my eyes, they look pretty similar and it would be hard to tell a difference unless you’re doing a 1:1 comparison. He also says something to that effect. It doesn’t mean the GM isn’t worth it, as I think there are other features/benefits to the newer version that will be valuable to many people, including me.
@hodie - I have had the planar, but barley used it, because of the weird AF noise. As I sad the GM is a good lens, but not extraordinary, as I expected after viewing some YouTube videos.
With the planar you will not have 30 f/seconds on the A1 and the focus is much better...
It seems premature to make that conclusion. Give it some time and please provide some images since you have it so we can also see what is extraordinary or not
EDIT: I see you have posted several photos already, sorry about that. That said, please continue to post images
abase21 wrote:
@hodie - I have had the planar, but barley used it, because of the weird AF noise. As I sad the GM is a good lens, but not extraordinary, as I expected after viewing some YouTube videos.
With the planar you will not have 30 f/seconds on the A1 and the focus is much better...
That sounds like a good plan, I am all in as well :-) I believe that for landscape use, you won't see much of a difference and one might be better off with another lens.... Thanks for all the images posted! Hodie wrote:
It seems premature to make that conclusion. Give it some time and please provide some images since you have it so we can also see what is extraordinary or not
The pictures with the 50mm ZA often have something really special about them. Colors and sharpness can also (still) be rated as extremely good.
Otherwise I find it (too) big and heavy for what it is and I've always found the autofocus unreliable on my A7RIII.
I'm really looking forward to the new 50mm GM. I found the first pictures very promising. I also like the sample images here. I'm curious.
(Completely in contrast to what I saw of the 35mm GM. Certainly good photographers are out with the 35mm GM and the pictures are technically extremely good, very sharp, but for my taste the lens doesn't seem to have anything special. For the 50mm GM I have hope in this regard.)
Here are some quick photos comparing the rendering between the 50GM and the 55/1.8. It's not a particularly nice day for light today, but hopefully these are useful anyway.
There are 2 images, one focusing on the nearer bough of the cherry tree and the other focusing on one further behind. This should give some indication of front/back bokeh and transitions. Links to the full sized images are just below too. All shot on an a7R4 with no edits, just an export from Lightroom.
The main difference I see is in fringing (the main weakness for the otherwise excellent 55/1.8). Also in the abovephotos, the area in focus is near the centre. When it is less central, the GM pulls away dramatically. I'll try and upload some photos demonstrating that too.
