patotts wrote:
You know what? I kind of changed my mind on this one. I've been praising the 50/1.4 GM left and right since it came out and I made the switch, but I just reviewed a slew of old 50/1.2 GM images vs. the 50/1.4 GM. While there isn't a huge difference, I definitely think the 50/1.2 GM has some special sauce to it. I kind of wish I had kept that one.
Nice! I’ve done the same a time or two on certain lenses.
I preordered the 50/1.2 when it was announced and was one of the first to get one in my hands. I still own it and feel it’s the best lens I’ve ever had. It’s a keeper.
And Sony, who have done so much to provide coverage at all levels of the 50mm lens region, realised that. We see pendulum swings in these trends - an overshoot followed by a reappraisal and finally a return to the central tendency. They felt they needed a strong regular fast lens and made one.
I just use my 50 1.2 GM for everything. It stays on my A7RIII full time and gets a rare break when it gets swapped out for my 35 1.4 GM.
My Zeiss 55 might be taking a permanent vacation though. I think I've used that lens just once or twice on a second body since I got the 50 1.2.
I don't have a 50 1.4 GM... but if it's around the same size and weight as the 35 1.4 GM, then it's not really THAT much smaller and lighter than the 50 1.2.
I have both, I prefer the 1.2 but I like the "kind of muted tones" look of the wider aperture combined with bitingly sharp contrast at the point of focus (I guess that special sauce), other than that specific look I think the 1.4 is so similar it's a wash. But that look at f1.2 comes with more weight and more weight means it might not make it out with me.
If I was still shooting weddings and portraits for $ it would be an easy choice, 1.2 and done.
Here's a folder with some quick tests I did a while ago..(not the best samples, but something to look at) https://flic.kr/s/aHBqjBiCTG
Magnum PI wrote:
I own the 1.2 and have access to all Sony demos, incl the 1.4. That being said I haven't requested any demos in a couple years.
With the 1.2 it is tempting to shoot a lot at wide open. You want to make use of your hard earned money after all. And here lays the issue: the shallow DOF coming from the 1.2 is not easy to work with. Sharp eyes and an out-of-focus nose isn't really fun. So you step back and the subject isn't framed properly anymore. Then you stop down to 1.8 after all.
The 1.2 makes sense at night, in the streets, with objects far away enough. It is a specialized lens, not a do it all 50mm workhorse.
Just to make a point at 1.2. Eyes sharp, nose is gone...
How much better is the AF of the 50/1.2 compared to the 50/1.4? It has twice the number of focus motors...
I have owned and used both 50 GMs. With running, jumping, and swimming dogs and horses, the 50/1.2 had significantly more keepers (broad daylight, eye-AF on an A7RV) compared to the 50/1.4 GM. I find it nearly impossible to tell the difference in IQ. Given my experience, I think that the 50/1.2 might be better at sports/action photography than the 50/1.4 (although 50mm probably isn't used much by the sports shooters)
A 50 1.2 can be a lot of fun right under the basket. I shot a couple of basketball games with it.
smpetty wrote:
How much better is the AF of the 50/1.2 compared to the 50/1.4? It has twice the number of focus motors...
I have owned and used both 50 GMs. With running, jumping, and swimming dogs and horses, the 50/1.2 had significantly more keepers (broad daylight, eye-AF on an A7RV) compared to the 50/1.4 GM. I find it nearly impossible to tell the difference in IQ. Given my experience, I think that the 50/1.2 might be better at sports/action photography than the 50/1.4 (although 50mm probably isn't used much by the sports shooters)
ILCE-1FE 50mm F1.2 GM lens50mmf/1.21/1250s1000 ISO+0.7 EV
