This lens is sharp! No real complaints about the lens. Feels tight, quality plastic. This has much better image quality vs the RF 50 1.8. That thing sucked honestly, and I had tried 3 different copies. This has been great so far. Focus is not very fast, but it's super quiet and has been extremely accurate so far.
My lens did arrive with a piece of dust or dirt in the middle of the glass on the inside, Viltrox said they would swap it out no issues.
Some crappy indoor lighting shots of my cats and one out my front door.
rico wrote:
I don't often proclaim Lens of the Year, but the 50 Air is the 2025 Winner.
This is of course particularly interesting since we still have most of 2025 ahead of us. 😄
Incidentally, in a direct comparison, the Viltrox AF-C on my A7iv, with the same settings, is significantly less reliable than that of the 1.8 50 FE, 2.5 50 G, and 1.2 50 GM when I focus on a small object within a complex scene and then pan the frame with the shutter button half-pressed. He then jumps much faster and more often to another object within the frame than with the three lenses mentioned. This is annoying when you're used to better results. As I said, even the 1.8 FE does a much better job.
Otherwise, this little thing is really great if you don't care much about bokeh beyond close-ups.
I've deleted a possibly inaccurate comment about bokeh. I apologize.
Nifty Fifty wrote:
The amount of blur on the Air at f2 is only equivalent to that of the GM at f2.8! I find this interesting and wonder how the Air would compare to the 2.8 Zoom GM at 50mm.
I have only used the lens for street shooting and portraits but I have been favorably impressed by it. I didn't do any tests but see no problems with blur as compared to my other lenses. Not sure how a 2.0 lens would not have the same basic blur as any other 50 f2. Understandably the bokeh will be different.
Out-of-focus rendering can vary quite a bit. If the PSF is not symmetric one side of z-axis will have less blur and the other more blur. Undercorrected SA causes deeper depth-of-field--I noticed this with the Sigma 45mm when comparing it with other 45s. It is a bit of the magic of that lens.
I haven't setup a comparison yet with the Air--it was so inexpensive, and it works well enough. I could get rid of several somewhat more expensive 50's (no GMs here).
The Air and 2.5 are so close, really comes down to which type of bokeh rendering you prefer. I think I prefer the Air in this case. The 1.8 seems to be a noticeable step up for rendering quality.
The Air and 2.5 are so close, really comes down to which type of bokeh rendering you prefer. I think I prefer the Air in this case. The 1.8 seems to be a noticeable step up for rendering quality.
Agree about the Air. Purchased it a couple of weeks ago for $165 new at B&H. Can't beat that!
