If I wanted a moderately compact, f2 and larger aperture, 50mm auto-focus lens - but I didn't want the background blur to be so strong and fast, while still shooting wider at around f2-f2.8 1m distance, are there good options that aren't as sharp (and modern rendering) as the gm 50mm f1.4?
I'm finding the images look off because of how fast the background blurs with this, it's not gradual enough for what I want as my go-to. Perhaps it's the 5mm tighter focal length that's causing that?
Maybe I'm not understanding / explaining my issue with it exactly, but the background blur looks "cheap", apologies for the poor choice of word:
@ f2.8:
If there's an established word to describe it, would love to know. I've heard "transition zone" used quite often here but not exactly sure what it's referring to. "Falloff" would make sense to me but I'm not sure if that's actually what people use to describe it. This is rapid falloff, turbo charged falloff, I'd like something more subtle, while still letting me shoot wide.
I know from my testing with the Nokton and APO from CV, the apo lens is much more gradual, at the same aperture, perhaps even too much. And the APO is even a little tighter fl.
I don't mind some spherical abberation (I might actually prefer it). Though I don't particularly like the glow of the nokton at close range, doesn't look like a nice glow. It's a lovely lens regardless but I'd like something with autofocus for people.
I was thinking about the 50mm f1.4 ZA but it's rather heavy and so I wouldn't get as much use out of it.
So perhaps the Sigma 50mm f2 - but just curious if anyone has thoughts or comments on this, as I can't find it to rent and it doesn't seem all that popular. The other one I know is available is the Samyung 45mm f1.8.
Anyone been through this and know what I mean? Any suggestions other than stop down to f7 with the 55f1.8 .
I think it's useful wide-open for longer range at say 2m or so, not just for people, or looking down at a pet and still getting some blurring with the body/floor. But with normal waist-up portrait range I feel like it needs significant stopping to slow the blurring.
I think the Sigma 50mm f2 might have less pop and separation but I think I'll give it a try for standard 1m-ish distance people shots. Will try and find a used copy unless I get warned off by follow-up posts.
45mm f2.8 I'm liking very up-close for pets ... and pretty up-close for people, but closer than I would ideally want to be. Has a really nice form-factor though.
following. I find myself wanting a small 50 and a 28 for the other camera. I know there’s some mixed responses to it, and it might be too sharp/modern for your taste, but keep thinking about the Sony 50/2.5.
I would suggest reading some of the reviews on this site and over at Phillip Reeves. In their reviews, both examine a lens' bokeh in a number of settings and this might help you find the lens you desire.
Regrads - Kk
Aug 05, 2025 at 09:58 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
You might also consider the Sigma 45 f/2.8 i-series lens. It doesn't produce a lot of blur as an f/2.8 lens, but I like the quality of the blur it produces. The lens also has a slow transition from in focus to out of focus. Both the quality of the blur and the transition are a bit usual and probably the product of less than fully corrected spherical aberrations. Take a look at the thread for that lens in this forum--it is pretty long--and see if it might be more to your liking.
Steve Spencer wrote:
You might also consider the Sigma 45 f/2.8 i-series lens. It doesn't produce a lot of blur as an f/2.8 lens, but I like the quality of the blur it produces. The lens also has a slow transition from in focus to out of focus. Both the quality of the blur and the transition are a bit usual and probably the product of less than fully corrected spherical aberrations. Take a look at the thread for that lens in this forum--it is pretty long--and see if it might be more to your liking.
I think the 45 f2.8 is almost like the opposite of the 55mm f1.8. Out of focus fall off is so slow that you need to get really up close.
I agree that it has really pleasing rendering when you are close but, I was hoping maybe the Sigma 50mm f2 would be a nice in-between.
I'm finding it hard to let go of the 45mm f2.8 even though it's not really what I want as my go-to.
Really close to the subject, it's wicked, not close enough and it's a touch too slow for general purpose.
I feel I'm constrained with both of them. Distortion on peoples faces and being a nuisance with the camera just a bit too close with the 45mm, or walking back far with the 55mm f1.8.
At 2.5m, the fall off on the 55 is lovely. But it's too far and I don't have the a7cr.
Similarly for action with great autofocus, and a compact size, hard to let go of the 55mm f1.8 either. 45 not so good in the department...like most lenses I've tried with character.
I think your first sample creates a harsh background due to the highlights. There is much more light in the background so it's pushing everything to extremes. I think if you masked the subject and dialed down the exposure on the background then the effect might be more pleasing.
We don't always get to choose the environment that we are photographing in, but I can't imagine ANY lens would create a pleasing background that has so much contrast as this one. If you crop out everything above the dog then the bokeh looks great.
LiveShots wrote:
I think your first sample creates a harsh background due to the highlights. There is much more light in the background so it's pushing everything to extremes. I think if you masked the subject and dialed down the exposure on the background then the effect might be more pleasing.
We don't always get to choose the environment that we are photographing in, but I can't imagine ANY lens would create a pleasing background that has so much contrast as this one. If you crop out everything above the dog then the bokeh looks great.
Apologies might have caused some confusion with the image of the dog as it's not a demonstration of the too-slow fall off of the 45 f2.8. I have more shots but they're with family members.
I was saying it's like the opposite of the 55mm f1.8, need to get really close. It does indeed have very slow fall-off. Too slow at comfortable working distance imho.
Can definitely get nice shots with it but I don't want it as my go-to, want to have a little more distance.
You want less blur while still shooting 50mm-55mm around f2-f2.8 at 1m distance? That is unlikely. The best option is shooting at f/4 or smaller. Or use a wider lens.
How about the small Sony 50mm f2.5 G
I do us it as walk around, where I did use the 55mm f1.8.
But you should also try the Sony 50mm f1.4 G Master
It's bigger but it want hurt as a walk around.
I think what you’re looking is pretty nuanced. Trying a few lenses out might be the best way to find what you’re looking for
That being said, going from 55mm to 50mm may do the trick. The 55’s background fall off has a lot to do with the slightly longer focal length. Switching to 50mm may be enough to get the DOF you’re looking for
As far as 50mm lenses, I currently use the 50mm 1.2 GM. I don’t think that’s exactly what you’re looking for
Haven’t really tried to many 50’s in E mount. Only the Zeiss 50mm 1.4 and the 55mm 1.8. So I may not be the best person to give recommendations
Hi,
If you can stand your CV50/1.2 at all:
Focus a tad in front of the thing you want to have in the focus plane, press the shutter button while slowly rotating the focusing ring toward infinity. With very little practice you'll do fine. Doing this I have the camera set to 5-10 fps not to fill the buffer too fast.
or
Buy the M-mount CV 50/1.2 and use it with an AF adapter. You'll lose EXIF-values and parts of the IBIS functionality.
Jonas B wrote:
Hi,
If you can stand your CV50/1.2 at all:
Focus a tad in front of the thing you want to have in the focus plane, press the shutter button while slowly rotating the focusing ring toward infinity. With very little practice you'll do fine. Doing this I have the camera set to 5-10 fps not to fill the buffer too fast.
or
Buy the M-mount CV 50/1.2 and use it with an AF adapter. You'll lose EXIF-values and parts of the IBIS functionality.
I really don't know why I would need focus stacking. I just focus using the focus magnifier, and that's it. I don't have the slightest problem getting the focus. I considered a Techart for convenience, but I've given up on it due to the many reports of technical issues and poor support, as well as the fact that AF-C only works in the center of the frame.
Nifty Fifty wrote:
I really don't know why I would need focus stacking. I just focus using the focus magnifier, and that's it. I don't have the slightest problem getting the focus. I considered a Techart for convenience, but I've given up on it due to the many reports of technical issues and poor support, as well as the fact that AF-C only works in the center of the frame.
Hallå,
The reply was meant for the OP. I know you are happy with your 50/1.2 as it is.
Appreciate the focussing suggestion with the nokton, it does render perfectly at the distances I'm interested in but I'm missing so many shots by the time I've got the focussing done. I love it for posed photos and I won't be getting rid of it.
It's an interesting idea doing the spray and pray with it with burst shots and maybe with enough practice I'll get there but it would be nice to just not have to worry about it and get all the random faces people make at the click of a button too. I'll keep the techart adapter in mind.
I imagine the Sigma won't render as nicely as the Nokton but maybe it will be a nice inbetween with the falloff compared to the 55mmf1.8 and 45mmf2.8.
I thought it might possibly be the 5mm focal length difference but I know it's different with different lenses of the same focal length too.
Dustin Abbott seems really keen on the 45mm f1.8 Samyung, and used prices are around $200 and brand new for not a lot more. Will try and grab one.
It was 3 years ago though and there's been a few since then I think. He didn't really seem that keen on the 50mm f2.5 for portraits like with the Samyung, and also directly talks about liking the falloff and the image quality vs the 55mm f1.8.
This 6 year old thread has mixed opinions on the Samyung, a few comparisons with the 45mm f2.8 from Sigma.
Think I'll grab the Sigma 50mm f2 and the Samyung 45mm f1.8 and see for myself I guess. Appreciate all the tips and suggestions, I'll be back with the falloff update.
Alternatively, just stick with my apsc fuji xf 35mm f1.4 .. but I guess I won't know until I try the other lenses.
Why aren’t you stopping down at closer range if you don’t want all the fall off?
🤷♂️
Yogifi wrote:
If I wanted a moderately compact, f2 and larger aperture, 50mm auto-focus lens - but I didn't want the background blur to be so strong and fast, while still shooting wider at around f2-f2.8 1m distance, are there good options that aren't as sharp (and modern rendering) as the gm 50mm f1.4?
I'm finding the images look off because of how fast the background blurs with this, it's not gradual enough for what I want as my go-to. Perhaps it's the 5mm tighter focal length that's causing that?
Maybe I'm not understanding / explaining my issue with it exactly, but the background blur looks "cheap", apologies for the poor choice of word:
If there's an established word to describe it, would love to know. I've heard "transition zone" used quite often here but not exactly sure what it's referring to. "Falloff" would make sense to me but I'm not sure if that's actually what people use to describe it. This is rapid falloff, turbo charged falloff, I'd like something more subtle, while still letting me shoot wide.
I know from my testing with the Nokton and APO from CV, the apo lens is much more gradual, at the same aperture, perhaps even too much. And the APO is even a little tighter fl.
I don't mind some spherical abberation (I might actually prefer it). Though I don't particularly like the glow of the nokton at close range, doesn't look like a nice glow. It's a lovely lens regardless but I'd like something with autofocus for people.
I was thinking about the 50mm f1.4 ZA but it's rather heavy and so I wouldn't get as much use out of it.
So perhaps the Sigma 50mm f2 - but just curious if anyone has thoughts or comments on this, as I can't find it to rent and it doesn't seem all that popular. The other one I know is available is the Samyung 45mm f1.8.
Anyone been through this and know what I mean? Any suggestions other than stop down to f7 with the 55f1.8 .
I think it's useful wide-open for longer range at say 2m or so, not just for people, or looking down at a pet and still getting some blurring with the body/floor. But with normal waist-up portrait range I feel like it needs significant stopping to slow the blurring.
I think the Sigma 50mm f2 might have less pop and separation but I think I'll give it a try for standard 1m-ish distance people shots. Will try and find a used copy unless I get warned off by follow-up posts.
45mm f2.8 I'm liking very up-close for pets ... and pretty up-close for people, but closer than I would ideally want to be. Has a really nice form-factor though....Show more →
ronno wrote:
Why aren’t you stopping down at closer range if you don’t want all the fall off?
🤷♂️
I need to stop it down too far at 1m, not very practical. It's great lens for longer distance shots for me.
The 45mm f2.8 sort of has the opposite problem, and is a great lens for upclose.
.