p.1 #1 · Zeiss Loxia 50mm, still a good choice? Or...
hello everyone,
I waited for the start of CP+ to see if any brand would announce new 50mm lenses, but that wasn’t the case (maybe there are already too many). I’m looking for a 50 mm that has the following characteristics: first of all compactness so I can always carry it with my A7 II, manual focus, and preferably not too expensive. In the used market I’ve seen that the Loxia can be found at very affordable prices (€400), but also a Zeiss C-Sonnar f/1.5 ZM at €550. So I ask you, is the Loxia still a good choice? Are there better options?
p.1 #2 · Zeiss Loxia 50mm, still a good choice? Or...
Yes, it is.
You can also take a look at the Voigtlander options.
The Loxia:
- Built in an impeccable fashion
- Equipped with an ultra‑simple optical formula (this is very rare nowadays)
- Delivers a typical Zeiss‑style rendering (color, bokeh, micro‑contrast)
- Offers fantastic resolution
- Does not rely on software correction
In short, a lovely lens and an excellent choice for second‑hand use. A modern vintage lens.
p.1 #4 · Zeiss Loxia 50mm, still a good choice? Or...
I remember a thread here a while ago comparing the Loxia 50 with the 50 GM f/1.2. The GM was certainly the more capable lens overall, but the Loxia had a contrast and character that, in my opinion, the GM couldn’t quite match. I actually bought my Loxia after that discussion, and since then I’ve collected every Loxia except the 21. These lenses are so heavily discounted at this point that it almost doesn’t make sense not to own them if you’re a fan of the Zeiss look. That being said, I don’t use my Loxia lenses much because I struggle with shooting manual lenses, but that would be true for me with any manual‑focus lens.
p.1 #5 · Zeiss Loxia 50mm, still a good choice? Or...
LeBogs wrote:
hello everyone,
I waited for the start of CP+ to see if any brand would announce new 50mm lenses, but that wasn’t the case (maybe there are already too many). I’m looking for a 50 mm that has the following characteristics: first of all compactness so I can always carry it with my A7 II, manual focus, and preferably not too expensive. In the used market I’ve seen that the Loxia can be found at very affordable prices (€400), but also a Zeiss C-Sonnar f/1.5 ZM at €550. So I ask you, is the Loxia still a good choice? Are there better options?
The Loxia is basically a 6 element 4 group classic double gaussian design (in the Zeiss world a classic Planar design). It is somewhat refined, adjusted for mirrorless, compared to the older lenses made for film cameras so the corners are sharper, there is less flare and the contrast is higher compared to what we see from older adapted 50mm lenses.
The design gives us busy bokeh with bright outlines, distortion, often a lot of LoCA and images sharp from border to border from f/8. A bit expensive for that, no?
On the other hand the build quality is good. At least I hope it's good; it felt that way, very nice, when trying one over a decade ago with the original Sony A7.
Depending on your budget, I would be more inclined to look for an APO-Lanthar rather than the Lox. I do own the 21mm, 25mm, and 85mm Loxia lenses. They are fantastic lenses although a bit tricky to unmount due to the barrel design.
p.1 #7 · Zeiss Loxia 50mm, still a good choice? Or...
Jonas B wrote:
The Loxia is basically a 6 element 4 group classic double gaussian design (in the Zeiss world a classic Planar design). It is somewhat refined, adjusted for mirrorless, compared to the older lenses made for film cameras so the corners are sharper, there is less flare and the contrast is higher compared to what we see from older adapted 50mm lenses.
The design gives us busy bokeh with bright outlines, distortion, often a lot of LoCA and images sharp from border to border from f/8. A bit expensive for that, no?
On the other hand the build quality is good. At least I hope it's good; it felt that way, very nice, when trying one over a decade ago with the original Sony A7....Show more →
A few clarifications. The Loxia is just as good – even better in the corners – than a Sony 1.8/55 (and clearly better in the center), for example. When it comes to distortion, it’s almost non‑existent: there’s only a tiny amount of barrel distortion (which is very easy to correct), unlike newer lenses that can have more complex distortion patterns… and yes, there is a bit of LoCA.
It’s not “expensive” if that’s what you’re after. Many Leica lenses are far more costly than a Sony GM f/1.2 (yet, on paper, the Sony is often labeled “better”), but that’s a separate debate that doesn’t belong in this thread.
p.1 #8 · Zeiss Loxia 50mm, still a good choice? Or...
tuxounet wrote:
A few clarifications. The Loxia is just as good – even better in the corners – than a Sony 1.8/55 (and clearly better in the center), for example. When it comes to distortion, it’s almost non‑existent: there’s only a tiny amount of barrel distortion (which is very easy to correct), unlike newer lenses that can have more complex distortion patterns… and yes, there is a bit of LoCA.
It’s not “expensive” if that’s what you’re after. Many Leica lenses are far more costly than a Sony GM f/1.2 (yet, on paper, the Sony is often labeled “better”), but that’s a separate debate that doesn’t belong in this thread....Show more →
That's not clarifications. The opposite I would say.
The Loxia is worse than the Sony 55/1.8, and quite so, in the midzone. I never argued about the corners but instead pointed out it is sharp all over at f/8 and smaller. I didn't mention the 55/1.8 either for what it matters.
The distortion is in line with most old 50mm lenses and images with straight lines can gain from getting corrected. Yes, it's easy to do but the lens isn't entirely free from the need of software adjustments. The same goes for LaCA. LoCA is harder...
The Loxia is expensive compared to other classic designs. Any discussions about undefined Leica lenses and the 50/1.2 GM are not of interest in this context.
Feb 25, 2026 at 11:06 AM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.1 #9 · Zeiss Loxia 50mm, still a good choice? Or...
LeBogs wrote:
hello everyone,
I waited for the start of CP+ to see if any brand would announce new 50mm lenses, but that wasn’t the case (maybe there are already too many). I’m looking for a 50 mm that has the following characteristics: first of all compactness so I can always carry it with my A7 II, manual focus, and preferably not too expensive. In the used market I’ve seen that the Loxia can be found at very affordable prices (€400), but also a Zeiss C-Sonnar f/1.5 ZM at €550. So I ask you, is the Loxia still a good choice? Are there better options?
Do you need to shoot wide open? If not any should be good stopped down
Including the 60's 50/2 Mamiya Sekor I got <$20 shipped online. It doesn’t have any yellowing so hopefully not radioactive like some old ones. Ca. 1950 50/2 Summitar good, as well
p.1 #10 · Zeiss Loxia 50mm, still a good choice? Or...
Personally, I can't see much reason to get a Loxia 50mm, especially since the Voigtlander 50/2 APO-Lanthar exists, and is superior in essentially every way.
p.1 #13 · Zeiss Loxia 50mm, still a good choice? Or...
LeBogs wrote:
So I ask you, is the Loxia still a good choice? Are there better options?
Thank you!
Objective vs Subjective.
Objectively, all non-budget lenses manufactured within the last ~30 years will deliver more than 99.9999% of viewers would ever want/need. Over the yeras I probably owned 150-200 lenses in my collection, from the early post-war designs to modern clinically perfect dumbells from all major vendors. All of them are plenty sharp and I cannot imagine a viewer spotting a technical flaw in a 24" tall print with any of them at a proper viewing distance. Your question is (probably) influenced by consumer electronics that has been getting dramatically better every 5 years or so. That's just not the case with optics, where improvements have been happening at a comparatively glacial pace. Additionally, people pixel peep at the already enormous images blown up to 200% to loudly complain about loca, coma, and other utter nonsense which barely has any impact on a finished product. Ignore that. Objectively, all non-budget lenses are amazing. I would even say that the minor improvements in technology, aside from better coatings, have not been moving us much forward but often "sideways". To correct for these barely visible aberrations, designers add more glass increasing weight. To reduce weight they increase vignetting or/and sacrifice geometry both of which get corrected in software deflating resolution. Is it really progress or simply introducing more flexibility to the juggling of trade-offs?
Subjectively it's a much more interesting question. The haptic feedback, the character of OOO areas, the convenience of mounting/unmounting, the filter size, etc. These concerns are specific to your preferences, and are very real. You will feel the consequences of your choices every time you touch the lens, and you will see it in your results even if they're shown on a tiny phone screen. Personally and subjectively, I can't stand "smooth and creamy bokeh" because it screams BORING at me and anyone with two brain cells can apply it to any image using modern digital tools. I prefer what they call "busy" bokeh because it simply looks awesome and inherently unpredictable. The double-gauss design used in this Zeiss is, in my opinion, the best option for a 50mm because the alternatives are too heavy to join me when I leave the house. I have this lens in other mounts, so no 1st hand experience with the E variant. But what concerns me from other people's stories is the difficulty of mounting/unmounting (I swap lenses often). Otherwise, it's a fantastic choice.
p.1 #14 · Zeiss Loxia 50mm, still a good choice? Or...
Yes, still a very sound lens within its design envelope. You've received some conventional advice, most of it very good even as it reflects personal opinions. I encourage you to consider what you want to photograph, be it general ( a jack of all trades); or travel work, or family, landscape, or street walkaround.
Lenses at 50mm are two-part ponies = f1.4-f2 and f5.6-f8 for deep DOF. How good should your results be at f2, can you benefit from wider aperture opportunities? (f1.4 comes into play). What percentage for character usage, or would all images with clinical sharp results at/near f2 suit? What aperture will you mostly use?
Finally, you can broaden your search to include lenses released in the digital eternity since the venerable 50/2 Zeiss ZM design appeared in 2005, to then be repurposed as a Loxia ten years later. A whole torrent of lens design development has flowed under the bridge in recent years. No one can keep up with it all.
So your best friend here is self knowledge. Try looking at the image threads for the contenders that emerge in your short list that comes from the above and other considerations. Golden oldie or new age faux vintage or super APO? This might be your guide. There are so many good options, it might be best to look for ways to reject lenses, paring it down to a short list for further inspection.
p.1 #15 · Zeiss Loxia 50mm, still a good choice? Or...
As much of a Zeiss fanboy as I can be, I never gelled with the Planar 50/2. It's not that it's bad, it's just that there are so many double-Gauss 50s out there with the same or better objective performance metrics selling for much less than the Planar, particularly if you're willing to adapt. Minolta's 1982 MD 50/2, for example, can go shot-for-shot with the Planar and it regularly sells for about $30 USD plus the cost of an adapter.
The ZM C-Sonnar 50/1.5 is a different beast entirely. Where the Planar starts out fairly soft at wide apertures and gets very sharp across the frame as you stop down to f/5.6, the Sonnar is more about loving the sum of the flaws in its performance than expecting high resolution results at any aperture. There's a thread about it with lots of samples here: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1448834/
If you're after stronger performance from wide open and are willing to compromise on the speed, the Voigtlander APO-Lanthar 50/3.5 is a nicely compact and relatively budget friendly option, though, like with the Sonnar, you'll need an M-to-E adapter for it. Fred tested it out on a stock Sony sensor and found it to be excellent: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1868807/11#infinity5
p.1 #16 · Zeiss Loxia 50mm, still a good choice? Or...
Thanks everyone for the input! I’m not really looking for a “perfect” lens — that’s why I’ve already ruled out the Apo-Lanthar. What I care more about are things like color rendering, micro-contrast and size. Right now I’m only using Nikon AI/AI-S lenses (28mm f/2, f/3.5 and 105mm f/2.5) plus a Distagon 35mm f/2, so I’m definitely not chasing ultimate wide-open sharpness.
Besides the C-Sonnar, which looks like it has a very unique character based on the samples I’ve seen, I’m also considering the Nokton 50mm f/1.5 VM II — but at over €600 it’s a bit outside my budget
p.1 #17 · Zeiss Loxia 50mm, still a good choice? Or...
LeBogs wrote:
I’m looking for a 50 mm that has the following characteristics: first of all compactness so I can always carry it with my A7 II, manual focus, and preferably not too expensive.
Speaking as a snob of German-branded manual focus primes (Leitz LTM, M, R, and Zeiss C/Y), I think you should skip that scene, and just pick up the Viltrox 50/2 Air: cheap, small, AF, incredible performance. The A7ii is currently my main body for fun with alternative lenses, but the Air operates at a different level.
p.1 #18 · Zeiss Loxia 50mm, still a good choice? Or...
Pictorially, the Sony GM 50/1.2 is almost as good as the Viltrox 50/2 AIR at common apertures, but falls short regarding it's out-of-focus content. Bokeh never gets discussed much and we even lack the terms to describe it well. Bokeh is 75% of the average wide aperture image, so why is that? What is its job? C/N/S answer: of course, it is to blur the background.
But Sony's bokeh model is less pleasant here, it lays down a broad field of poorly differentiated material behind the subject, making it hard to mentally fit the subject into the scene. The Viltrox AIR does a good job of this challenge, imparting a finer sense of place to the image as well as breathing life into the scene's background.
Here is a little test of bokeh for you: look around the bokeh field - not the subject - and see how comfortable it is to do this. Why look at an image that is uncomfortable to view?
This is preamble to the YT comparison below. Open two browser tabs, expand them to full size and move one to 3:53, and the other to 4:00. The eye needs visual cues to make sense of a scene - even in bokeh. We might call these two approaches: the German/Japanese model and the Chinese model, of image depth.
The AIR is one tenth the price of the GM, and one quarter the weight. It's packed to the gunwales with great glass - in its tiny barrel, it has a 13/9 design, comprising four ED, three HRI and one asph element(s). Lens A. Now you know why so few reviews include comparisons..
..
p.1 #19 · Zeiss Loxia 50mm, still a good choice? Or...
If you like the charm of the C-Sonnar, you should check out the 7artisans 50mm f/1.1. It's not as compact, but the extra speed gives it its own kind of funk. 7a discontinued it, but you can still find it new (with silly prices) or used (typically more reasonable) or you can buy the unbranded version directly from China for a much better price:
