p.2 #2 · Thoughts on the new Viltrox 55 1.8 versus the Sony 50 1.4 for portraits and travel
Many of us end up with two main portrait focal lengths, but before saying more, it is important to understand that your '50mm' or your '55mm' are not that focal length, not at all in fact. Stills lens designers are up against it, and they gain degrees of freedom by letting their lenses breathe - often severely.
Your lenses tighten angle of view in close focus, exactly where we work with these shortish lenses when photographing people. Both the GM 50/1.4 and the V55/1.8 show noticeable breathing, especially noted in reviews of the Sony GM 50/1.4.
It may be that the effect is greater on the Sony here, narrowing the gap as a result. The industry thinks it is OK but it would be nice to know the actual FLs at typical portrait distances for the nominal focal length.
'The Viltrox 55mm f/1.8 EVO exhibits visible focus breathing, with breathing ratios measured at approximately 14% in the frame center and 16% on the edges. While this makes it less ideal for precision cinematic focus pulls, it remains acceptable for general video use and outperforms the older Sony FE 55mm f/1.8 ZA in this regard.'
p.2 #3 · Thoughts on the new Viltrox 55 1.8 versus the Sony 50 1.4 for portraits and travel
Thank you, rsolti13, for the revealing images on p2. Notice right away that the Viltrox controls bokeh much better, with greater context and depiction of depth - near content is more clear than distant content. The Sony tends to the undifferentiated 'wall of blur' approach.
The image quality is very different even allowing for the higher exposure of the GM lens. The V image has more color, the subjects feel embedded in and 'belong' in the image, the GM has more subject 'float' above the background. The GM bokeh is frankly not a great asset here - bokeh should be easily viewable, not unpleasant in any way.
But the big one is what we might call 'presence' - the sense that the subjects are palpable, could be touched if you reached out to them. This elusive quality involves several contributing factors (exposure, color, WB, contrast etc.) but it is very much a lens 'formula'.
For portraits, we prioritise facial shaping as the output of this formula. Highlight handling is key here - because human vision has a very wide dynamic range, we don't often see facial highlights in the real world as close to blown out. Smoothly graded highlight tones are therefore vital. We see so many images with Caucasian skin very close to blown out. It's a thing:
'Why Photographers Intentionally Overexpose Skin
Understanding the specific benefits and techniques of this approach explains why it is so common in modern portraiture:Flattering the Subject: bright, slightly overexposed light washes out tiny lines and skin texture, resulting in a naturally smooth complexion'
'High-Key Aesthetic: Many photographers deliberately shoot for a luminous, dreamy style—often referred to as "high-key" photography—which relies on bright whites and soft shadows.'
Skin tones and more importantly *variations* in skin tones go to the Viltrox here, hands down, particularly in Set Two. The Sony male appears almost jaundiced despite it apparently being a summers day. The Sony shows them as more artificial.
The last thing to point to is the treatment of heavily unfocused people/objects in the background. Important because bokeh occupies around 60% of this image set. The Sony bokeh threatens to overwhelm the subjects, the Viltrox bokeh does a better job of 'knowing its place' in the image. Edge handling is very good indeed.
I think this: 'next to onion rings on the Sony where the Viltrox has them' should read:
'next to *no* onion rings on the Sony where the Viltrox has them'
They are much more in focus in high contrast in the V image, and most would consider them not to be image-relevant. And the shape is better too.
Maybe Sony wanted to keep portrait shooters in the other GM, the 50/1.2, and the GM 50/1.4 is the general purpose lens.
