Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

50mm for Sony alpha 7 camera.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2020 1:44 pm    Post subject: 50mm for Sony alpha 7 camera. Reply with quote
Hi folks
I want to buy a 50mm lens for my sony a7II camera.
Budget is 180$
I want a good lens for street photography and portraits , selfie ecc.


PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2020 2:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Good quality adapted (manual) lenses in 50mm are very common for less than 1/4 your budget.
I suspect if you asked for a list of 50mm legacy lenses to avoid it would be shorter.
All the manufacturers made vast numbers of lenses around this focal length in the 60's, 70's & 80's...

There might be bad examples but I don't think any are bad designs.

If you want to stick to native mount lenses your options will drop drastically.
Are there any features you want, like particularly fast apertures, close focusing, swirly bokeh, small size, or a particular mount...
I suspect you could mange one each of all the first 4 with appropriate adapters inside your budget.


PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2020 2:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I like neutral tones and colors of modern fuji lenses.
I'm searching those type of look


PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2020 2:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
So which adapters do you have? I would advise not to buy one 50 but four or five different ones for that budget. Not necessarily all 50's bit maybe throw in a 28/35/58, which is doable within budget as long as you don't need a different adapter for each. m42 would be the way to go.


PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2020 2:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
D1N0 wrote:
So which adapters do you have? I would advise not to buy one 50 but four or five different ones for that budget. Not necessarily all 50's bit maybe throw in a 28/35/58, which is doable within budget as long as you don't need a different adapter for each. m42 would be the way to go.


i've a md to nex adapter.

I'm shooting with the 28-70 af camera zoom ( I don't like color rendering, its poor) and the minolta 35-70mm 3.5 ( leica model).
Now, i'm a bit tired of zooms, i want a prime lens for improve quality of pics.


PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2020 4:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
https://www.sony.com/electronics/camera-lenses/sel50f18f

https://www.dxomark.com/sony-a7r-ii-best-prime-lenses-review/


PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2020 5:42 pm    Post subject: Re: 50mm for Sony alpha 7 camera. Reply with quote
fujicorry wrote:
Hi folks
I want to buy a 50mm lens for my sony a7II camera.
Budget is 180$
I want a good lens for street photography and portraits , selfie ecc.


One of these:

C/Y Planar 50mm 1.4
C/Y Planar 50mm 1.7
Rollei Planar 50mm 1.8
CZJ Pancolar 50mm 1.8

or

MD Rokkor 50mm 1.4
Zuiko 50mm 1.4


PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2020 6:19 pm    Post subject: Re: 50mm for Sony alpha 7 camera. Reply with quote
fujicorry wrote:
Hi folks
I want to buy a 50mm lens for my sony a7II camera.
Budget is 180$
I want a good lens for street photography and portraits , selfie ecc.


I would recommend you to buy two prime lenses if you want to spend 180$ - a wideangle for street and a longer lens for portrait.

Why? For both street photography and for portraits you won't see any difference between a 50$ Minolta MD 1.4/50mm and a 150$ Carl Zeiss CY 1.4/50mm.

Depending on your preferences I would recommend one of the following:

1) A 2.8/28mm lens plus a 1.4/50mm (or 1.4/58mm)
2) A 2.8/35mm lens plus a 1.4/58mm
3) A 2.8/35mm lens plus a 2.5/100mm, a 2.8/100mm or a 2.8/135mm

I have tested and directly complared quite a few lenses. Unless you want a distictive "vintage" look I would recommend the sharper and better lenses from around 1980 such as Canon "new FD", Minolta MD or Nikkor Ai/AiS.

Some Canon new FD lenses have problems with decaying slide bearings - keep that in mind if you choose Canon nFD as your brand.
The common Konica AR primes have pretty good optics; focusing is less smooth than with the MC/MD Rokkors, and the aperture ring is troublesome to use.
The Minolta MD lenses have no major flaws, neither mechanically nor optically.
Quite a few Ai/AiS Nikkors - in spite of their good reputation - have either "dry" focusing helices or stuck apertures.

When it comes to optical performance, you may use any of the lenses mentioned, such as

2.8/28mm: Minolta MC or MD (about USD 50.--, sometimes less), Canon nFD 2.8/28mm (probably also <50 USD)
2.8/35mm (new generation): Canon nFD and Minolta MD (both excellent lenses, available for around 50 USD)
2.8/35mm (for "vintage" rendering): Minolta MC 2.8/35mm [7/7] variants; Konica AR 2.8/35mm first computation (both <50$)
1.4/50mm: Canon FD or nFD (same optics); Konica AR 1.4/50mm, Minolta MC and MD 1.4/50mm (all around $40-60)
Normal lenses for "vintage" rendering: Canon FL 1.4/50mm, Konica AR 1.4/57mm, Minolta MC 1.4/58mm (all around $50)
Portrait tele: Canon FD and nFD 2.8/100mm, Konica 2.8/100mm, Minolta MC/MD 2.5/100mm, Nikkor-P.C Auto 2.5/105mm (all in the 80-150$ range depending on condition)

You might even consider a 135mm for portraits - such as the Canon FD 2.5/135mm, the nFD 2.8/135mm, the Minolta MC/MD 2.8/135mm, or the Konica 3.2 and 2.5/135mm. Those lenses go for 50-100$.

Lots of nice stuff to choose from, for sure!

Stephan

PS some information on Minolta MC/MD can be found here on my website:
http://artaphot.ch/minolta-sr/objektive


PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2020 7:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
https://www.ebay.it/itm/363210179891

This? Is good?


PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2020 8:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Sure. A good lens. But you'll need to clean it from fungus. If it stays under 50 I would get it.


PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2020 8:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ah! I've not the tools for clean it. i'll buy Minolta MD 50mm 1.4...color rendition is very good, i like neutral tints and seems so sharp. ...


PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2020 9:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
fujicorry wrote:
ah! I've not the tools for clean it. i'll buy Minolta MD 50mm 1.4...color rendition is very good, i like neutral tints and seems so sharp. ...


Good choice - and you already have the adapter
Laugh 1


PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2020 10:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'd recommend the Zeiss Planar T* 1.7/50 or the Zeiss/Rollei Planar HFT 1.8/50 as both have great colours and for what they cost, are bargains - the T* 1.7 being about 3x the price of the other, but is a better lens all-round, but not by much.


PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2020 10:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I'd recommend the Zeiss Planar T* 1.7/50 or the Zeiss/Rollei Planar HFT 1.8/50 as both have great colours and for what they cost, are bargains - the T* 1.7 being about 3x the price of the other, but is a better lens all-round, but not by much.


Yes the Rollei Planar HFT 1.8/50 would have been my suggestion also if the OP didn't already have the Minolta adapter.
In all the images that I have seen from the Rollei Planar HFT 1.8/50 and the Rollei Planar HFT 1.4/50, the Rollei Planar HFT 1.8/50 seems to be a better all round lens.
Still, the Minolta will not disappoint either
Tom


PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2020 11:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yes, the Rollei Planar stands out as having great colours.

I sold my 1.4 version as it isn't as good and it fetches quite a large price. I got mine extremely cheap as it had some fungus and oily blades that were almost stuck solid. I cleaned it, used it for a while, found I didn't particularly like it so made a nice profit to invest in something else.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 12, 2020 4:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
You have the Minolta 35-70.

Thus it makes no sense to buy a (vintage) prime lens to "improve quality".

You will be disappointed because the 35-70 is just SO good. Your shiny new 50 won't have any significant "better quality".
I have the Minolta MD 50mm f1.4, a really good, very sharp and recommended lens, as well as the 35-70 and can attest to that.

A prime only makes sense for you if you want more blurred background / bokeh - and then you should not focus on obtaining the sharpest fifty, but on a fifty which has in your eyes the most appealing bokeh. The vintage 50s are not sharp wide open anyway, if you want that, get a modern lens.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 12, 2020 5:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
There are lots of vintage 50s that are sharp wide open, or at least, are sharp on moderately dense digital sensors. I haven't tried them with the latest highest density sensors, but I expect they are still sharp enough.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 12, 2020 5:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
No, they aren't.

They are, at most, QUITE sharp in the CENTER (but less so at midframe and not in the corners) on a not-so-high-resolution camera.

Not comparable at all with what modern lenses are able to do. Even a cheap nifty fifty like a Canon EF/RF 50mm f1.8 is better wide open.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 12, 2020 9:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Being sharp corner to corner is not the point of using legacy glass. Being able to shoot interesting photo's is. Modern glass is often corrected so well everything just looks the same. Boring. If you are in it to resolve every pixel of your 45mp full frame sensor then dish out for some modern heavy weight and stop driving up the prices of legacy glass in search of the sharpest extreme corner pixel.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 12, 2020 11:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
hasenbein wrote:
You have the Minolta 35-70.

Thus it makes no sense to buy a (vintage) prime lens to "improve quality".

You will be disappointed because the 35-70 is just SO good. Your shiny new 50 won't have any significant "better quality".
I have the Minolta MD 50mm f1.4, a really good, very sharp and recommended lens, as well as the 35-70 and can attest to that.

A prime only makes sense for you if you want more blurred background / bokeh - and then you should not focus on obtaining the sharpest fifty, but on a fifty which has in your eyes the most appealing bokeh. The vintage 50s are not sharp wide open anyway, if you want that, get a modern lens.


What camera?


PostPosted: Sat Dec 12, 2020 12:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
hasenbein wrote:
No, they aren't.

They are, at most, QUITE sharp in the CENTER (but less so at midframe and not in the corners) on a not-so-high-resolution camera.

Not comparable at all with what modern lenses are able to do. Even a cheap nifty fifty like a Canon EF/RF 50mm f1.8 is better wide open.


If you think the cheap, nasty Canon EF 50 is sharper than many vintage lenses, you're sadly mistaken.

Define sharp? Able to outresolve the sensor?

What lp/mm figure does Canon claim for the Ef 50?


PostPosted: Sat Dec 12, 2020 3:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
hasenbein wrote:
No, they aren't.

They are, at most, QUITE sharp in the CENTER (but less so at midframe and not in the corners) on a not-so-high-resolution camera.

Not comparable at all with what modern lenses are able to do. Even a cheap nifty fifty like a Canon EF/RF 50mm f1.8 is better wide open.


If you think the cheap, nasty Canon EF 50 is sharper than many vintage lenses, you're sadly mistaken.

Define sharp? Able to outresolve the sensor?

What lp/mm figure does Canon claim for the Ef 50?


I had a Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II and it wasn't as sharp as expected until f/5.6. Probably something wrong with it, the worst 50mm (planar) I've had.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 12, 2020 3:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
hasenbein wrote:
No, they aren't.

They are, at most, QUITE sharp in the CENTER (but less so at midframe and not in the corners) on a not-so-high-resolution camera.

Not comparable at all with what modern lenses are able to do. Even a cheap nifty fifty like a Canon EF/RF 50mm f1.8 is better wide open.


I don't have much experience with "modern" normal lenses, apart from the Sony/Zeiss 1.8/55mm for the Sony E mount and the Zeiss Otus 1.4/5mm. Wide open and at f2, both these modern lenses are way sharper than any of the probably >100 vintage (=before 1990) normal lenses I own, includinge the Zeiss CY 1.7/50mm and 1.4/50mm and all the 1980s normal lenses from Canon (e. g. nFD 1.2/50mm L), Konica, Minolta, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax and Yashica.

Nevertheless I decided against the modern fast monsters since they are much too large and heavy for my kind of work. The modern f1.8 lenses such as the Sony 1.8/20mm, Sony/Zeiss 1.8/55mm and Sony 1.8/85mm seem to be good compromises, though.

S


PostPosted: Sat Dec 12, 2020 3:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
You will not regret the decision. to get 50mm 1.4 minolta. Alternatively you could get the MC 58 1.4.. but for 180 you could probably get a Canon fd 55mm 1.2. Downside is the adapter to breechlock can be fussy.


PostPosted: Sat Dec 12, 2020 4:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
My vote is for the Meike 50mm f1.7, excellent sharpness across the frame and you don’t have to worry about shoddy adapters as it’s native FE mount. Very impressed with mine, also used on my A7.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3