View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
papasito
Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1658
|
Posted: Sat Jan 09, 2021 9:16 pm Post subject: Sony 55/1,8 vs. Zeiss 50/1,4 |
|
|
papasito wrote:
Both lenses have manual focus.
Which to buy?
Any experience to share? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010 Posts: 2901 Location: The Netherlands
|
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2021 5:07 pm Post subject: Re: Sony 55/1,8 vs. Zeiss 50/1,4 |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
papasito wrote: |
Both lenses have manual focus.
Which to buy?
Any experience to share? |
You know how many great MF lenses you could buy for that money 😜 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 10463 Location: California
Expire: 2021-06-22
|
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2021 5:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
https://www.dxomark.com/sony-carl-zeiss-planar-t-fe-50mm-f-1-4-za-lens-review/ _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony A7Rii, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Lenses:
Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200
Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300
Macro-Takumar 1:4/50
Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm
Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element),
Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17
Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500
Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100
Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100
SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
Other lenses:
Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
hasenbein
Joined: 15 May 2020 Posts: 93
|
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2021 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hasenbein wrote:
DXOmark is crap.
But rest assured, the 50 1.4 is a really great lens. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 10463 Location: California
Expire: 2021-06-22
|
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2021 8:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
hasenbein wrote: |
DXOmark is crap.
But rest assured, the 50 1.4 is a really great lens. |
Can you please expand on your comments? Tell us why. _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony A7Rii, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Lenses:
Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200
Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300
Macro-Takumar 1:4/50
Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm
Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element),
Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17
Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500
Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100
Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100
SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
Other lenses:
Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
papasito
Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1658
|
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2021 9:28 pm Post subject: Re: Sony 55/1,8 vs. Zeiss 50/1,4 |
|
|
papasito wrote:
caspert79 wrote: |
papasito wrote: |
Both lenses have manual focus.
Which to buy?
Any experience to share? |
You know how many great MF lenses you could buy for that money 😜 |
Thank you, Casper79.
As almost all of us, I have used a lot of great MF lenses. And I continue to do so.
In the little market of used lenses in Argentina/Uruguay, is more difficult to find a very good 135 mm F/1,8 or F/2 than a Sony 135/1,8 GM, that Sony sell at very good price and with stock.
Here, a good Planar 50/1,4 or distagon 35/1,4 in C/Y are practically impossible to find, while Sony offer their 50/1,4 or 35/1,4 with stock at very reasonable price.
In all cases, are very good MF lenses, and very good Sony lenses too.
As we know, the Sony 135/1,8 is a mervelous gem.
In my experience, the Sony 35/1,4 no so good. But the 20/1,8 G and the 24/1,4 GM are very good ones.
There are excellent MF lenses, V.Gr. THe 100 and 150 apochromat Kinoptic Paris lenses, the Canon L 200/1,8, The Leica apochromat 280/2 R, some Zeiss, Nikkor, etc. But I can't find them in nice price.
So, Sony lenses, you are welcome!!! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
papasito
Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1658
|
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2021 9:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
papasito wrote:
visualopsins wrote: |
https://www.dxomark.com/sony-carl-zeiss-planar-t-fe-50mm-f-1-4-za-lens-review/ |
Thank you, Visualopsins, very much. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
papasito
Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1658
|
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2021 9:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
papasito wrote:
hasenbein wrote: |
DXOmark is crap.
But rest assured, the 50 1.4 is a really great lens. |
Many thanks hasenbein. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Blazer0ne
Joined: 12 Sep 2018 Posts: 836
Expire: 2024-12-07
|
Posted: Tue Jan 12, 2021 1:31 am Post subject: Re: Sony 55/1,8 vs. Zeiss 50/1,4 |
|
|
Blazer0ne wrote:
...
Last edited by Blazer0ne on Tue Feb 22, 2022 6:08 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
papasito
Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1658
|
Posted: Tue Jan 12, 2021 1:57 pm Post subject: Re: Sony 55/1,8 vs. Zeiss 50/1,4 |
|
|
papasito wrote:
Blazer0ne wrote: |
papasito wrote: |
caspert79 wrote: |
papasito wrote: |
Both lenses have manual focus.
Which to buy?
Any experience to share? |
You know how many great MF lenses you could buy for that money 😜 |
Thank you, Casper79.
As almost all of us, I have used a lot of great MF lenses. And I continue to do so.
In the little market of used lenses in Argentina/Uruguay, is more difficult to find a very good 135 mm F/1,8 or F/2 than a Sony 135/1,8 GM, that Sony sell at very good price and with stock.
Here, a good Planar 50/1,4 or distagon 35/1,4 in C/Y are practically impossible to find, while Sony offer their 50/1,4 or 35/1,4 with stock at very reasonable price.
In all cases, are very good MF lenses, and very good Sony lenses too.
As we know, the Sony 135/1,8 is a mervelous gem.
In my experience, the Sony 35/1,4 no so good. But the 20/1,8 G and the 24/1,4 GM are very good ones.
There are excellent MF lenses, V.Gr. THe 100 and 150 apochromat Kinoptic Paris lenses, the Canon L 200/1,8, The Leica apochromat 280/2 R, some Zeiss, Nikkor, etc. But I can't find them in nice price.
So, Sony lenses, you are welcome!!! |
If you can find a Fuji XF 50mm f1.0 WR I will say yes to that. Then buy a Fujifilm camera for a little more. Have it that way. I think you won't be disappointed. Then try their 90mm f2. |
Here, now, I can't find them. But when I can do it, I will.
Thank you Blazer0ne |
|
Back to top |
|
|
justtorchit
Joined: 12 Oct 2009 Posts: 269 Location: St. Louis, MO
|
Posted: Tue Jan 12, 2021 5:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
justtorchit wrote:
I don't have experience with the Sony 50/1.4 but do with the 55/1.8 (Zeiss, right?). I feel this lens is over-priced for its performance. Sharpness is great to be certain. But the chromatic aberration is atrocious. I can't believe they were OK with this thing, given all the competition out there. While it's lovely in size, I could not justify using it over my other 50mm lenses after looking at the results. The Sigma 50/1.4 Art bested it. The Nikon Z 50/1.8 S bested it. If you've got that kind of money burning a hole in your pocket and want manual focus, may I suggest checking out the Voigtlander APO 50/2? I've no personal experience (yet...) but have heard it's a wonder.
I actually did a little comparison between the Zeiss 55/1.8 (via Techart TZE adapter), Sigma 50/1.4 Art (FTZ adapter), Nikon Z 50/1.8, and threw in the Contax G 45/2 (via fotodiox adapter) all shot on the Nikon Z 7. I understand the Sony's cameras do some in-camera correction for their lenses but I use an A7III at work and I still see lots of CA in my results. These are all wide open, and then with a tight, center-ish crop.
Nikon Z 50mm f/1.8 @ f/1.8
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art @ f/1.4
Sony Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 @ f/1.8
Contax G 45mm f/2 @ f/2
CROPS
Nikon Z 50mm f/1.8 @ f/1.8 (center crop)
Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art @ f/1.4 (center crop)
Sony Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 @ f/1.8 (center crop)
Contax G 45mm f/2 @ f/2 (center crop)
[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20211/big_2026_50mmComparisonContax45crop_1.jpg[/url] _________________ David
www.davidkovaluk.com - personal website
www.instagram.com/davidkovaluk
http://makingnottaking.blogspot.com/ - photoblog |
|
Back to top |
|
|
caspert79
Joined: 31 Oct 2010 Posts: 2901 Location: The Netherlands
|
Posted: Tue Jan 12, 2021 5:30 pm Post subject: Re: Sony 55/1,8 vs. Zeiss 50/1,4 |
|
|
caspert79 wrote:
papasito wrote: |
caspert79 wrote: |
papasito wrote: |
Both lenses have manual focus.
Which to buy?
Any experience to share? |
You know how many great MF lenses you could buy for that money 😜 |
Thank you, Casper79.
As almost all of us, I have used a lot of great MF lenses. And I continue to do so.
In the little market of used lenses in Argentina/Uruguay, is more difficult to find a very good 135 mm F/1,8 or F/2 than a Sony 135/1,8 GM, that Sony sell at very good price and with stock.
Here, a good Planar 50/1,4 or distagon 35/1,4 in C/Y are practically impossible to find, while Sony offer their 50/1,4 or 35/1,4 with stock at very reasonable price.
In all cases, are very good MF lenses, and very good Sony lenses too.
As we know, the Sony 135/1,8 is a mervelous gem.
In my experience, the Sony 35/1,4 no so good. But the 20/1,8 G and the 24/1,4 GM are very good ones.
There are excellent MF lenses, V.Gr. THe 100 and 150 apochromat Kinoptic Paris lenses, the Canon L 200/1,8, The Leica apochromat 280/2 R, some Zeiss, Nikkor, etc. But I can't find them in nice price.
So, Sony lenses, you are welcome!!! |
Yeah I know all about it. My family-in-law is Argentinian but live in Europe already for a while. My father-in-law’s Argentinian’s pension has been halved in a short time because of the bad economy. I’m glad the situation didn’t hit you too hard personally. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
papasito
Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1658
|
Posted: Tue Jan 12, 2021 6:03 pm Post subject: Re: Sony 55/1,8 vs. Zeiss 50/1,4 |
|
|
papasito wrote:
caspert79 wrote: |
papasito wrote: |
caspert79 wrote: |
papasito wrote: |
Both lenses have manual focus.
Which to buy?
Any experience to share? |
You know how many great MF lenses you could buy for that money 😜 |
Thank you, Casper79.
As almost all of us, I have used a lot of great MF lenses. And I continue to do so.
In the little market of used lenses in Argentina/Uruguay, is more difficult to find a very good 135 mm F/1,8 or F/2 than a Sony 135/1,8 GM, that Sony sell at very good price and with stock.
Here, a good Planar 50/1,4 or distagon 35/1,4 in C/Y are practically impossible to find, while Sony offer their 50/1,4 or 35/1,4 with stock at very reasonable price.
In all cases, are very good MF lenses, and very good Sony lenses too.
As we know, the Sony 135/1,8 is a mervelous gem.
In my experience, the Sony 35/1,4 no so good. But the 20/1,8 G and the 24/1,4 GM are very good ones.
There are excellent MF lenses, V.Gr. THe 100 and 150 apochromat Kinoptic Paris lenses, the Canon L 200/1,8, The Leica apochromat 280/2 R, some Zeiss, Nikkor, etc. But I can't find them in nice price.
So, Sony lenses, you are welcome!!! |
Yeah I know all about it. My family-in-law is Argentinian but live in Europe already for a while. My father-in-law’s Argentinian’s pension has been halved in a short time because of the bad economy. I’m glad the situation didn’t hit you too hard personally. |
Thank you.
Yes, Im a lowyer with 35 years of profession.
My best regards for you and your family. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|