Great video as always! I rented the Canon F1.2 for an event about 2 years ago. I loved it. But noticed the focus speed was purely “okay”. Wasn’t anything mind blowing. I was given the 50mm F1.8 RF lens about 12 months ago. All I can say about that thing is “wow!!” It’s sharp, hits the focus every time, great autofocus. Really impressive for 10% of the price of the 1.2.
I think because Mirrorless cameras are hybrid cameras, many people mainly use them for video work. thats why Nikon decided to design Z lenses to have minimum focus breathing. but yes if Nikon can produce a smaller and affordable lens without fixing focus breathing then it can be a good option.
@@youknowwho9247 it's not overpriced. It has a modern design that is sharp and contrasty right to the corners wide open. It's also weather sealed with a gasket at the mount. Yeah it's way more money than a typical nifty fifty, but it's way more capable as well. I like the design philosophy.
I would love to see Nikon make a smaller 50 1.2 😍 I love the lack of focus breathing for video but you have to respect the convenience of the Sony lens being so small
A fair analysis, but every photographer's ratings will differ. I would rate size and focus speed very high and could care less about focus breathing and coma (points for Sony). Moreover, I presume Nikon loss IQ (sharpness) points for "weak" corners. But this would not be a landscape lens for me, so I would value the extra "punchiness" of the Nikon more. Overall, if I were buying a 50mm 1.2, I'd probably opt for the Sony with Nikon my second choice (which is how these rankings came out but for different reasons). Since I'm not buying, I'll make do with my ultra-compact, throwaway "nifty fifty" Canon RF 50mm 1.8.
If you’re testing modern Sony lenses, you really need to update your A7RIII, as it really doesn’t take advantage of the current Sony lenses AF speed. That 50mm 1.2 GM focuses about 3x faster on a current Sony body than what your demonstration shows Edit: I just noticed you’re using AF-S. There’s basically no reason to use that as it’s contrast detect and much slower than AF-C
I love these comparisons! Truly excellent review. Some may say it's unnecessary to compare lenses across systems but I disagree! It's very useful for us coming from DSLR's and are choosing what mirrorless system to invest in!
As I thought all of them should be fantastic and a Benchmark of craftmanship !! Disappointed to know about the Canon build quality though Also I seriously think that Chirstopher should include Focus Breathing as one of the criteria for giving points. Its extremely useful to have such a lens for video work so as for macro work(stack)
Thanks, great video! I love these comparisons - we used to see more cross platform comparisons, and I for one would love to see these across more lens categories
please make more cross mount comparisons! mirrorless is still very new to a lot of people and comparing the lenses can help determine which system to buy into. plus these types of videos are simply just fun to watch.
Owned the Canon &the Sony, ended up w/the Sony. The Sony is smaller, lighter & is much steadier when focusing.The focus breathing assist is great too. You can feel canon’s glass move when focusing too. Sony was $1800 vs $2300 Canon
The Nikon 50mm 1.2 S lens looks very professionally built and will match the Nikon Z9 well. With the Nikon Z9, the Control Ring issue is a non issue as the response of the control ring can be tailored to a user's need.
Well, as a Nikon user you get the best of both worlds (Sony and Nikon). I have a Megadap ETZ adapter which works very well with my 14mm 1.8 GM Sony lens and I can basically get either the Sony or the Nikon 50mm 1.2. Autofocus speed does get a hit though with the adapted Sony lens. That said, and in this particular instance, I'd rather get the native lens as the main advantage of the Sony in terms of picture quality is in the corners which won't make much of a difference at the aperture of 1.2 in a portrait but in the center, where I'm most likely to frame my subject, the Nikon is definitely punchier.
Nice comparison, it just shows how far modern lenses have come, whatever camera system you might use, you just can't go wrong with any of the above F1.2 lenses above.
I love my RF 50mm f/1.2 L USM! I can't complain about the build quality. It feels solid and plastic could absorb hard hits better than metal (that can bend or break)... Together with the RF 85mm f/1.2 L USM both lenses are my daily workhorses for people photography on my R6 and R5 😍
Lens selection should be the first consideration, since they'll make up the biggest part of your camera budget eventually. Nikon and Canon who got a late start in ML, have come up with some very nice lenses. I like how Nikon chose to get a lot of f1.8 primes out quickly. Sony only has an advantage in the premium G and GM space, and with a lot of good third party choices.
Sony might have the high end advantage now, but… I think Canon and Nikon are eventually going to put class them. I know I personally prefer almost all of the Canon L stuff over Sony GM.
@@thisisbenji90 I can see Canon and Nikon ending up where this review ended up. With negligible differences in image quality and price. Sony might only have a size advantage. On the cheap end maybe third parties will see opportunities with Nikon and Canon as well?
If you plan on going cheap the Rf 35 and 50 1.8 are absolutely excelent, and the 85 f2 is also a strong performer. The 16 2.8 is a letdown due to the massive barrel distortion but i guess there will soon be alternatives to it.
The relative weight of the different elements' evaluation (ie Flaring) is very, very subjective: there are people that would not care at all about coma, others that love flares. Glad you showed them one by one. There are also more parameters to take into account: ergonomics, weight, diameter...You know already. Thanks a lot for all the reviews. Now time to improve composing.
Canon's focus breathing and loud AF might make it tricky to use for video or macro stacking. I hope in the future you can find a way to have controlled bokeh test. Maybe a static indoor scene?
Canon shooter here - I own the RF 50 1.2L and agree with what Chris has found - razor sharp quality, corner to corner and not the greatest suitability to video. If I didn’t need its sharpness across the frame in low light, I would have kept using my EF 50 1.2L or switched to an ART lens. I also think it is a bit overpriced and offers an opportunity to Sigma or Tamron should they choose to market an RF 50mm lens. I am however more than satisfied with its performance and will continue to select it above my RF 28-70 on shoots where I have the time to use it.
Hi Christopher - great video as always. I think you are fair, but I would add that when considering the lens for hybrid photography and video use the Nikon then wins hands down - as you pointed out, it has by far the least focus breathing (almost none) whereas both the others focus breath pretty badly. That said, if one is only using the lens for still photography, I think there is an argument to say the Sony is the best choice in that it is the smallest, lightest, and cheapest with the fastest AF. However, if one is into hybrid photography and videography, then the Nikon is clearly the best. Nikon has stated that they are designing their lenses withy hybrid use in mind - clearly Sony and Canon are not. Also the lens design pf the Nikon is superior to the Sony as it displays much less distortion when not corrected meaning there will be a truer 50mm when using this lens as it will need less cropping and stretching to correct the distortion. So as always, this is a use case issue - but for me the Nikon takes the prize being the best built, the best optically without correction (on par with Canon and better than Sony), and the only one with almost no focus breathing. Of course, weight and size don't matter to me as I only use this lens for pro portraiture work preferring the much smaller and lighter Nikon 1.8 S version for events and weddings. As you state, however, it is clear that all three of these lenses are spectacular and all should be praised - I know I would be happy with any of them, and I am definitely happy with the Nikon which I have been using since it was released. Anyway, great video and comparison as always - love your reviews! :)
Lens selection was originally not a factor in my choice of camera system - I started out with a Sony NEX-5N in 2012, and planned on using the kit lens for my purposes. I simply went with where the most interesting technology was at from my point of view. Nowadays, it would absolutely be a major factor in my choice if I was starting from scratch.
as I own sony and canon... I still love canon the most out of all 50mm lenses to date. I still own: sony 50mm 1.2, Zony 50mm 1.4, Zony 55mm 1.8, Canon 50mm 1.2 (rf), Canon 50mm 1.4 (ef), Canon 50mm 1.8 (mark I and II) EF, Leica Summilux 50mm 1.4 (m mount - silver and new retro design), Leica 50mm 1.4 (version ii), Leica summicron rigid 50mm f2, Voightlander M mount 50mm APO, Konica 50mm f2 m mount, Fujifilm x mount 35mm 1.4, Fuji GF mount 63mm f2.8, Mitakon 65mm 1.4. Out of all those lenses I find rf50mm 1.2 the best, second is my black summilux and third might be sony 50mm 1.2. Subjective rating of lenses from in use perspective, bokeh and sharpness and general rendering.
It's a very good video and really nice of you to test 3 different brands, I'm just a bit disappointed that you haven't included focus breathing rating since you clearly tested it. Nikon is bulkier for a reason - they've focused their efforts on producing the line of lens for the Z system with almost no focus breathing, and that's a fairly big deal!
@@hofra01 I guess that all depends on your definition of “crazy” crop. The Sony 50mm is already slightly wider than the other two, likely by design for this exact reason. It’s possible that adding a (by my definition “slight”) crop to the Sony lens actually brings it more in-line with the focal length of the Canon and Nikon lenses. In any event, a crop of zero-to-maybe 1.15 is certainly not “crazy”, especially when it completely eliminates the effect of focus breathing for video.
@@jamiesondean well if I would by a 50mm I want it to be 50mm not so more not so less. I would also rather have a bigger lens prime lens that does both video and photo perfectly than have a small lens that is only useful for photos and pretty much acts like a mini zoom lens “horrific focus breathing” when using video. So nope, even if I was a Sony user I most definitely forget about this lens. I use all my lenses for videos and photos.
It has tons of distortion so can never reach the maximum resolution of the camera it is mounted on... That's the nature of distortion correction on digital cameras. When you think about it, a 50mm with distortion is pretty stupid.
Sacrificing some distortion to win on other parameters is popular for MILC and integrated cameras as post-processing corrections are on by default both in camera itself and in editing software.
@@bigbelly3564 Tons of distortion? Lol you have no idea what a real distortion is! That's a tamed pincution distortion which is pretty useful in portraits by flattening the face more and the 50mm focal will have a look a bit closer to the 85mm. I see it as a plus in this case cause these lenses use case will be mainly portraits.
@@networm64 Just admit it is flawed and that is why it is cheaper. If you want the most high-end natural fall off to OOF areas, you need to have the least amount of distortion correction. Not a lot of people understand this concept, mostly Leica shooters do, that is what Leica was known for, perfect fall off.
@@bigbelly3564 Oh sorry I didn't know I'm talking to someone which their utopia is the Leica brand world! I just love the Sony's flawed lens way more than Canon's flawed lens and Nikon's flawed lens in this case!
If you shoot Canon: get the Canon If you shoot Nikon: get the Nikon If you shoot Sony: get the Sony 🤷🏿♂️ I shoot Nikon and I own the 50mm 1.2 just a perfect lens for my needs. Overall a good review
Thanks for the review. I own both Nikon and Canon for sports. I think you should include T stop or exact camera settings. In the coma test, the exposures look very different to me. Losing a 1/3 to 1/2 stop could mean the difference between ISO 12k or higher which is a big deal.
The announcement of Nikon's 40mm f2 has actually got me eyeing full frame again almost singlehandedly at this point after switching down to APS-C and then MFT a few years ago. 40mm is my preferred walkabout, single lens focal length, and I just didn't have a satisfactory option back when I shot on my Nikon D600 - a Z6 with that 40mm would be everything I could ever want out of an everyday shooter package, and their 24-70 f4 with its collapsable design measures just about as big as my Olympus 12-40 f2.8 does currently on MFT. Now the only thing they need is an f4 or other, reasonable non-"pro" aperture tele zoom with a similar principle behind it and I really will have no choice but to switch back over to Nikon. After some saving up for about half a year or so, of course.
@@ASMROW That also looks great, though if I can get full frame at the same footprint and much less (at least for the lens), I don't really see the point in sticking if I can get myself the extra bokeh and high ISO performance - the AF improvements are nice too, but honestly secondary. The OM lens is only available new for 700€, the Nikon at 280€. It's difficult to justify the difference, even if the OM lens does of course look beautiful. Since I wouldn't be using any proper big and heavy glass anyway of the new Z lineup, I'm really just thinking this may be the time to switch now. Better low light, better AF, the option of more background isolation from less specialised glass.. it's just all falling into place where it makes sense, and the second hand market is looking great for a Z6 these days - and I can imagine I'd be shooting more adapted glass again, vintage 50s and 135s especially.
Jenny - the 40mm f/2 Nikon lens is incredible - a great value for the money - I owe and use (both professionally and personally) all the Nikon S line primes (except the 58mm 0.95 Noct) and I can honestly say I love shooting with the 40mm f/2 - it is not an S line lens and it is not as technically perfect, but it is small, and light with great IQ and some real character - a perfect walking around or take it where ever you are going lens. Highly recommended!
I think FOCUS BREATHING should be a mark point, for videographers is something critical. Much more important than a bit of sharpness in the corner. Thank you for this fantastic video and comparison. 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
I really like your reviews, only one thing I disagree with you is on the build quality of RF mount L lenses. I find them solid well made and I welcome the solid plastic over the metal EF lenses. I own two of them and their build quality is flawless - no problem whatsoever with them
Chris, did you do a comparison like this for the 24-105mm standard zooms? That is such a useful lens design for everyday use and for travel that it would be very interesting to see how the big three compare.
Wow I managed to get my RF 50 1.2 for 1789€. Ok there is an official price but these things are so expensive that it's worth waiting a while to find a good deal.
I have used both the Sony and the Canon higher end mirrorless cameras. My background was shooting film for over a decade on Nikons and then moving to the Canon 5D Mark II and then the EOS R and now R5. Sony makes an extremely technologically advanced camera, but it just does not feel natural to use like the Canon. It literally feels like you're holding a small computer that just happens to take photos. The Canon, on the other hand, feels like a real DSLR or film camera of old. The menus are more intuitive, the grip feels far better. It's just a superior user experience, ergonomically, so to me the RF 50mm f/1.2 is the way to go. I might also add that if you can't take the pictures you need in any of these higher end mirrorless systems, you've got bigger problems than the trivialities with these lenses lol
We're all different and I'm glad there are different brands and different design philosophies (though I honestly have no idea how a camera could feel like 'a small computer' in the hand). My only contact with Canon bodies is the 7D. It felt pretty good in the hand, though very large and a bit plasticky. Clunky. The A9 I have now feels slightly more solid and it's smaller, which I like. Both are, in terms of "perceived solidity", nowhere near the Canon 7 that I shoot b+w with occasionally. Its selenium cell still kinda works, 50 yrs later.
1:53 Lens Rental has torn down all the Canon lenses and report the quality and strength is fantastic. They achieve it with outer materials that may feel "plasticky" but are in fact used in military-spec gear. My four-year-old RF 50/1.2 has been in my backpack every time I leave the house and it literally looks brand new. (I'm not a fanboy, by the way, and wish they put the full lens spec in brighter white on the barrel so I could reach for the correct lens faster. Also, the alignment dots for mounting should be much easier to see.)
Agreed. The entire difference in scores from canon to Nikon is in the very subjective Build Quality area, and as you note, the internals of this lens are extremely well built. Seems Christopher just doesn’t like the feel of the outer plastic shell. I understand that feeling, but it really doesn’t have anything to do with actual build quality.
The lens selection does play a major part for me. As a hobbyist, having a variety to try and settle on what I like is so important. That's why I enjoyed the Sony system for many years. Right now I am using a Fuji XE4 after a gap. The reason I left Fuji earlier was due to their restriction of lens licences to other third parties, except Zeiss in the beginning. I am now thinking of getting a full frame system again. Love canon colours but there isn't much choice and most of their lenses are huuugeee.. Might get into Sony again or panasonic.
Long time viewer, first time poster. Truly I am a fan, not so much a fanboy. Unless you count Pepsi Crystal! 👀 So first let me say thank you for all the work you do in producing these videos. Second... spill the beans on your supplier, man!
Sony is really setting the bar with these new GM primes. I hope that will update their zooms as well, those seems to be lacking when compared with competition.
Cristopher why you mentioned that Canon made from plastic? It’s magnesium alloy but not plastic. Maybe you have to explore deeper Cabon technology. I faced with same mistake with headphones review of Meze Lyric. It also made from magnesium alloy, but very often it was confused with plastic.
Why not include distortion in your scoring criteria? Because it's easily corrected in post? Thought you would also want to include autofocus performance there too. Either way, great comparison!
Lens selection is key to the system decision. Nikon Z can smartadapt Sony E. So I could buy into the Z system, using the Zony 35mm f1.4 - a luminous 35mm is what I need for like 90% of social & urban shots. For outdoors I use SLRs, I need battery life that is still available in serious frost.
Btw by now I own a Z5 with the Zeiss- labelled Sony f1.4 35mm. Guess AF- performance would be better with the F-mount Sigma art luminous 35mm. The FTZ-Adapter, I own 2 for my 2 Z-body, so the combo would have been cheaper! Or the Tamron with the similar specs, reviewed even more positively. Or I could use the techart smart-adapter with another Sony lens I own and mount the Zony on a A7 body. All this options might mean a more reasonable use of my existing fear. However right now I like just that suggested combo! Without any intention to change a thing
I shot quite a bit with the RF 50mm 1.2 and I agree that the build quality feels somewhat cheap compared to other RF L lenses. But you really can‘t fault the optics of this lens, it‘s pretty much perfectly sharp. What I found interesting in the video are the really nice sunstars even at f2 of the Canon. But I must say the Nikon would be the lens to go for video, the minimal amount of focus breathing is impressive for this kind of lens.
The Z bokeh seemed busier but had the plus of having smooth transitions unlike the Sony one which had a clear bokeh walls akin to the fast Sigma Art. A strong factor when shooting subjects in continuous plane shifts.
.. oddly enough I bought into the Sony brand in case I wanted to try out old legacy lenses ...it would be fun to have thrown a red herring in the review such as the Micro Nikkor 55 mm 2.8..for a humble price tag of $50...
I think it’s worth mentioning that the weight of the Nikon is largely due to its video capability and lack of focus breathing which you did point but neglected to score. However, that said whatever system you’ve bought into there is truly some excellent glass out there for everyone but I certainly wouldn’t solely base my camera purchase on lens choice alone and for me ergonomics plays a massive role. No camera or lens is perfect, it’s how many boxes it ticks based on your own needs and you can see this by the very close overall scores.
Sony really designed their lens by optimizing everything and sacrificing one single point - focus breathing, which is deliberately left off the design brief. There is good reason behind this seeming madness - they have now started auto-correcting focus breathing in camera whilst shooting video. Maybe one day focus breathing will be used as a sacrificial parameter across many more makes as they pick up in-camera auto-correction for it, to improve weight, size, and other parameters.
I use the Canon System and was looking into the RF 50 1.2. Even though the image looks amazing, the autofocus isn't really convincing. I'll be waiting for an RF 50 1.4 L with fast autofocus, meanwhile I got the RF 50 1.8 for fun and the RF 85 1.2 for serious stuff.
Looks like the sony is going light and small with any problems, like distortion, focus breathing and vignetting handled by the camera corrections, and Nikon is trying to get all of them right in the lens at the expense of size and weight. Canon as they always do just embraces the imperfections as part of "Canon look".
I own the Nikon one. It's huge and heavy but won't be such a big problem when you have an extended grip like the Z-GR1. Have to say it's the best Z lens I've used and its special character reminds me of the 58 1.4g but definitely a lot sharper. I would sacrifice some focus breathing for smaller size like the Sony one. But ofc, you won't regret getting any of the three, just depending on which system you are shooting, and I don't think any of them worths switching system as they nearly as good, not like say, RF 85 1.2 DS or Noct, that worths moving to another mount if you want them.
That RF 85 1.2 DS is really an F/2. I'm curious to see what Nikon and Sony produce this year in the 85mm 1.2 arena. This 50mm 1.2 reminds me of my 200 F/2. Only reason I'm still shooting Nikon.
"All three are from different and incompatible systems" Nikon Z can use Sony FE lenses; I use the Sony 50mm GM daily on my Nikon Z8 with Megadap 21 Pro. The combo focuses faster than most native Nikon Z and Canon RF lenses I own. Fringer is also great for EF to Z like the EF 85mm f/1.2 -> Z8
I chose the body first then scratch around for the best lenses I can afford. I think this is probably the wrong way around as there is no way I would spend $2000+ on a single prime lens so I am unlikely to get the results pros get. I would probably be better off buying the lens first and then finding a cheap low spec or second hand body to match it.
1.8 or 1.4 primes can get the job done for a fraction of the 1.2 price. I personally will be going for a used 50mm Sigma art lens, which sells for 400€ at my pro retailer. I think he did a comparison between the 1.2 RF and the sigma art, and the difference was not huge, definitly not worth 2000 extra €
Now, they need to make 50 1.4 lenses that have still good image quality, but use some software correction to achieve below 500g of weight and below 1000 .- in price.
Every manufacturer is cutting corners with basically all of their lenses. Otherwise they would be twice as expensive. The real question here is which corners are you willing to cut
U can see the reviewer already biased by not mentiong canon during the sharpness test, he mentioned canon starting at the flaring, when Canon get the most flaring out of those two and not even bother to praise canon on the sharpness test tsk
The breathing is digitally corrected meaning that the frame is cropped so you are not getting a true 50mm - this kind of correction is not for professionals
I love these three lenses being compared. and you did a good job in this video, but I think more catagories could've been part of the scoring, like ( focusing speed ) ( size and weight ) color and contrast ) and two catagories of Bokeh, one being the quality of the blur, and the other being bokeh balls. and overall value for money. for me personally size and weight is a big one, and if all three lenses are close to equal in image quality, the smaller and lighter one wins by a landslide. and for some reason Sony got this when they designed there 50GM, and Canon went double the size and weight of there old DSLR 50 f1.2 and Nikon really went insane with the size and weight. and what amazes me is that with all the talk going around about the bigger lens mounts of Canon and Nikon was going to give them the ability to make better and smaller lenses than Sony's smaller mount. and so far none of that has come true. and if you ask me, I think the bigger lens mount is part of the reason all there new top glass is so big. because it has to be fatter at the base of the lens where it mounts to the camera. so all there designs have to start off with a size disadvantage. just look how huge and heavy the new Canon 85 L is, and I hate to think how heavy the new Nikon 85 f1.2 is going to be. Sigma had the right idea when they made there new 85 Art FE mount like half the size and weight of there first generation 85 art. and with equal image quality. and that brings me to one more subject. which is that Nikon and Canon don't open up there mount to 3rd party manufactures like Sony does. and I don't understand why. I think they are losing customers to Sony because Sony has so many good 3rd party lens options from Tamron, Sigma, Samyang. and Canon and Nikon have almost none. the only less expensive options Canon and Nikon have is using there DSLR glass with an adaptor. and I don't say all of this as a Sony fanboy, I still own my old Nikon and Canon DSLR's.
Probably nikon amd canon don't want sigma or tamron to make lenses for their mounts is cos either the 3rd party lens makers are not paying canon or nikon whatever amount for royalty or canon or nikon are asking too much money. Think of it from a manufacturer's standpoint. Why would you let a competitor make money by making products for your own camera without any monetary gain. I'm sure Sony is getting paid by all the 3rd party companies for making lens for their camera mounts.
@@Prabhu_njd Of course Sony makes money from companies like Tamron. but the real financial benefit to Sony collaborating with 3rd party manufacturers is that the 3rd party glass is getting people to buy into the Sony system. and once they buy the camera they are a Sony shooter. who will be buying Sony glass for years. and then another Sony camera and another Sony camera.
As a canon shooter most normal focal range lenses are rather huge tbh. I like the 28-70mm for what it is but carrying that thing around isnt fun. Its great to finally see a 35mm f1.4 that seems reasonably sized but we still need more mid range f1.4/f1.8 lenses. Problem is that it takes canon forever to fill the gaps. They focus more on exotic lenses like the 24-105 f2.8 and 200-800mm. I wouldnt even mind the closed off mount if they atleast made their own lenses in that space. At the same time the long end lenses are super light for what they offer. 100-500mm is my favourite wildlife lens.
The lens ecosystem should be one of the most important points of choosing one system over another. While the Sony bodies might not everyone's ergonomic cup of tea, it's hard to fault their overall lens lineup and especially the breath of 3rd party lens available for the E-Mount. Sure the L and S lenses are nice and all but the price of most of them are not attainable for most non-working photographers.
i have an idea. lets overlay a grid with zero distortion in a different color over the distortet fotos of the grid. this way, the distorting effect becomes more visible
I'm a Sony shooter and own the 50mm GM and its an absolute masterpiece, paired with the A7RIV the detail it produces is glorious. I feel though focus breathing breathing and AF should have been categories as well but perhaps the same result would have been reached in the end.
The Nikon lens is the better lens for hybrid photo/video shooters due to the focus breathing issue - there is no comparison. For still the Sony lens is very nice - just depends on use case (as always haha)
@@baronsilverton6504 If doing focus pulls then yes but for other style of content where subjects aren’t moving much the focus breathing won’t matter at all. Bear in mind that Nikon don’t have any cine cameras which is going to be of far larger importance to video-shooters.
@@joe2snj I understand your point and in some cases I agree. That said - hard core film makers always use focus pulls so I think this is an important issue. Also, hybrid shooters, which represent more and more of the stills market, want video to excel - as such, the Z9 is really the king for now. I fully expect Sony and Canon to respond in kind and as always all three of them make stellar products. It really doesn't matter which you shoot today - if you are any good then you can make great work with any of them. I shoot Nikon professionally, and have for used Nikon's for over 30 years. Although I have used both the Canon RF system as well as the Sony E mount system. For me the Nikon system is my choice - build quality is superior and when they release things they work - not like the R5 over heating problems etc. The Z mount lenses are among the best in the business - I can (and have) put them against other lenses - both RF and E mounts and others, and the fully stack up and often surpass the competitors - also the bulk of the Z line is designed specifically for hybrid shooting with limited to no focus breathing - not true of RF and E mount lenses. Again, much of this is a matter of choice but this notion that Nikon is inferior or somehow does not stack up to Sony and Canon is a false narrative at this point - and those of us in the field that have used them all know this very well. But again, they are all great and they have different strengths and weaknesses so some of this (much of it) just depends on use case. Happy New Year :)
@@baronsilverton6504 I didn’t say Nikon was inferior but in terms of video use not many opt for Nikon as they haven’t taken video seriously up until now. The Z9 sure has amazing video specs but its larger size and weight will put many off for gimbal work even though it shoots up to 8K. So does the A1 and for those that will are more interested in 4K but want/need smaller bodies Sony and Canon have plenty of options. Hardcore filmmakers will be often be using dedicated cine cameras and cine lenses but yes its true that hybrid shooters value lenses with minimal focus breathing. Sony choose an approach that prioritises making their lenses smaller, lighter while providing excellent image quality. Personally I like that as I’m a stills only shooter and I don’t want bigger and heavier glass. As for Z glass often surpassing the competition in head to head comparisons it’s not often Z lenses that are coming out on top.
As a sony user I think it's a little unfair to not include that focus breathing into the chart. Granted that mostly affects video people like me but still.
I think the build quality is subjective, as all 3 are both engineered to be very durable. I greatly prefer plastic lens exteriors to cut down weight. Canon's flaring is definitely worse than the others (But hoods resolve this mostly). I think the sony is a better deal than the canon. I think at this point your choice should come down only to what body you have. Switching systems to pick the better 50 1.2 is insane.
Not too surprising a result. On the plus side... Nikon has announced if you buy the 85mm f/1.2 at the same time as the 50mm f/1.2...they'll throw in a wheelbarrow.
Hi Chris - another knit picky comment from me, but I feel it should be said: Ironically it is not the case that none of these offerings are available across systems. Since the recording of this video, the Nikon Z camera system can adapt the Sony lenses with the Metadap adaptor - and with the newer version 2 adapter at near native functionality! Furthermore, in theory, the Nikon will also be able to adapt RF lenses (at some point when someone makes an adapter). However, the same is not true for the others. The Sony and Canon will never be able to adapt Nikon lenses due to the Z mounts superior and shorter flange distance. Another win for Nikon. Also, and I think I mentioned this before, the final tally of scores did not include focus breathing, which is a very important category (especially for video work) and the Nikon was clearly superior to both the other lenses in this regard - I wonder if the Nikon would have beaten the Sony had this category been included. Still, I could not agree with your conclusion more - any of these lenses in someone's camera bag would be more than welcome as they all ultimately produce spectacular images! -PD
There’s always some negative with post corrections. Beside you can correct for vignette, distortion, chromatic aberration, even sharpness to a certain extent. Makes you think if it’s even worth spending extra money for these lux lenses.
Yes and when they digitally correct the focus breathing they are cropping the shot so you no longer are getting the true focal length - this is a jury rigged solution to the problem of the small E mount diameter - a problem that will haunt the Sony system more and more as lens design is pushed by Canon and Nikon with their superior mounts. The Sony E mount was originally made for APSC cameras and that limitation is starting to show - it will show more and more as we move forward as evidenced by their digital corrections - proves they cannot compensate with the optics so we now know the mount is reaching its limits.
@@baronsilverton6504 Wow, how desperate do you have to be for abandoning all logic like this? The Sony lens is by far the smallest and lightest here, with the best af and sharpest rendering and you still go on about the mount idea that's been disproven already? Focus breathing has nothing to do with that, you just need a big stupid lens like the nikkor to correct for it.
Very nice comparison! Thank you! I am mostly a Canon shooter, however they really messed up here imho. The build quality of that RF 50 is absolutely horrendous for that price tag. Sure it does extend outwards during focusing but why the hell does it have to retract inwards... Leaving a nice big opening for dust, dirt and water to go inside the lens. My Sigma EF 50mm 1.4 Art is built like a tank and even if I drop it I can still buy 3 of it for the cost of a single new native RF version. IQ is very close too. Certainly not enough for 3x price difference. I hope third party manufacturers like Sigma (and Tamron) will speed up their RF production plans.
It's probably like many other Canon L lenses, including the old EF 50mm f/1.2, which require you to fit a front filter to complete the weather sealing. Check the instruction manual. I have that EF, and have used it in a rainstorm with the filter, with no problems. You don't typically need to use other filters like polarisers with a fast 50 , so it's not an inconvenience to have a clear filter always fitted. It might be an extra cost, though.
@@francisernens1795 any piece of glass fitted in-front of the lens reduces quality and the transmission of light. Period. Filters are not manufactured according to Canon or Sigma quality norms and material spec even the likes of Hoya, NISI, Polar Pro etc. It's very funny idea to ask a customer to put a filter on a premium lens to get it fully sealed. I use only ND / Polarisers when I have to, but generally do not use any filters permanently on my lenses - Sigma 50A, 24-35A, 70-200S, 150-600C. Front elements are robust enough take a bit abuse. If I drop it a filter will not save the lens. So why even bother in the first place :)
@@ILasaroff I don't think you understand - I'm not saying you should always fit filters to all lenses. Some Canon lenses are weather sealed without, for example the EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 II. But some say right there in the instruction book that they are not, for example every 16-35mm L zoom Canon have made for at least the last decade. And you can see just by looking at the lens that they are not. This RF lens is one of those, and it's nothing unusual for Canon.
@@ILasaroffhaving watched comparison videos and photos there is pretty much zero impact on image quality from filters. Yes, technically it adds another element between the sensor and subject but in real world scenarios a decent clear filter wont degrade the final image enough that its even noticable while pixel peeping. Even 45mp wont render those flaws. Its one of those things that alot of people use as an argument without doing their own tests and research. Similar to claiming low res camera bodies having better iso performance when in reality a high mp will still give you more detail at the same iso.
Minor point. The Sony lens is fully compatible with Nikon Z cameras, so Nikon users are totally fine buying it and using it. I think that would be a valid point to bring up since Nikonites have the Z lens and Sony lens choice now.
Thanks Christopher I bet it was hard to pick faults with any of the 3 lenses but as a Canon owner lol I have heard that the focus on the RF is loud from another tubers that use it. I dont own one so cant comment I went for the RF28-70 F2 instead , well done to Sony even with the smaller mount
There is almost 0% chance I own any of those in the nmext 30 years, yet I watch.
Great work as always!
If you say so it comes true
7:47 Canon clearly wins here because the lens is able to translate the text.
😂😂😂😂😂
lol ya it uses AI software
😂😂😂😂😂 😂😂😂😂😂
It doesn’t unfortunately it has quite a bit flaring issue
@@faisalghiar wooooooooooooosh
Great video as always! I rented the Canon F1.2 for an event about 2 years ago. I loved it. But noticed the focus speed was purely “okay”. Wasn’t anything mind blowing.
I was given the 50mm F1.8 RF lens about 12 months ago. All I can say about that thing is “wow!!” It’s sharp, hits the focus every time, great autofocus. Really impressive for 10% of the price of the 1.2.
Very fair comparison, I own the Z 50 1.2 and agree with the assessment above. Maybe focus breathing could have been another category :-).
I think because Mirrorless cameras are hybrid cameras, many people mainly use them for video work. thats why Nikon decided to design Z lenses to have minimum focus breathing. but yes if Nikon can produce a smaller and affordable lens without fixing focus breathing then it can be a good option.
@@JaspreetSinghArtist the Z 50mm 1.8 S is smaller and affordable with no focus breathing.
@@Brownwhale7 It's also a full stop slower and way overpriced for such a slow prime.
@@youknowwho9247 you are obsessed.
@@youknowwho9247 it's not overpriced. It has a modern design that is sharp and contrasty right to the corners wide open. It's also weather sealed with a gasket at the mount. Yeah it's way more money than a typical nifty fifty, but it's way more capable as well. I like the design philosophy.
Another category could be “weight and handling” 😂 that Nikon is a chungus XD. Love how they handled the focus breathing though!
nikon is larger and heavier to tackle focus breathing
You prefer plastic lenses? At least Nikon give its users superb professional grade 1.8 lenses too.
@@HossDiaph You realize that nikons 1.2 is nearly 30% heavier right? that's all I'm getting at lol I don't own any of the three.
@@Kaisolostudio Great that you get more for your money!
@@lcador9 literally 😂
I would love to see Nikon make a smaller 50 1.2 😍 I love the lack of focus breathing for video but you have to respect the convenience of the Sony lens being so small
The size is probably the due price for removing focus breathing.
@@serena-yu exactly 💯
sony did add focus breathing compensation on their new camera's that get rid of it but it does punch it in a little bit
The Nikon 50mm 1.8 is smaller and also has almost zero focus breathing.
A fair analysis, but every photographer's ratings will differ. I would rate size and focus speed very high and could care less about focus breathing and coma (points for Sony). Moreover, I presume Nikon loss IQ (sharpness) points for "weak" corners. But this would not be a landscape lens for me, so I would value the extra "punchiness" of the Nikon more. Overall, if I were buying a 50mm 1.2, I'd probably opt for the Sony with Nikon my second choice (which is how these rankings came out but for different reasons). Since I'm not buying, I'll make do with my ultra-compact, throwaway "nifty fifty" Canon RF 50mm 1.8.
If you’re testing modern Sony lenses, you really need to update your A7RIII, as it really doesn’t take advantage of the current Sony lenses AF speed. That 50mm 1.2 GM focuses about 3x faster on a current Sony body than what your demonstration shows
Edit: I just noticed you’re using AF-S. There’s basically no reason to use that as it’s contrast detect and much slower than AF-C
I love these comparisons! Truly excellent review. Some may say it's unnecessary to compare lenses across systems but I disagree! It's very useful for us coming from DSLR's and are choosing what mirrorless system to invest in!
Im staying with Sony for a long time as I own an a1. I just find the comparisons across systems interesting, and enjoyable to watch.
As I thought all of them should be fantastic and a Benchmark of craftmanship !! Disappointed to know about the Canon build quality though
Also I seriously think that Chirstopher should include Focus Breathing as one of the criteria for giving points. Its extremely useful to have such a lens for video work so as for macro work(stack)
Thanks, great video! I love these comparisons - we used to see more cross platform comparisons, and I for one would love to see these across more lens categories
please make more cross mount comparisons! mirrorless is still very new to a lot of people and comparing the lenses can help determine which system to buy into. plus these types of videos are simply just fun to watch.
Owned the Canon &the Sony, ended up w/the Sony. The Sony is smaller, lighter & is much steadier when focusing.The focus breathing assist is great too. You can feel canon’s glass move when focusing too. Sony was $1800 vs $2300 Canon
The Nikon 50mm 1.2 S lens looks very professionally built and will match the Nikon Z9 well. With the Nikon Z9, the Control Ring issue is a non issue as the response of the control ring can be tailored to a user's need.
Well, as a Nikon user you get the best of both worlds (Sony and Nikon). I have a Megadap ETZ adapter which works very well with my 14mm 1.8 GM Sony lens and I can basically get either the Sony or the Nikon 50mm 1.2. Autofocus speed does get a hit though with the adapted Sony lens. That said, and in this particular instance, I'd rather get the native lens as the main advantage of the Sony in terms of picture quality is in the corners which won't make much of a difference at the aperture of 1.2 in a portrait but in the center, where I'm most likely to frame my subject, the Nikon is definitely punchier.
It's cuz he used an R2 or R3. If he used an R4 .. it's super sharp/punchier
@@Zakna It's a fair comparison when three cameras are at around 40mp
@Yamen Zein Nice to hear that the 14mm lens work well. May I ask if the adapter performs consistently well with the 14gm when shooting time lapse?
@@chanjeff4406 I actually haven't tried time-lapse.
Nice comparison, it just shows how far modern lenses have come, whatever camera system you might use, you just can't go wrong with any of the above F1.2 lenses above.
I love my RF 50mm f/1.2 L USM! I can't complain about the build quality. It feels solid and plastic could absorb hard hits better than metal (that can bend or break)...
Together with the RF 85mm f/1.2 L USM both lenses are my daily workhorses for people photography on my R6 and R5 😍
Lens selection should be the first consideration, since they'll make up the biggest part of your camera budget eventually. Nikon and Canon who got a late start in ML, have come up with some very nice lenses. I like how Nikon chose to get a lot of f1.8 primes out quickly. Sony only has an advantage in the premium G and GM space, and with a lot of good third party choices.
Sony might have the high end advantage now, but… I think Canon and Nikon are eventually going to put class them. I know I personally prefer almost all of the Canon L stuff over Sony GM.
@@thisisbenji90 I can see Canon and Nikon ending up where this review ended up. With negligible differences in image quality and price. Sony might only have a size advantage. On the cheap end maybe third parties will see opportunities with Nikon and Canon as well?
If you plan on going cheap the Rf 35 and 50 1.8 are absolutely excelent, and the 85 f2 is also a strong performer.
The 16 2.8 is a letdown due to the massive barrel distortion but i guess there will soon be alternatives to it.
@@thisisbenji90 your loss buddy
Merry Christmas to you all, Chris! Yet another excellent review!
Thank you for the great review. Something I rarely see tested, but useful to know it a T-stop comparison
I'm not sure that the tests on the Canon in the dark truly compare with the others because it looks to me like the Canon has a brighter exposure.
No the sony has brighter exposer from use.
The relative weight of the different elements' evaluation (ie Flaring) is very, very subjective: there are people that would not care at all about coma, others that love flares. Glad you showed them one by one. There are also more parameters to take into account: ergonomics, weight, diameter...You know already. Thanks a lot for all the reviews. Now time to improve composing.
Canon's focus breathing and loud AF might make it tricky to use for video or macro stacking.
I hope in the future you can find a way to have controlled bokeh test. Maybe a static indoor scene?
I love my EF 50mm f1.8 version I. It still works great today, despite its age😁
Same here ua-cam.com/channels/f82WA15QTdshOqwnorV3ZQ.html 🎥📸🎥💥💥
Canon shooter here - I own the RF 50 1.2L and agree with what Chris has found - razor sharp quality, corner to corner and not the greatest suitability to video. If I didn’t need its sharpness across the frame in low light, I would have kept using my EF 50 1.2L or switched to an ART lens. I also think it is a bit overpriced and offers an opportunity to Sigma or Tamron should they choose to market an RF 50mm lens. I am however more than satisfied with its performance and will continue to select it above my RF 28-70 on shoots where I have the time to use it.
Great video Christopher 😎👍🏻 my favorite is always when you throw some shade at the “fan boys, you know who you are…fan boys” 😂💙
Hi Christopher - great video as always.
I think you are fair, but I would add that when considering the lens for hybrid photography and video use the Nikon then wins hands down - as you pointed out, it has by far the least focus breathing (almost none) whereas both the others focus breath pretty badly. That said, if one is only using the lens for still photography, I think there is an argument to say the Sony is the best choice in that it is the smallest, lightest, and cheapest with the fastest AF. However, if one is into hybrid photography and videography, then the Nikon is clearly the best. Nikon has stated that they are designing their lenses withy hybrid use in mind - clearly Sony and Canon are not. Also the lens design pf the Nikon is superior to the Sony as it displays much less distortion when not corrected meaning there will be a truer 50mm when using this lens as it will need less cropping and stretching to correct the distortion.
So as always, this is a use case issue - but for me the Nikon takes the prize being the best built, the best optically without correction (on par with Canon and better than Sony), and the only one with almost no focus breathing. Of course, weight and size don't matter to me as I only use this lens for pro portraiture work preferring the much smaller and lighter Nikon 1.8 S version for events and weddings.
As you state, however, it is clear that all three of these lenses are spectacular and all should be praised - I know I would be happy with any of them, and I am definitely happy with the Nikon which I have been using since it was released.
Anyway, great video and comparison as always - love your reviews! :)
Great review, seasons greetings and peace to you Christopher. I hope 2022 brings everything you and your family wish for, cheers.
The video that I was waiting for! Absolutely fantastic timing.
Lens selection was originally not a factor in my choice of camera system - I started out with a Sony NEX-5N in 2012, and planned on using the kit lens for my purposes. I simply went with where the most interesting technology was at from my point of view. Nowadays, it would absolutely be a major factor in my choice if I was starting from scratch.
as I own sony and canon... I still love canon the most out of all 50mm lenses to date. I still own: sony 50mm 1.2, Zony 50mm 1.4, Zony 55mm 1.8, Canon 50mm 1.2 (rf), Canon 50mm 1.4 (ef), Canon 50mm 1.8 (mark I and II) EF, Leica Summilux 50mm 1.4 (m mount - silver and new retro design), Leica 50mm 1.4 (version ii), Leica summicron rigid 50mm f2, Voightlander M mount 50mm APO, Konica 50mm f2 m mount, Fujifilm x mount 35mm 1.4, Fuji GF mount 63mm f2.8, Mitakon 65mm 1.4. Out of all those lenses I find rf50mm 1.2 the best, second is my black summilux and third might be sony 50mm 1.2. Subjective rating of lenses from in use perspective, bokeh and sharpness and general rendering.
It's a very good video and really nice of you to test 3 different brands, I'm just a bit disappointed that you haven't included focus breathing rating since you clearly tested it. Nikon is bulkier for a reason - they've focused their efforts on producing the line of lens for the Z system with almost no focus breathing, and that's a fairly big deal!
Now that Sony has Focus Breathing Compensation one could argue that the Sony is the winner in that regard
@@jamiesondean you’d need some severe cropping to fully compensate for this Sony lens I would hazard a guess.
@@jamiesondean oh yeh, what about the crazy cropping? Then it’s not longer a 50mm which what we talking about.
@@hofra01 I guess that all depends on your definition of “crazy” crop. The Sony 50mm is already slightly wider than the other two, likely by design for this exact reason. It’s possible that adding a (by my definition “slight”) crop to the Sony lens actually brings it more in-line with the focal length of the Canon and Nikon lenses. In any event, a crop of zero-to-maybe 1.15 is certainly not “crazy”, especially when it completely eliminates the effect of focus breathing for video.
@@jamiesondean well if I would by a 50mm I want it to be 50mm not so more not so less. I would also rather have a bigger lens prime lens that does both video and photo perfectly than have a small lens that is only useful for photos and pretty much acts like a mini zoom lens “horrific focus breathing” when using video.
So nope, even if I was a Sony user I most definitely forget about this lens. I use all my lenses for videos and photos.
I wanted to switch to mirrorless and this would be my first lens. Thanks for the video
All love from Egypt
The Sony really is a marvel considering how much smaller it is...and cheaper??
It has tons of distortion so can never reach the maximum resolution of the camera it is mounted on... That's the nature of distortion correction on digital cameras. When you think about it, a 50mm with distortion is pretty stupid.
Sacrificing some distortion to win on other parameters is popular for MILC and integrated cameras as post-processing corrections are on by default both in camera itself and in editing software.
@@bigbelly3564 Tons of distortion? Lol you have no idea what a real distortion is! That's a tamed pincution distortion which is pretty useful in portraits by flattening the face more and the 50mm focal will have a look a bit closer to the 85mm. I see it as a plus in this case cause these lenses use case will be mainly portraits.
@@networm64 Just admit it is flawed and that is why it is cheaper. If you want the most high-end natural fall off to OOF areas, you need to have the least amount of distortion correction. Not a lot of people understand this concept, mostly Leica shooters do, that is what Leica was known for, perfect fall off.
@@bigbelly3564 Oh sorry I didn't know I'm talking to someone which their utopia is the Leica brand world! I just love the Sony's flawed lens way more than Canon's flawed lens and Nikon's flawed lens in this case!
May I add I never witnessed sunstars of a beauty the RF 50mm 1.2 is performing?
I love the fact that there 3 camera systems that can compete with each other.
If you shoot Canon: get the Canon
If you shoot Nikon: get the Nikon
If you shoot Sony: get the Sony 🤷🏿♂️
I shoot Nikon and I own the 50mm 1.2 just a perfect lens for my needs.
Overall a good review
Thanks for the review. I own both Nikon and Canon for sports. I think you should include T stop or exact camera settings. In the coma test, the exposures look very different to me. Losing a 1/3 to 1/2 stop could mean the difference between ISO 12k or higher which is a big deal.
The announcement of Nikon's 40mm f2 has actually got me eyeing full frame again almost singlehandedly at this point after switching down to APS-C and then MFT a few years ago. 40mm is my preferred walkabout, single lens focal length, and I just didn't have a satisfactory option back when I shot on my Nikon D600 - a Z6 with that 40mm would be everything I could ever want out of an everyday shooter package, and their 24-70 f4 with its collapsable design measures just about as big as my Olympus 12-40 f2.8 does currently on MFT. Now the only thing they need is an f4 or other, reasonable non-"pro" aperture tele zoom with a similar principle behind it and I really will have no choice but to switch back over to Nikon.
After some saving up for about half a year or so, of course.
How about the OM 20mm f1.4 for your MFT?
@@ASMROW That also looks great, though if I can get full frame at the same footprint and much less (at least for the lens), I don't really see the point in sticking if I can get myself the extra bokeh and high ISO performance - the AF improvements are nice too, but honestly secondary. The OM lens is only available new for 700€, the Nikon at 280€. It's difficult to justify the difference, even if the OM lens does of course look beautiful.
Since I wouldn't be using any proper big and heavy glass anyway of the new Z lineup, I'm really just thinking this may be the time to switch now. Better low light, better AF, the option of more background isolation from less specialised glass.. it's just all falling into place where it makes sense, and the second hand market is looking great for a Z6 these days - and I can imagine I'd be shooting more adapted glass again, vintage 50s and 135s especially.
Jenny - the 40mm f/2 Nikon lens is incredible - a great value for the money - I owe and use (both professionally and personally) all the Nikon S line primes (except the 58mm 0.95 Noct) and I can honestly say I love shooting with the 40mm f/2 - it is not an S line lens and it is not as technically perfect, but it is small, and light with great IQ and some real character - a perfect walking around or take it where ever you are going lens. Highly recommended!
Love this comparison! Would love to see more prime comparisons between the brands.
I think FOCUS BREATHING should be a mark point, for videographers is something critical. Much more important than a bit of sharpness in the corner.
Thank you for this fantastic video and comparison. 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
I agree, that should have been taken into account in the score. Close focus abilities too.
I really like your reviews, only one thing I disagree with you is on the build quality of RF mount L lenses. I find them solid well made and I welcome the solid plastic over the metal EF lenses. I own two of them and their build quality is flawless - no problem whatsoever with them
Chris, did you do a comparison like this for the 24-105mm standard zooms? That is such a useful lens design for everyday use and for travel that it would be very interesting to see how the big three compare.
Wow I managed to get my RF 50 1.2 for 1789€. Ok there is an official price but these things are so expensive that it's worth waiting a while to find a good deal.
I have used both the Sony and the Canon higher end mirrorless cameras. My background was shooting film for over a decade on Nikons and then moving to the Canon 5D Mark II and then the EOS R and now R5. Sony makes an extremely technologically advanced camera, but it just does not feel natural to use like the Canon. It literally feels like you're holding a small computer that just happens to take photos. The Canon, on the other hand, feels like a real DSLR or film camera of old. The menus are more intuitive, the grip feels far better. It's just a superior user experience, ergonomically, so to me the RF 50mm f/1.2 is the way to go. I might also add that if you can't take the pictures you need in any of these higher end mirrorless systems, you've got bigger problems than the trivialities with these lenses lol
@Benjamin Mesa I'm glad it's not just me lol
We're all different and I'm glad there are different brands and different design philosophies (though I honestly have no idea how a camera could feel like 'a small computer' in the hand). My only contact with Canon bodies is the 7D. It felt pretty good in the hand, though very large and a bit plasticky. Clunky. The A9 I have now feels slightly more solid and it's smaller, which I like. Both are, in terms of "perceived solidity", nowhere near the Canon 7 that I shoot b+w with occasionally. Its selenium cell still kinda works, 50 yrs later.
Thank you for this very informative video. I like the way the comparison is presented.
1:53 Lens Rental has torn down all the Canon lenses and report the quality and strength is fantastic. They achieve it with outer materials that may feel "plasticky" but are in fact used in military-spec gear. My four-year-old RF 50/1.2 has been in my backpack every time I leave the house and it literally looks brand new. (I'm not a fanboy, by the way, and wish they put the full lens spec in brighter white on the barrel so I could reach for the correct lens faster. Also, the alignment dots for mounting should be much easier to see.)
Agreed. The entire difference in scores from canon to Nikon is in the very subjective Build Quality area, and as you note, the internals of this lens are extremely well built. Seems Christopher just doesn’t like the feel of the outer plastic shell. I understand that feeling, but it really doesn’t have anything to do with actual build quality.
The lens selection does play a major part for me. As a hobbyist, having a variety to try and settle on what I like is so important. That's why I enjoyed the Sony system for many years. Right now I am using a Fuji XE4 after a gap. The reason I left Fuji earlier was due to their restriction of lens licences to other third parties, except Zeiss in the beginning. I am now thinking of getting a full frame system again. Love canon colours but there isn't much choice and most of their lenses are huuugeee.. Might get into Sony again or panasonic.
What about Nikon? There are more and more third party FF AF lenses, even cheapo chinese ones.
@@amermeleitor thanks, I didn't like the "body" for some reason.. right now I've got OM-1 and loving it. Not a full frame but it's really good.
Long time viewer, first time poster.
Truly I am a fan, not so much a fanboy. Unless you count Pepsi Crystal! 👀
So first let me say thank you for all the work you do in producing these videos.
Second... spill the beans on your supplier, man!
You need to looks at focus transitions near the point of focus as well as distant bokeh. Thanks for the test.
Sony is really setting the bar with these new GM primes. I hope that will update their zooms as well, those seems to be lacking when compared with competition.
Cristopher why you mentioned that Canon made from plastic? It’s magnesium alloy but not plastic. Maybe you have to explore deeper Cabon technology. I faced with same mistake with headphones review of Meze Lyric. It also made from magnesium alloy, but very often it was confused with plastic.
Perhaps you should include a score for focus breathing, It is often discussed in lens tests.
What’s the Sony like with the focus breathing correction in video?
Why not include distortion in your scoring criteria? Because it's easily corrected in post? Thought you would also want to include autofocus performance there too. Either way, great comparison!
The best 50 MM F1.2 here is the one that fits your mount.
Love your videos! They are like poetry in motion. The Nikon lens looks massive for a 50m 📸
think focus speed/accuracy should also be in the results
I have the Canon RF 50 1.2 and I love it. That's all that matters to me. :)
Great video again, would you consider making a standardized test for bokeh in the future?
Lens selection is key to the system decision. Nikon Z can smartadapt Sony E. So I could buy into the Z system, using the Zony 35mm f1.4 - a luminous 35mm is what I need for like 90% of social & urban shots. For outdoors I use SLRs, I need battery life that is still available in serious frost.
The Zony, I like this new brand :) Nikon handling and Sony money.
Btw by now I own a Z5 with the Zeiss- labelled Sony f1.4 35mm. Guess AF- performance would be better with the F-mount Sigma art luminous 35mm. The FTZ-Adapter, I own 2 for my 2 Z-body, so the combo would have been cheaper! Or the Tamron with the similar specs, reviewed even more positively. Or I could use the techart smart-adapter with another Sony lens I own and mount the Zony on a A7 body.
All this options might mean a more reasonable use of my existing fear. However right now I like just that suggested combo! Without any intention to change a thing
Could you do a 85mm comparison as well?
I shot quite a bit with the RF 50mm 1.2 and I agree that the build quality feels somewhat cheap compared to other RF L lenses.
But you really can‘t fault the optics of this lens, it‘s pretty much perfectly sharp. What I found interesting in the video are the really nice sunstars even at f2 of the Canon.
But I must say the Nikon would be the lens to go for video, the minimal amount of focus breathing is impressive for this kind of lens.
Hey Christopher, nice Videos ... what are you thinking about the new Sony A7 IV ?
I would go for sony simply because of the total cost of acquisition is cheaper due to the third party lenses
The Z bokeh seemed busier but had the plus of having smooth transitions unlike the Sony one which had a clear bokeh walls akin to the fast Sigma Art.
A strong factor when shooting subjects in continuous plane shifts.
Seems you can't have it all, damn physics :) I have the 50/1.2 and the transitions truly are smooth, depending on scene it will matter more or less.
.. oddly enough I bought into the Sony brand in case I wanted to try out old legacy lenses ...it would be fun to have thrown a red herring in the review such as the Micro Nikkor 55 mm 2.8..for a humble price tag of $50...
Another great test, thank you!
I think it’s worth mentioning that the weight of the Nikon is largely due to its video capability and lack of focus breathing which you did point but neglected to score. However, that said whatever system you’ve bought into there is truly some excellent glass out there for everyone but I certainly wouldn’t solely base my camera purchase on lens choice alone and for me ergonomics plays a massive role. No camera or lens is perfect, it’s how many boxes it ticks based on your own needs and you can see this by the very close overall scores.
Sony really designed their lens by optimizing everything and sacrificing one single point - focus breathing, which is deliberately left off the design brief. There is good reason behind this seeming madness - they have now started auto-correcting focus breathing in camera whilst shooting video. Maybe one day focus breathing will be used as a sacrificial parameter across many more makes as they pick up in-camera auto-correction for it, to improve weight, size, and other parameters.
I own RF 50mm F1.2 and it is absolutely amazing. I didn't even like 50mm focal length until I bought this lens.
AF is quite important, not sure why it's not being given a score?
Brilliant comparison.
Thank you
I use the Canon System and was looking into the RF 50 1.2. Even though the image looks amazing, the autofocus isn't really convincing. I'll be waiting for an RF 50 1.4 L with fast autofocus, meanwhile I got the RF 50 1.8 for fun and the RF 85 1.2 for serious stuff.
Looks like the sony is going light and small with any problems, like distortion, focus breathing and vignetting handled by the camera corrections, and Nikon is trying to get all of them right in the lens at the expense of size and weight. Canon as they always do just embraces the imperfections as part of "Canon look".
I own the Nikon one. It's huge and heavy but won't be such a big problem when you have an extended grip like the Z-GR1. Have to say it's the best Z lens I've used and its special character reminds me of the 58 1.4g but definitely a lot sharper. I would sacrifice some focus breathing for smaller size like the Sony one. But ofc, you won't regret getting any of the three, just depending on which system you are shooting, and I don't think any of them worths switching system as they nearly as good, not like say, RF 85 1.2 DS or Noct, that worths moving to another mount if you want them.
That RF 85 1.2 DS is really an F/2. I'm curious to see what Nikon and Sony produce this year in the 85mm 1.2 arena. This 50mm 1.2 reminds me of my 200 F/2. Only reason I'm still shooting Nikon.
I’m in the Sony ecosystem, and the 50 f1.2 looks tempting… but I think I’ll stick to my Zeis 55mm f1.8. After all these years, still an awesome lens.
"All three are from different and incompatible systems" Nikon Z can use Sony FE lenses; I use the Sony 50mm GM daily on my Nikon Z8 with Megadap 21 Pro. The combo focuses faster than most native Nikon Z and Canon RF lenses I own. Fringer is also great for EF to Z like the EF 85mm f/1.2 -> Z8
I chose the body first then scratch around for the best lenses I can afford. I think this is probably the wrong way around as there is no way I would spend $2000+ on a single prime lens so I am unlikely to get the results pros get. I would probably be better off buying the lens first and then finding a cheap low spec or second hand body to match it.
1.8 or 1.4 primes can get the job done for a fraction of the 1.2 price. I personally will be going for a used 50mm Sigma art lens, which sells for 400€ at my pro retailer. I think he did a comparison between the 1.2 RF and the sigma art, and the difference was not huge, definitly not worth 2000 extra €
Now, they need to make 50 1.4 lenses that have still good image quality, but use some software correction to achieve below 500g of weight and below 1000 .- in price.
Every manufacturer is cutting corners with basically all of their lenses. Otherwise they would be twice as expensive. The real question here is which corners are you willing to cut
U can see the reviewer already biased by not mentiong canon during the sharpness test, he mentioned canon starting at the flaring, when Canon get the most flaring out of those two and not even bother to praise canon on the sharpness test tsk
Autofocus rating was required, and sony lens breathing is corrected in a7IV.
but that is in camera correction. Doesnt apply other cameras
@@hborhuu yes, but the future looks bright for all the new comers and a1 and a7Siii in particular.
The breathing is digitally corrected meaning that the frame is cropped so you are not getting a true 50mm - this kind of correction is not for professionals
I love these three lenses being compared. and you did a good job in this video, but I think more catagories could've been part of the scoring, like ( focusing speed ) ( size and weight ) color and contrast ) and two catagories of Bokeh, one being the quality of the blur, and the other being bokeh balls. and overall value for money. for me personally size and weight is a big one, and if all three lenses are close to equal in image quality, the smaller and lighter one wins by a landslide. and for some reason Sony got this when they designed there 50GM, and Canon went double the size and weight of there old DSLR 50 f1.2 and Nikon really went insane with the size and weight. and what amazes me is that with all the talk going around about the bigger lens mounts of Canon and Nikon was going to give them the ability to make better and smaller lenses than Sony's smaller mount. and so far none of that has come true. and if you ask me, I think the bigger lens mount is part of the reason all there new top glass is so big. because it has to be fatter at the base of the lens where it mounts to the camera. so all there designs have to start off with a size disadvantage. just look how huge and heavy the new Canon 85 L is, and I hate to think how heavy the new Nikon 85 f1.2 is going to be. Sigma had the right idea when they made there new 85 Art FE mount like half the size and weight of there first generation 85 art. and with equal image quality. and that brings me to one more subject. which is that Nikon and Canon don't open up there mount to 3rd party manufactures like Sony does. and I don't understand why. I think they are losing customers to Sony because Sony has so many good 3rd party lens options from Tamron, Sigma, Samyang. and Canon and Nikon have almost none. the only less expensive options Canon and Nikon have is using there DSLR glass with an adaptor. and I don't say all of this as a Sony fanboy, I still own my old Nikon and Canon DSLR's.
Probably nikon amd canon don't want sigma or tamron to make lenses for their mounts is cos either the 3rd party lens makers are not paying canon or nikon whatever amount for royalty or canon or nikon are asking too much money. Think of it from a manufacturer's standpoint. Why would you let a competitor make money by making products for your own camera without any monetary gain. I'm sure Sony is getting paid by all the 3rd party companies for making lens for their camera mounts.
@@Prabhu_njd Of course Sony makes money from companies like Tamron. but the real financial benefit to Sony collaborating with 3rd party manufacturers is that the 3rd party glass is getting people to buy into the Sony system. and once they buy the camera they are a Sony shooter. who will be buying Sony glass for years. and then another Sony camera and another Sony camera.
As a canon shooter most normal focal range lenses are rather huge tbh. I like the 28-70mm for what it is but carrying that thing around isnt fun. Its great to finally see a 35mm f1.4 that seems reasonably sized but we still need more mid range f1.4/f1.8 lenses. Problem is that it takes canon forever to fill the gaps. They focus more on exotic lenses like the 24-105 f2.8 and 200-800mm. I wouldnt even mind the closed off mount if they atleast made their own lenses in that space.
At the same time the long end lenses are super light for what they offer. 100-500mm is my favourite wildlife lens.
The lens ecosystem should be one of the most important points of choosing one system over another. While the Sony bodies might not everyone's ergonomic cup of tea, it's hard to fault their overall lens lineup and especially the breath of 3rd party lens available for the E-Mount. Sure the L and S lenses are nice and all but the price of most of them are not attainable for most non-working photographers.
Bravo! You've done it again!
i have an idea. lets overlay a grid with zero distortion in a different color over the distortet fotos of the grid. this way, the distorting effect becomes more visible
Thanks for this info!
I'm a Sony shooter and own the 50mm GM and its an absolute masterpiece, paired with the A7RIV the detail it produces is glorious. I feel though focus breathing breathing and AF should have been categories as well but perhaps the same result would have been reached in the end.
The Nikon lens is the better lens for hybrid photo/video shooters due to the focus breathing issue - there is no comparison. For still the Sony lens is very nice - just depends on use case (as always haha)
@@baronsilverton6504 If doing focus pulls then yes but for other style of content where subjects aren’t moving much the focus breathing won’t matter at all. Bear in mind that Nikon don’t have any cine cameras which is going to be of far larger importance to video-shooters.
@@joe2snj I understand your point and in some cases I agree. That said - hard core film makers always use focus pulls so I think this is an important issue. Also, hybrid shooters, which represent more and more of the stills market, want video to excel - as such, the Z9 is really the king for now. I fully expect Sony and Canon to respond in kind and as always all three of them make stellar products. It really doesn't matter which you shoot today - if you are any good then you can make great work with any of them.
I shoot Nikon professionally, and have for used Nikon's for over 30 years. Although I have used both the Canon RF system as well as the Sony E mount system. For me the Nikon system is my choice - build quality is superior and when they release things they work - not like the R5 over heating problems etc. The Z mount lenses are among the best in the business - I can (and have) put them against other lenses - both RF and E mounts and others, and the fully stack up and often surpass the competitors - also the bulk of the Z line is designed specifically for hybrid shooting with limited to no focus breathing - not true of RF and E mount lenses.
Again, much of this is a matter of choice but this notion that Nikon is inferior or somehow does not stack up to Sony and Canon is a false narrative at this point - and those of us in the field that have used them all know this very well. But again, they are all great and they have different strengths and weaknesses so some of this (much of it) just depends on use case.
Happy New Year :)
@@baronsilverton6504 I didn’t say Nikon was inferior but in terms of video use not many opt for Nikon as they haven’t taken video seriously up until now.
The Z9 sure has amazing video specs but its larger size and weight will put many off for gimbal work even though it shoots up to 8K. So does the A1 and for those that will are more interested in 4K but want/need smaller bodies Sony and Canon have plenty of options. Hardcore filmmakers will be often be using dedicated cine cameras and cine lenses but yes its true that hybrid shooters value lenses with minimal focus breathing. Sony choose an approach that prioritises making their lenses smaller, lighter while providing excellent image quality. Personally I like that as I’m a stills only shooter and I don’t want bigger and heavier glass.
As for Z glass often surpassing the competition in head to head comparisons it’s not often Z lenses that are coming out on top.
As a sony user I think it's a little unfair to not include that focus breathing into the chart. Granted that mostly affects video people like me but still.
It's not an issue
also effect focus stacking/ stitching. part of photography.
I think the build quality is subjective, as all 3 are both engineered to be very durable. I greatly prefer plastic lens exteriors to cut down weight.
Canon's flaring is definitely worse than the others (But hoods resolve this mostly).
I think the sony is a better deal than the canon. I think at this point your choice should come down only to what body you have. Switching systems to pick the better 50 1.2 is insane.
Yep, the diferences between these 3 systems are becoming increasingly minor and niche with each lens and camera release.
Not too surprising a result.
On the plus side...
Nikon has announced if you buy the 85mm f/1.2 at the same time as the 50mm f/1.2...they'll throw in a wheelbarrow.
Hi Chris - another knit picky comment from me, but I feel it should be said:
Ironically it is not the case that none of these offerings are available across systems. Since the recording of this video, the Nikon Z camera system can adapt the Sony lenses with the Metadap adaptor - and with the newer version 2 adapter at near native functionality! Furthermore, in theory, the Nikon will also be able to adapt RF lenses (at some point when someone makes an adapter). However, the same is not true for the others. The Sony and Canon will never be able to adapt Nikon lenses due to the Z mounts superior and shorter flange distance. Another win for Nikon.
Also, and I think I mentioned this before, the final tally of scores did not include focus breathing, which is a very important category (especially for video work) and the Nikon was clearly superior to both the other lenses in this regard - I wonder if the Nikon would have beaten the Sony had this category been included.
Still, I could not agree with your conclusion more - any of these lenses in someone's camera bag would be more than welcome as they all ultimately produce spectacular images!
-PD
Sony just introduced a digital correction for the focus breathing in the a7iv
There’s always some negative with post corrections. Beside you can correct for vignette, distortion, chromatic aberration, even sharpness to a certain extent. Makes you think if it’s even worth spending extra money for these lux lenses.
Yes and when they digitally correct the focus breathing they are cropping the shot so you no longer are getting the true focal length - this is a jury rigged solution to the problem of the small E mount diameter - a problem that will haunt the Sony system more and more as lens design is pushed by Canon and Nikon with their superior mounts. The Sony E mount was originally made for APSC cameras and that limitation is starting to show - it will show more and more as we move forward as evidenced by their digital corrections - proves they cannot compensate with the optics so we now know the mount is reaching its limits.
@@baronsilverton6504 Wow, how desperate do you have to be for abandoning all logic like this? The Sony lens is by far the smallest and lightest here, with the best af and sharpest rendering and you still go on about the mount idea that's been disproven already? Focus breathing has nothing to do with that, you just need a big stupid lens like the nikkor to correct for it.
Very nice comparison! Thank you! I am mostly a Canon shooter, however they really messed up here imho. The build quality of that RF 50 is absolutely horrendous for that price tag. Sure it does extend outwards during focusing but why the hell does it have to retract inwards... Leaving a nice big opening for dust, dirt and water to go inside the lens. My Sigma EF 50mm 1.4 Art is built like a tank and even if I drop it I can still buy 3 of it for the cost of a single new native RF version. IQ is very close too. Certainly not enough for 3x price difference. I hope third party manufacturers like Sigma (and Tamron) will speed up their RF production plans.
It's probably like many other Canon L lenses, including the old EF 50mm f/1.2, which require you to fit a front filter to complete the weather sealing. Check the instruction manual. I have that EF, and have used it in a rainstorm with the filter, with no problems. You don't typically need to use other filters like polarisers with a fast 50 , so it's not an inconvenience to have a clear filter always fitted. It might be an extra cost, though.
@@francisernens1795 any piece of glass fitted in-front of the lens reduces quality and the transmission of light. Period. Filters are not manufactured according to Canon or Sigma quality norms and material spec even the likes of Hoya, NISI, Polar Pro etc. It's very funny idea to ask a customer to put a filter on a premium lens to get it fully sealed. I use only ND / Polarisers when I have to, but generally do not use any filters permanently on my lenses - Sigma 50A, 24-35A, 70-200S, 150-600C. Front elements are robust enough take a bit abuse. If I drop it a filter will not save the lens. So why even bother in the first place :)
@@ILasaroff I don't think you understand - I'm not saying you should always fit filters to all lenses. Some Canon lenses are weather sealed without, for example the EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 II. But some say right there in the instruction book that they are not, for example every 16-35mm L zoom Canon have made for at least the last decade. And you can see just by looking at the lens that they are not. This RF lens is one of those, and it's nothing unusual for Canon.
@@ILasaroffhaving watched comparison videos and photos there is pretty much zero impact on image quality from filters. Yes, technically it adds another element between the sensor and subject but in real world scenarios a decent clear filter wont degrade the final image enough that its even noticable while pixel peeping. Even 45mp wont render those flaws.
Its one of those things that alot of people use as an argument without doing their own tests and research. Similar to claiming low res camera bodies having better iso performance when in reality a high mp will still give you more detail at the same iso.
It could be interesting to add the 50mm S Pro in the comparison. Yes it is only f1.4 but this lens is awesome.
Can't believe Sony is the cheapest :o
Minor point. The Sony lens is fully compatible with Nikon Z cameras, so Nikon users are totally fine buying it and using it. I think that would be a valid point to bring up since Nikonites have the Z lens and Sony lens choice now.
Pretty great performance from all 3.
Good review. Based off various sample galleries I've seen, the Nikon takes the best looking images.
Thanks Christopher I bet it was hard to pick faults with any of the 3 lenses but as a Canon owner lol I have heard that the focus on the RF is loud from another tubers that use it. I dont own one so cant comment I went for the RF28-70 F2 instead , well done to Sony even with the smaller mount