Got the Sigma 50 Art and used it on several assignments plus some personal shoots; it's definitely good enough for what I want it for, would love to get the lighter Sony 50 1.4 GM but I figured the price difference would be better spent on other equipment that I need.
@@mawandekheswa noticeable, worse than all my other lenses but mostly causes issues at f/1.4. To put it into perspective, I tested the Sony 50mm f/1.2 GM the other day, the LOCA there is still an issue. It's just slightlly better at 1.2 than the Sigma 1.4 at 1.4. Hope that all makes sense 😛
@@quagmire321able Thank you! I'm having a hard time choosing between the Sigma and the Sony 50mm f1.4 - I just don't want to spend money on a lens that has terrible CA.
@@mawandekheswa oic, I think the Sony 50 1.4 would be better but the Sigma definitely doesn't have terrible CA. Probably best to consider if the price difference is important to you. ;-)
The 50/1.4 Zeiss was one of the first Sony lenses I owned. Spectacular image quality but slow af. Got the 24/1.4 then the 35/1.4 and those are incredible. Just got the 50/1.4 yesterday and it is so good. Also easier to change lenses than the Zeiss which was so slippery without any grippiness. It's why I dropped it 2 years ago and it's never been quite the same wide open even after Sony authorized "repaired" it.
I haven't even finished watching the video yet, but had to pause to comment... KUDOS to bringing up bokeh balls! I know in some circumstances, the perceived quality of those magical out-of-focus orbs is important, but you are quite correct, in that WAY too many "photographers" emphasis this aspect of a fast lens WAY too much, and with much too high a priority! Another awesome quick and succinct review!
@@3BMEP indeed they can, depending on the subject matter being photographed of course. I’ve seen images where the balls stand out so much the actual subject of the composition is totally lost into the background!
Sometimes we want certain gadgets so badly that it almost feels like a necessity for purposeful action. And it’s easy to evade reasoning when your heart is calibrated for G.A.S. 😂
Hi Hugh, Late to this specific game but how does the Sony 50, 1.4 G match to the 7CR? Too big? What IS the fastest best lens for that camera? Speed and low light for me. Thanks.
It’s no 50/2.5 G in terms of size or weight (no 551/.8 either), but it is optically next level and it is smaller and less expensive than the 1.2. We think of it as the sweet spot in the standard field of view segment. Which is why we bought one for Claudia’s a7C R. 😊🖖🏻
Though I don’t own these newer 50 1.4’s, I do own the 55 1.8, and it’s a “good” lens… It’s weakness is at wide open, where it suffers from BAD chromatic and longitudinal chromatic aberrations on even moderately contrasting edges, though there is a slight swirling effect to the background blur which many find appealing (as I do). Stopped down even a stop and it’s a brilliant optic!
I'd choose the Sony 1.4 over the Sony's admittedly very nice 1.2 for price and weight difference, but my Sony 50 mm 2.5G is not going anywhere as I like to keep it small and light especially when traveling plus rarely need that 1.4 anyway for that focal length (I have the 24 1.4 GM, though...). When you reach a certain quality level of lenses it tends to come down to this when comparing them: You observe the differences when zooming in like s**t...and that's when it dawns on the marble head: Is it more important to just know that the sharpness is there when zoomed in like there is no tomorrow, or do you go where the smart money is and try to obtain the best bang for the buck? And keep the wife happy with whatever money is saved ;). Or travel somewhere nice to use the lenses...but right you are Hugh, all of this reasoning does not stop you for wanting what you want vs. what might actually be enough. Thanks for the no nonsense vid again, Hugh!
I absolutely love my old Sony a6000 with the Sigma 35mm f1.4. Now I got the Sony A7R IV. Choosing for a new 50mm is really hard since I mostly take night/fast pictures. In another review I saw the performance of the autofocus of the new Sigma 50mm f2 in the dark and now I think I’m convinced. I love this new Sony lens, I might preorder it
@@houlej19 how’s the low light Eye AF with the A7R IV and the 50mm f1.4 GM? I’m a wedding photographer, so that’s my biggest concern. I need a lens when light is bad.
I was on the fence between A7iv and S5ii (both photo and video mainly as an amateur traveler). Although I like some things on the vast range of E-mount, I think I will give a try to the L-Mount. Probably like this: S5ii (two bodies), and Pana 18 1.8, Sigma 35 2.0 and Sigma 65 2.0. Yeap, for sure it's something kind of small and lightweight. Way less than my old Nikon D750, 24-70mm, 105 macro, and so many other lenses i have tried before.
Damn, I got my Sony/Zeiss 55F1.8 but still I see these both lenses I want to upgrade. I don't need to but its so compelling to get something with would check all my boxes.
@@kenn6592 No, at the moment I don't want to spend that much money and I still swapping the 35mm and 55mm tgo often. I would need to buy both GMs. In the end, the GM won't make me a better shooter so I stick to my old glas.
@@3BMEP Es muss ja mal gesagt werden - oder? Immer nur Schärfe und die zahlreichen Parameter, obwohl Coma bei einem Sternenhimmel ist schon blöd. Für Landschaft bin ich mit meinem kleinen und leichten optisch aussergewöhnlichen Voigtländer f2 super zu frieden. It has to be said - ore not? Always just sharpness and the numerous other parameters, although coma is stupid in a starry sky. For landscapes, I'm super happy with my small and light, optically exceptional Voigtländer f2.
Another excellent video. Mr. Brownstone, any chance of you visiting Philly or Chicago? We have lots of history and interesting architecture. C'mon Mr. New York, show us some love!
Dollars VS weight VS artificial FPS limitation VS other lenses. What if Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8 can do it all? After all, focal length and distance to a subject are quadratically more important than the f-stop number.
Thanks for mentioning the difference in fps gated by Sony. Doesn’t matter to me for what we do, but important for some! Tamron too heavy for what we do.
Want versus need; two completely different discussions. I love your comparisons, and there is something so appealing about best in class, but you’re right. Good enough needs to be a boundary on most discussions. I also use the megapixels.
This lens and the new 50mm f1.4 sigma biggest weakness is the used market for me. The Sony zeiss 50mm f1.4(900 CDN) is dirt cheap on the used market and the 55mm f1.8 is even cheaper(650 CDN) I would grab the 55mm f1.8 and be happy with during my travels.
The Leica 50mm APO Summicron gives a rendering that is truly breathtaking. I now also own the new Leica 50mm Summicron-SL non APO for it's much smaller size and weight, but I'm also keeping my older APO lens.
@@3BMEP 1) There seems to be less or no chromatic aberration with the APO lens relative to the non APO. With the APO, I can shoot at f2 and not really worry about CA. With the non APO lens, it seems that I need to stop down to about f4 in high contrast light situations. 2) At f2, with the non APO, it seems to me that the drop off from in focus to out of focus is more steep than with the APO. That being said, however, photos made with the APO at f2 have a more beautiful transition from in to out of focus. 3) Off axis sharpness with the APO seems to be better. While I have not done extensive testing, the non APO is no slouch in this area, however. 4) I find the bokeh to be smoother and more pleasing in the APO relative to the non APO. 5) There is just a smoothness, a beauty, and a "glow" to the photos made by the APO that give it a distinctive look. I can't exactly put my finger on it, but I can tell a 50 APO Summicron-SL photo, especially at f2, when I see it.
@@howardkastner5843 then, what is the reason of having the non apo that is only around 300gr lighter if is not better at any single aspect other than the weight? (Based on your comparative) Mentioned before by many, the Non Apo is the Lumix 50 1.8 with metal construction. Yes, coating might differ a bit and pixel picking you may find some difference, NEVER noticeable in real world. I own the 50 APO and the Lumix 1.8. I don’t see the point of owing the mew summicron
@@3BMEP Actually, I also have the Leica SL 24-90… yes, it’s a beast. BUT, it gives me access to all focal lengths between 24 and 90, it’s lighter than carrying all those fixed focus lenses (actually it’s lighter than the 35 and the 90, and it’s almost as sharp as a Leica fixed focus lens.
Oh c’mon 100 or so grams is nothing….people don’t pick up on weight difference in clothing or shoes or phones….get the sigma and save that all important cash….
...There is ONE more option to judge on: Being able to max out the lens's fps. Though rare (animal/wildlife, capturing an exact action moment), this could be a deciding point, but that would be for people who already own an A1 or A9/II camera, with their 30 fps and 20 fps max respectively vs. Sony's 15 fps cap on non-native lenses....
Whenever I use the 50mm focal length, I'm never interested in an f/1.4 aperture because I usually like just a bit more depth of field. So a quality 1.8 lens is perfect for me since I enjoy the look of f/2 with a 50. And my 50 of choice is the Nikon Z 1.8. Can't wait to see that lens on a 60 mp sensor.
I had to laugh when my camera store mentioned Sony were bringing out the f1.4 I have the f1.2 for my music shooting and love it. They said I'd love the size and weight...I said no thanks and now I'm off to an indoor shoot. f1.2 bolted to my A1,
Ha! The bokeh balls comment sent me over the moon. Immediately subscribed!
😎👍🏻🖖🏻
I loved that too!
Got the Sigma 50 Art and used it on several assignments plus some personal shoots; it's definitely good enough for what I want it for, would love to get the lighter Sony 50 1.4 GM but I figured the price difference would be better spent on other equipment that I need.
How are the chromatic abberations iin real world use?
@@mawandekheswa noticeable, worse than all my other lenses but mostly causes issues at f/1.4. To put it into perspective, I tested the Sony 50mm f/1.2 GM the other day, the LOCA there is still an issue. It's just slightlly better at 1.2 than the Sigma 1.4 at 1.4.
Hope that all makes sense 😛
@@quagmire321able Thank you! I'm having a hard time choosing between the Sigma and the Sony 50mm f1.4 - I just don't want to spend money on a lens that has terrible CA.
@@mawandekheswa oic, I think the Sony 50 1.4 would be better but the Sigma definitely doesn't have terrible CA. Probably best to consider if the price difference is important to you. ;-)
@@quagmire321able You've helped me a great deal! Thank you
The 50/1.4 Zeiss was one of the first Sony lenses I owned. Spectacular image quality but slow af. Got the 24/1.4 then the 35/1.4 and those are incredible. Just got the 50/1.4 yesterday and it is so good. Also easier to change lenses than the Zeiss which was so slippery without any grippiness. It's why I dropped it 2 years ago and it's never been quite the same wide open even after Sony authorized "repaired" it.
the 50 1.4, when compared to the leica 35 f2, is at 1.4 or at f2 ?
I just ordered the Sony 50mm 1.4 GM lens. Upgrading from the Sony E 50mm f/1.8 OSS, E-Mount for APS-C.
Huge differences in every way - enjoy!
I haven't even finished watching the video yet, but had to pause to comment... KUDOS to bringing up bokeh balls! I know in some circumstances, the perceived quality of those magical out-of-focus orbs is important, but you are quite correct, in that WAY too many "photographers" emphasis this aspect of a fast lens WAY too much, and with much too high a priority! Another awesome quick and succinct review!
Have you ever noticed that perfectly circular bokeh balls can actually be distracting? 😎
@@3BMEP indeed they can, depending on the subject matter being photographed of course. I’ve seen images where the balls stand out so much the actual subject of the composition is totally lost into the background!
@@ewrzosek and sometimes the background is distracting because it’s too perfect and competes with the substance of the image!
Sometimes we want certain gadgets so badly that it almost feels like a necessity for purposeful action. And it’s easy to evade reasoning when your heart is calibrated for G.A.S. 😂
Hi Hugh, Late to this specific game but how does the Sony 50, 1.4 G match to the 7CR? Too big? What IS the fastest best lens for that camera? Speed and low light for me. Thanks.
It’s no 50/2.5 G in terms of size or weight (no 551/.8 either), but it is optically next level and it is smaller and less expensive than the 1.2. We think of it as the sweet spot in the standard field of view segment. Which is why we bought one for Claudia’s a7C R. 😊🖖🏻
How do these compare to the Zeiss 55mm f1.8?
Though I don’t own these newer 50 1.4’s, I do own the 55 1.8, and it’s a “good” lens… It’s weakness is at wide open, where it suffers from BAD chromatic and longitudinal chromatic aberrations on even moderately contrasting edges, though there is a slight swirling effect to the background blur which many find appealing (as I do). Stopped down even a stop and it’s a brilliant optic!
@@ewrzosek Appreciate the feedback!
“Want and Need!” My life’s koan…
😉🖖🏻
I'd choose the Sony 1.4 over the Sony's admittedly very nice 1.2 for price and weight difference, but my Sony 50 mm 2.5G is not going anywhere as I like to keep it small and light especially when traveling plus rarely need that 1.4 anyway for that focal length (I have the 24 1.4 GM, though...). When you reach a certain quality level of lenses it tends to come down to this when comparing them: You observe the differences when zooming in like s**t...and that's when it dawns on the marble head: Is it more important to just know that the sharpness is there when zoomed in like there is no tomorrow, or do you go where the smart money is and try to obtain the best bang for the buck? And keep the wife happy with whatever money is saved ;). Or travel somewhere nice to use the lenses...but right you are Hugh, all of this reasoning does not stop you for wanting what you want vs. what might actually be enough. Thanks for the no nonsense vid again, Hugh!
As always, a pleasure - and thank you for being one of those folks who contributes such thoughtful commentary!
Thanks for your thoughts. I am going to do the same! Best wishes.
Great Video......just got my FIRST notification of your videos re this one .......not sure what changed to
cause , but glad it works again.
where would place this against the new sigma 1.2 given they are about the same price.
I absolutely love my old Sony a6000 with the Sigma 35mm f1.4. Now I got the Sony A7R IV. Choosing for a new 50mm is really hard since I mostly take night/fast pictures. In another review I saw the performance of the autofocus of the new Sigma 50mm f2 in the dark and now I think I’m convinced. I love this new Sony lens, I might preorder it
I have that same body. What did you go with?
@@I922sParkCir Sony 50mm f1.4 G-Master
@@houlej19 how’s the low light Eye AF with the A7R IV and the 50mm f1.4 GM? I’m a wedding photographer, so that’s my biggest concern. I need a lens when light is bad.
@@I922sParkCir It's more than enough. Thrust me, it's mind blowing
I was on the fence between A7iv and S5ii (both photo and video mainly as an amateur traveler). Although I like some things on the vast range of E-mount, I think I will give a try to the L-Mount. Probably like this: S5ii (two bodies), and Pana 18 1.8, Sigma 35 2.0 and Sigma 65 2.0. Yeap, for sure it's something kind of small and lightweight. Way less than my old Nikon D750, 24-70mm, 105 macro, and so many other lenses i have tried before.
Sounds like a plan!
You have a very professional studio sound. What lavalier mic are you using in all your videos: DPA 4060 or maybe Sanken COS11D or another?
RODE NTG4+ shotgun boomed just out of frame into a Sound Devices MixPre 3 II and synched in post!
Thanks Hugh!
Damn, I got my Sony/Zeiss 55F1.8 but still I see these both lenses I want to upgrade. I don't need to but its so compelling to get something with would check all my boxes.
I am in the same exact predicament. Love my 55 1.8 but would love the 50 1.4 g master 🤦🏻♀️
Dif either of you make the move? Considering swapping my 55 1.8 for 50 1.4. Use A7rV. No video.
@@kenn6592 No, at the moment I don't want to spend that much money and I still swapping the 35mm and 55mm tgo often. I would need to buy both GMs.
In the end, the GM won't make me a better shooter so I stick to my old glas.
Finally someone who admits what really matters. You just have to love the lens! Grüße von Udo aus Deutschland
😊🙏🏻🖖🏻
@@3BMEP Es muss ja mal gesagt werden - oder? Immer nur Schärfe und die zahlreichen Parameter, obwohl Coma bei einem Sternenhimmel ist schon blöd. Für Landschaft bin ich mit meinem kleinen und leichten optisch aussergewöhnlichen Voigtländer f2 super zu frieden.
It has to be said - ore not? Always just sharpness and the numerous other parameters, although coma is stupid in a starry sky. For landscapes, I'm super happy with my small and light, optically exceptional Voigtländer f2.
Another excellent video. Mr. Brownstone, any chance of you visiting Philly or Chicago? We have lots of history and interesting architecture. C'mon Mr. New York, show us some love!
First of all, DC is awesome! Second, absolutely love you videos. Maaaaaan, you got style!
Dollars VS weight VS artificial FPS limitation VS other lenses.
What if Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8 can do it all? After all, focal length and distance to a subject are quadratically more important than the f-stop number.
Thanks for mentioning the difference in fps gated by Sony. Doesn’t matter to me for what we do, but important for some! Tamron too heavy for what we do.
@@3BMEP My pleasure.
Want versus need; two completely different discussions. I love your comparisons, and there is something so appealing about best in class, but you’re right. Good enough needs to be a boundary on most discussions. I also use the megapixels.
😊👊🏻
@@3BMEPHugh, do you by any chance suffer from Leica lust? 😝 I understand that it's going around.
@@chesslover8829 since the SL2 and M11 are my go-tos for my personal work… maybe? 😊
This lens and the new 50mm f1.4 sigma biggest weakness is the used market for me. The Sony zeiss 50mm f1.4(900 CDN) is dirt cheap on the used market and the 55mm f1.8 is even cheaper(650 CDN)
I would grab the 55mm f1.8 and be happy with during my travels.
The Leica 50mm APO Summicron gives a rendering that is truly breathtaking. I now also own the new Leica 50mm Summicron-SL non APO for it's much smaller size and weight, but I'm also keeping my older APO lens.
How would you describe the image quality differences between the two, Howard?
@@3BMEP 1) There seems to be less or no chromatic aberration with the APO lens relative to the non APO. With the APO, I can shoot at f2 and not really worry about CA. With the non APO lens, it seems that I need to stop down to about f4 in high contrast light situations.
2) At f2, with the non APO, it seems to me that the drop off from in focus to out of focus is more steep than with the APO. That being said, however, photos made with the APO at f2 have a more beautiful transition from in to out of focus.
3) Off axis sharpness with the APO seems to be better. While I have not done extensive testing, the non APO is no slouch in this area, however.
4) I find the bokeh to be smoother and more pleasing in the APO relative to the non APO.
5) There is just a smoothness, a beauty, and a "glow" to the photos made by the APO that give it a distinctive look. I can't exactly put my finger on it, but I can tell a 50 APO Summicron-SL photo, especially at f2, when I see it.
@@howardkastner5843 then, what is the reason of having the non apo that is only around 300gr lighter if is not better at any single aspect other than the weight? (Based on your comparative)
Mentioned before by many, the Non Apo is the Lumix 50 1.8 with metal construction. Yes, coating might differ a bit and pixel picking you may find some difference, NEVER noticeable in real world.
I own the 50 APO and the Lumix 1.8. I don’t see the point of owing the mew summicron
Thanks for the reminder that owning a Leica is a liability. I'm considering that 35mm APO-SUMMICRON-SL too.
Thank you )))
Best response to fng bokeh balls I’ve ever heard excellent review
😉🖖🏻
Personally I would buy the samyang 50mm f1.4 ii for 500 bucks & spend the money I'd saved on a very nice holiday
Nah.. Close focus is really bad
Hugh, my choice for a second lens for the SL2 (after the 35mm APO) would be the 75. The 50 is just too close to the 35, IMHO.
Agreed: the 50 being too close to the 35. I DO love the 90, though!
@@3BMEP Actually, I also have the Leica SL 24-90… yes, it’s a beast. BUT, it gives me access to all focal lengths between 24 and 90, it’s lighter than carrying all those fixed focus lenses (actually it’s lighter than the 35 and the 90, and it’s almost as sharp as a Leica fixed focus lens.
❤❤❤❤
Oh c’mon 100 or so grams is nothing….people don’t pick up on weight difference in clothing or shoes or phones….get the sigma and save that all important cash….
...There is ONE more option to judge on: Being able to max out the lens's fps. Though rare (animal/wildlife, capturing an exact action moment), this could be a deciding point, but that would be for people who already own an A1 or A9/II camera, with their 30 fps and 20 fps max respectively vs. Sony's 15 fps cap on non-native lenses....
Fair point, although I suspect unlikely to matter at this focal length for those use cases. 😊🖖🏻
Whenever I use the 50mm focal length, I'm never interested in an f/1.4 aperture because I usually like just a bit more depth of field. So a quality 1.8 lens is perfect for me since I enjoy the look of f/2 with a 50. And my 50 of choice is the Nikon Z 1.8. Can't wait to see that lens on a 60 mp sensor.
3:16 it had to be said
Nearly 50% more for the Sony in the UK. Its the same for the 35 mm and 85 mm. I'll stick with the Sigmas
😮
I had to laugh when my camera store mentioned Sony were bringing out the f1.4 I have the f1.2 for my music shooting and love it. They said I'd love the size and weight...I said no thanks and now I'm off to an indoor shoot. f1.2 bolted to my A1,
wow, right?
Its just another 50mm. Not impressed of what Ive seen compared to all the other 50´s out there.
To answer that very last question of yours...no.
😉
Video starts at 2:00, and it doesn't pay off lol