I'm not an optics engineer, I'm only writing what I was reading earlier: The sharpness at 1.4 could be lower on purpose (design decision) to provide the smoothest out-of-the-focus (bokeh) rendering. Actually it makes a lot o sense, as in portraits you don't really want /need to have a crazy sharp image. On the other hand if you want to have super sharp image with a lot of details and bokeh is not your priority, you are stopping down the lens to 2.0/2.8 anyway. I think that only recently Sony was able to provide sharpness and quality bokeh in the recent lenses like 50 1.2 with using the most modern glass and coatings.
@@mariosinisterra193 still don't understand f/1.2 for portrait lenses for what purpose. It looks really weird with one eye blurred and/or totally blown out background.
@@ishaun707 the Sony Planar 50mm f1.4 FE can absolutely resolve the 61mp sensor on the A7Riv. It is one of the sharpest lenses I own, along with the 90mm f2.8 macro FE.
I have this lens for 2 years now. Razor sharp from f / 1.4, both in the center and corners and certainly does not appear that weird flare. The resolution is superior to the similar Sigma lens. Probably the tested lens has problems. The performance of this lens is comparable to that of the Otus series from Zeiss. I recommend that you check the tested lens before drawing conclusions. Sorry if my comment bothered you, but this lens is a masterpiece.
From Sony: "We discovered that some SEL50F14Z Planar T* FE 50mm F1.4 ZA lenses for ?™ E-mount cameras may develop an issue with fog inside the lens". Model: SEL50F14Z Serial Numbers: 1800001 to 1810699 8300001 to 8300119 Your lens have the serial number 1807613, so...
From Sony: "Symptoms Fogging, visible as small dots, may occur inside the lens. Image quality may be affected due to a decrease in contrast or resolution"
Finally, I was hoping and praying you would review some of the early zeiss lenses, 35/50 and Batis line. I might say the copy you have is faulty mine doesn’t make a sound and is flawless. I used the Sony system for about two years only renting lenses until I could afford to buy. I never got to try the 35/50. But when it came time to purchase I considered this planar lens as a worthy investment in the line. And I wasn’t wrong the 50 almost never leaves my mkiii. I shot several hundred events and fashion shows over the last two years the 50 was the one lens that when I think back would have served nearly 60 percent of my usage. Thanks again for the review, I might add that price should be a reflection of a photographers investment in a system going forward. I only say that because it was after shooting with a canon shooter who used a 50mm f1.4 with great results and it was a lens he a had purchased with the 5d mkii and was now using with his Mkiv. When you buy into a system buy lenses that are proven. The 35/40/50/135 zeiss lenses are even better with the mkiii or mkiv.
Always like your reviews. Other UA-camrs' product reviews consist content too much about themselves; where I expect to see products and samples, I see instead their talking faces occupying 60% of my screen at 70% of the video length. In my understanding, that's narcissism on the heavy side. But you are different. Like a well-trained professional sommelier, you let the product and sample photos take the center stage, remain as a narrator, and feed information to viewers at a balanced pace. When making decisions on lens purchase, you are my number one go-to guy.
Oh Chris really? You finally reviewed this lovely monster? Very good job, I was waiting to hear that "sharpest 50mm I've ever tested so far" for this beast indeed! It's corner sharpness is really unbeatable! Wish you review GM 24mm F1.4 too...
I have both 50mm zeiss and 24mm gm, trust me this 50mm zeiss is way way way sharper than 24mm. One thing I found is that 24mm gm allows way more light than this zeiss 50mm even though both are 1.4. I believe it has to do with amount of light passing thru glass but you get that pop and excellent contrast they 24mm can never ever touch.
Finally! I've been waiting for this video since you teased some footage of you handling this lens in you Sigma 50mm Art high resolution test video. I'm surprised that this lens is so soft at MFD. Thank you!
This lens is known to have QC issues and I think you got a ‘questionable’ one with a lot of weird softness and fringing wide open. Other than that, this lens is a hidden gem for E-Mount in my opinion. It’s overlooked because it’s not labelled ’G-Master’ and because the rest of the Sony Zeiss lenses from this series (35mm and zooms) aren’t particularly outstanding. I had this lens with my A7RIII. I sold them both and while I don’t miss the A7RIII too much, I pine for this 50mm f1.4 every day! Best 50mm lens I’ve ever used, beautiful detail, pop and contrast to the images. The really clean design and full metal construction is extremely rare now, which gives it that high-end Zeiss/Leica feel. It’s just a lovely thing and I’d put it above most, if not all, G-Master glass for build quality. The manual focusing ring feels as good at my manual Zeiss Loxia which I also owned at the time. It’s one of the only lenses I’d go back to Sony for. I will 100% buy another one day and I’d have no issues buying a Sony camera just to use it. Ironically, I left Sony because lenses like this have dried up and the collaboration with Zeiss appears to be dead. Sigma are the only manufacturer making interesting, well-priced, high quality glass on the E-Mount right now.
I love your reviews but I don't it's fair to point out autofocus on Sony lenses as you're shooting with a really old body, their newer bodies have much much better AF.
Most other sources claim that this lens is in fact weather sealed, but some point out that the gasket at the mount is very thin. I agree that it would be very surprising otherwise for such an expensive lens.
Love your videos- we always learn something from them , and a thought on the zeiss batis 25mm f/2 vs 50mm f/1.4 zeiss this one you are reviewing, they probably are both good. Have you tried the zeiss 25 f/2 yet , both for sony mount?
Agree. With the massive price of this lens, there should be stringent factory QC- purchasers should not have to be concerned with obtaining " a bad copy ".
i think the glaring issue is caused from coating problem, or maby moistured optics from inside. i did try that boy in sunlight and there were no glaring.
Chris, as usual Zeiss and Sony would need me to sell a body part to afford that Zeiss glass. However, there is the choice of the Zeiss related 55 1.8 which was very well reviewed by DXOMARK. A much cheaper option, yes 55 is a little longer and marginally less useful than 50 mm.
Zeiss used to be top tier, but now we have other options that atleast in the technical terms can performe way better at a lower price. But truth also be told, Sony Zeiss is not as good as "Zeiss Zeiss" (when they just produce their lens how they want and how they got famous). The original Zeiss lenses actually have a very pleasing character, similar to what people say about some Leica lenses eventhough they're not optically perfect at modern standards - but they do have strong but lovely character. I actually have to admit that from experience, Zeiss has made some of my favourite lenses if I just look at the atmospheric feel, but I can also attest that they're rarely as good as people say they are - at least as long pure sharpness edge to edge and CA are more important to you than the rendering of contrast and bokeh.
The lens is sharp, but not at 1.4 Sir as you just stated it was very sharp. The chart you are showing at 1.4 the number look fuzz. I have this Len for about a year now, I realize the reason way my images were looking fuzz is because it's not sharp at 1.4, Great review on the lens it self. 👍🏾👍🏾
Fun fact: the only difference between Sony lenses and Sony / Zeiss lenses is the S/Z lenses are tested on a Zeiss machine at the Sony contract lens factories.
Could you now do the Zeiss 35mm 1.4 ZA as a follow up to this? Interested in hearing what you think as I just purchased it recently and have some thoughts
To.keep this short, I simply believe that Sony Zeiss lens cannot be justified on a cost IQ basis. The design of Gaussian 50 mm lens is not difficult. Am not sure how much Sony pay Zeiss to put the Zeiss name on a lens. The one exception to my comments is the really excellent Sony Zeiss 35 2.8. Ok, not a light demon,but fabulous street and general lens.
Hi Christopher, you should perhaps consider using Auto-ISO when showing clickless aperture changing in video mode. It’s hard to focus on DOF changes when the exposure is changing that much.
The hardest bit for these Sony/Zeiss lenses is definitely that third party options from Sigma and Tamron (and even non-Zeiss Sony lenses in some cases) provide every bit the image quality for so much less money. As such, it just ends up feeling like a cash grab by both Zeiss and Sony, and with these collab lenses one doesn't even get the sense of prestige/pedigree of a Zeiss exclusive like a Batis, Touit, Loxia, etc. In this case, I'm really at a loss to what the allure is when the 50mm f/1.4 ART is available natively in E mount...
Weren't the Zony lenses the freshman effort for the mount? I agree that Zeiss just shrugged and licensed their name without holding the end product to a consistent image quality standard.
The Sony Zeiss FE 50mm f/1.4 was introduced in 2016 and was the last collaboration between Sony and Zeiss with e-mount lenses. Zeiss lenses like Voightländer ones are not really german lenses but Japanese ones by Cosina. Also very few Sony Zeiss lenses are made in Japan. The small and light full frame e-mount Sony Zeiss 35mm f/2.8 is one of the few exceptions.
Are you expecting to review the Tamron 28-200mm f/2.8-5.6 in the near future? I've seen many positive reviews of this lens but I prefer to wait for your review before getting one 😉
@@aliendroneservices6621 yeah not to mention the build quality and small form factor. There is CA but I can live with it. I haven't been too fussed on the Zeiss Batis range unless it's the 18mm for Astro
I think the 55 represents the best of Sony mirrorless: small and amazing image quality. Had this lens for years and traded for the tested 50 1.4. I think, in the end you should own both :)
@@smodjo yes it truly is a mirrorless lens by virtue of its size and weight. I'm sure the 1.4 us excellent but honestly, the rendering of the 55 is enough for me and I don't find the bokeh to be all that displeasing
@@joeymccallion sure, the 55 was always enough for me. Once I bought the 1.4 I never could let go. But they are very similar. I like a wider field of view. The 50 is said to be more a 47mm lens, which I like a lot
I dont understand why zeiss lenses have that strong chromatic aberrations, arent they supposed to have these t* special coatings? Are kind of dissapointing in that regard
Hey the new Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L USM Lens is a screaming deal at $2,199.00 they just knocked off a 100 dollars. From what I hear it blows this Zony out of the water. Just a little perspective. So far as focus breathing it is not a 9000 dollar Cinema lens. I own it and it is a special lens by any standard.
@@alexaudiovisuals I have not, and I've heard good things about it. How I feel is just a general sentiment; I'm not suggesting it applies to every case.
The equivalent full frame lens of a Fuji 50mm 1.0 is a 75mm 1.5. And it's surely existing (even at 1.4) on FE mount and made by Samyang even though I'm sure the Fuji is better. But f1.0 on APS-C is not that fast.
I'm not an optics engineer, I'm only writing what I was reading earlier:
The sharpness at 1.4 could be lower on purpose (design decision) to provide the smoothest out-of-the-focus (bokeh) rendering. Actually it makes a lot o sense, as in portraits you don't really want /need to have a crazy sharp image. On the other hand if you want to have super sharp image with a lot of details and bokeh is not your priority, you are stopping down the lens to 2.0/2.8 anyway.
I think that only recently Sony was able to provide sharpness and quality bokeh in the recent lenses like 50 1.2 with using the most modern glass and coatings.
Sony’s most underrated lens. I’ve had it a few years now and absolutely love it. Kills every other 50mm ever made.
Even canon 50mm 1.2 Rf?
or Voigtlander apo Lanthar 50mm f2?
Stanislav Chutoreckij For use on the Sony A7R IV, I’ve read that this lens isn’t best for resolving or taking advantage of the high-res sensor?
@@mariosinisterra193 still don't understand f/1.2 for portrait lenses for what purpose. It looks really weird with one eye blurred and/or totally blown out background.
@@ishaun707 the Sony Planar 50mm f1.4 FE can absolutely resolve the 61mp sensor on the A7Riv. It is one of the sharpest lenses I own, along with the 90mm f2.8 macro FE.
I have this lens for 2 years now. Razor sharp from f / 1.4, both in the center and corners and certainly does not appear that weird flare. The resolution is superior to the similar Sigma lens. Probably the tested lens has problems. The performance of this lens is comparable to that of the Otus series from Zeiss. I recommend that you check the tested lens before drawing conclusions. Sorry if my comment bothered you, but this lens is a masterpiece.
From Sony: "We discovered that some SEL50F14Z Planar T* FE 50mm F1.4 ZA lenses for ?™ E-mount cameras may develop an issue with fog inside the lens".
Model: SEL50F14Z
Serial Numbers:
1800001 to 1810699
8300001 to 8300119
Your lens have the serial number 1807613, so...
From Sony:
"Symptoms
Fogging, visible as small dots, may occur inside the lens.
Image quality may be affected due to a decrease in contrast or resolution"
Probably the best solution is to update the material using a good version of this lens. Someone made an effort to design and build the product.
Did you encounter noise from the lens when focusing?
Thanks for including the autofocus test, that's such an important part and often overlooked by other reviewers!
Thou I think, Autofocus on my A9 is really better and quick. No complaining here
@@smodjo is it quick on your a9?
@@Lovemore7 yes, I cannot complain. Quicker than my 85gm or sigma 35 1.2. Eye AF is really damn good together with the a9
Always a pleasure to listen to your reviews! :D
Finally, I was hoping and praying you would review some of the early zeiss lenses, 35/50 and Batis line. I might say the copy you have is faulty mine doesn’t make a sound and is flawless. I used the Sony system for about two years only renting lenses until I could afford to buy. I never got to try the 35/50. But when it came time to purchase I considered this planar lens as a worthy investment in the line. And I wasn’t wrong the 50 almost never leaves my mkiii. I shot several hundred events and fashion shows over the last two years the 50 was the one lens that when I think back would have served nearly 60 percent of my usage. Thanks again for the review, I might add that price should be a reflection of a photographers investment in a system going forward. I only say that because it was after shooting with a canon shooter who used a 50mm f1.4 with great results and it was a lens he a had purchased with the 5d mkii and was now using with his Mkiv. When you buy into a system buy lenses that are proven. The 35/40/50/135 zeiss lenses are even better with the mkiii or mkiv.
Always like your reviews. Other UA-camrs' product reviews consist content too much about themselves; where I expect to see products and samples, I see instead their talking faces occupying 60% of my screen at 70% of the video length. In my understanding, that's narcissism on the heavy side. But you are different. Like a well-trained professional sommelier, you let the product and sample photos take the center stage, remain as a narrator, and feed information to viewers at a balanced pace. When making decisions on lens purchase, you are my number one go-to guy.
Oh Chris really? You finally reviewed this lovely monster? Very good job, I was waiting to hear that "sharpest 50mm I've ever tested so far" for this beast indeed! It's corner sharpness is really unbeatable! Wish you review GM 24mm F1.4 too...
I have both 50mm zeiss and 24mm gm, trust me this 50mm zeiss is way way way sharper than 24mm. One thing I found is that 24mm gm allows way more light than this zeiss 50mm even though both are 1.4. I believe it has to do with amount of light passing thru glass but you get that pop and excellent contrast they 24mm can never ever touch.
Finally! I've been waiting for this video since you teased some footage of you handling this lens in you Sigma 50mm Art high resolution test video. I'm surprised that this lens is so soft at MFD.
Thank you!
This lens is known to have QC issues and I think you got a ‘questionable’ one with a lot of weird softness and fringing wide open.
Other than that, this lens is a hidden gem for E-Mount in my opinion. It’s overlooked because it’s not labelled ’G-Master’ and because the rest of the Sony Zeiss lenses from this series (35mm and zooms) aren’t particularly outstanding.
I had this lens with my A7RIII. I sold them both and while I don’t miss the A7RIII too much, I pine for this 50mm f1.4 every day!
Best 50mm lens I’ve ever used, beautiful detail, pop and contrast to the images. The really clean design and full metal construction is extremely rare now, which gives it that high-end Zeiss/Leica feel. It’s just a lovely thing and I’d put it above most, if not all, G-Master glass for build quality.
The manual focusing ring feels as good at my manual Zeiss Loxia which I also owned at the time.
It’s one of the only lenses I’d go back to Sony for. I will 100% buy another one day and I’d have no issues buying a Sony camera just to use it.
Ironically, I left Sony because lenses like this have dried up and the collaboration with Zeiss appears to be dead. Sigma are the only manufacturer making interesting, well-priced, high quality glass on the E-Mount right now.
I love your reviews but I don't it's fair to point out autofocus on Sony lenses as you're shooting with a really old body, their newer bodies have much much better AF.
Most other sources claim that this lens is in fact weather sealed, but some point out that the gasket at the mount is very thin. I agree that it would be very surprising otherwise for such an expensive lens.
Looked at mine and it definitely has the gasket. It is thin.
Love your videos- we always learn something from them , and a thought on the zeiss batis 25mm f/2 vs 50mm f/1.4 zeiss this one you are reviewing, they probably are both good. Have you tried the zeiss 25 f/2 yet , both for sony mount?
Shots fired at the Zeiss badge!
And rightly so!
Agree. With the massive price of this lens, there should be stringent factory QC- purchasers should not have to be concerned with obtaining " a bad copy ".
Is there a chart somewhere for a fast look at your experiences or do I have to go through all your videos and make my own?
You'll have to go through the videos I'm afraid! Sorry
would you recommend this over a sony 50mm 1.2 gm?
Mines just came in, new camera comes in soon. LFG
i think the glaring issue is caused from coating problem, or maby moistured optics from inside. i did try that boy in sunlight and there were no glaring.
I have been waiting for this for 10 years. I thought you won”t test any lens in the highest class for Sony such as GM.
Chris, as usual Zeiss and Sony would need me to sell a body part to afford that Zeiss glass.
However, there is the choice of the Zeiss related 55 1.8 which was very well reviewed by DXOMARK.
A much cheaper option, yes 55 is a little longer and marginally less useful than 50 mm.
Zeiss used to be top tier, but now we have other options that atleast in the technical terms can performe way better at a lower price.
But truth also be told, Sony Zeiss is not as good as "Zeiss Zeiss" (when they just produce their lens how they want and how they got famous). The original Zeiss lenses actually have a very pleasing character, similar to what people say about some Leica lenses eventhough they're not optically perfect at modern standards - but they do have strong but lovely character.
I actually have to admit that from experience, Zeiss has made some of my favourite lenses if I just look at the atmospheric feel, but I can also attest that they're rarely as good as people say they are - at least as long pure sharpness edge to edge and CA are more important to you than the rendering of contrast and bokeh.
The lens is sharp, but not at 1.4 Sir as you just stated it was very sharp. The chart you are showing at 1.4 the number look fuzz. I have this Len for about a year now, I realize the reason way my images were looking fuzz is because it's not sharp at 1.4, Great review on the lens it self. 👍🏾👍🏾
My sample is very sharp at f1.4.
Christopher, would you choose this lens or the Sigma Art 50mm?
I don't have that much money, so the Sigma (also, the Sigma is almost as good quite frankly)
Bring on the new mirrorless Sigma 50mm 1.4 🤞
Fun fact: the only difference between Sony lenses and Sony / Zeiss lenses is the S/Z lenses are tested on a Zeiss machine at the Sony contract lens factories.
Personally I think the 55mm f/1.8 ZA is a better deal, by far. Sure, it's not as fast, but it's a lot cheaper.
nice lens review and nice book
Could you now do the Zeiss 35mm 1.4 ZA as a follow up to this? Interested in hearing what you think as I just purchased it recently and have some thoughts
I’m hesitating between this and the 35 1.4. What do you think of the 35? Happy?
I'll be covering that 35mm lens soon
Sony Zeiss 50 ZA 1.4 or the Sigma 35 1.2 dg dn ? what do you prefer ?
I'd probably prefer the Sigma, but then again I prefer 35mm as a focal length
To.keep this short, I simply believe that Sony Zeiss lens cannot be justified on a cost IQ basis. The design of Gaussian 50 mm lens is not difficult.
Am not sure how much Sony pay Zeiss to put the Zeiss name on a lens.
The one exception to my comments is the really excellent Sony Zeiss 35 2.8. Ok, not a light demon,but fabulous street and general lens.
Heyo, have you covered the f1.2 version?
Hi Christopher, you should perhaps consider using Auto-ISO when showing clickless aperture changing in video mode. It’s hard to focus on DOF changes when the exposure is changing that much.
The hardest bit for these Sony/Zeiss lenses is definitely that third party options from Sigma and Tamron (and even non-Zeiss Sony lenses in some cases) provide every bit the image quality for so much less money. As such, it just ends up feeling like a cash grab by both Zeiss and Sony, and with these collab lenses one doesn't even get the sense of prestige/pedigree of a Zeiss exclusive like a Batis, Touit, Loxia, etc. In this case, I'm really at a loss to what the allure is when the 50mm f/1.4 ART is available natively in E mount...
Weren't the Zony lenses the freshman effort for the mount? I agree that Zeiss just shrugged and licensed their name without holding the end product to a consistent image quality standard.
Hi! What Sigma lens is at par with this? The only one I could find is 1.4 DG DN which is actually more expensive than this Zeiss lens
Any plans to do the Tamron 17-28 f2.8?
Eventually, yes
At that price it makes me appreciate my Takumar 50mm1.4 all the more I'm sure I could buy at least 15 more of them
scrptwic lol 😂
I have a Sony a 6300 and I'm wondering if it's worth spending the money on this or getting a cheaper 50 mm lens
The zeiss 50 1.8 has comparable results. Only buy the Zeiss ones if you are looking to upgrade to full frame
@@alen2937 thank you for that advice
The Sony Zeiss FE 50mm f/1.4 was introduced in 2016 and was the last collaboration between Sony and Zeiss with e-mount lenses.
Zeiss lenses like Voightländer ones are not really german lenses but Japanese ones by Cosina. Also very few Sony Zeiss lenses are made in Japan. The small and light full frame e-mount Sony Zeiss 35mm f/2.8 is one of the few exceptions.
Are you expecting to review the Tamron 28-200mm f/2.8-5.6 in the near future? I've seen many positive reviews of this lens but I prefer to wait for your review before getting one 😉
Sometime this year, hopefully :-)
hey, why has zeiss been a "warning" for you? curious to know
probably because the brand is associated with Sony
Because their lenses for sony have had decentering issues.
Because their zoom lenses are so mediocre and overpriced, generally
How fast is the autofocus on the A5100 compared to the A7II? Would the autofocus of the A6400 be faster than either A5100 or A7II?
The a6400 should be the fastest
surprised to see that you said it is the sharpest 50mm that you have tested ... Is it sharper than the Canon RF 50 f/1.2?
I only testing that on my old 30mp Canon EOS R. I'm re-testing that particular Canon lens on my EOS R5 soon so you'll be able to compare
Great review mate, haven't actually watched it yet but.... We know what to expect at this point 😉
Sony and Zeiss isn't all bad. I've the 55mm and I love it
That's one of the only good Sony-Zeiss lenses. I have it too. Mind-blowing creamy bokeh with fantastic color rendering and micro-contrast.
@@aliendroneservices6621 yeah not to mention the build quality and small form factor. There is CA but I can live with it. I haven't been too fussed on the Zeiss Batis range unless it's the 18mm for Astro
I think the 55 represents the best of Sony mirrorless: small and amazing image quality. Had this lens for years and traded for the tested 50 1.4. I think, in the end you should own both :)
@@smodjo yes it truly is a mirrorless lens by virtue of its size and weight. I'm sure the 1.4 us excellent but honestly, the rendering of the 55 is enough for me and I don't find the bokeh to be all that displeasing
@@joeymccallion sure, the 55 was always enough for me. Once I bought the 1.4 I never could let go. But they are very similar. I like a wider field of view. The 50 is said to be more a 47mm lens, which I like a lot
zeiss label: warning sign hahaha :)
Hey Chris, do you plan on reviewing the RF 100-500mm soon?
Yes, although I'll be covering the 600mm and 800mm f/11 lenses first
@@christopherfrost Looking forward to those reviews too! If not more than the 100-500mm.
This unit is faulty, I've been shooting this lens since 2017, never Had that weird flare, also the wide open sharpness is way better
Need to watch out for manufacturing variance. Your copy might not be representative.
Chris’ copy looks a bit worn as well.
I have to agree. looks off to me.
Have to agree. I also do not have this heavy chromatic abberation at close distance.
I dont understand why zeiss lenses have that strong chromatic aberrations, arent they supposed to have these t* special coatings? Are kind of dissapointing in that regard
The 24-70 f4 did the Ziess name/branding no favours. It's a bit of a stinker! That's not to say they all are though.
All the the Zony lens are mediocre, except for the 50mm f1.4 but seem like Chris got a Lemon
De-clicked aperture but wicked focus breathing, no IS and noisy AF.... seems strange to me.
Hey the new Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L USM Lens is a screaming deal at $2,199.00 they just knocked off a 100 dollars. From what I hear it blows this Zony out of the water. Just a little perspective. So far as focus breathing it is not a 9000 dollar Cinema lens. I own it and it is a special lens by any standard.
Dang... no weather sealing :(
This lens has rubber ring around the mount.
When I see Zeiss nowadays, I think overpriced
havent tried the 55 1.8 i presume
the fogging, which causes the issues on that lens is inacceptable tho
@@alexaudiovisuals I have not, and I've heard good things about it. How I feel is just a general sentiment; I'm not suggesting it applies to every case.
Sony E+ VarioSonnar/Tessar = Bad. Sony + Zeiss doesn't always mean bad.
How is this lens compared to the rf 501.2?
I only testing that on my old 30mp Canon EOS R. I'm re-testing that particular Canon lens on my EOS R5 soon so you'll be able to compare
Sony: “Check our this fast lens”
Fuji: “Hold my F1.0”
Hold my Samyang 75mm f/1.8. Same FoV, very similar DoF (f/1.8 vs. f/1.5 equiv.), but at 1/3 the price.
Fujinon makes full-frame lenses? For what mount?
The equivalent full frame lens of a Fuji 50mm 1.0 is a 75mm 1.5. And it's surely existing (even at 1.4) on FE mount and made by Samyang even though I'm sure the Fuji is better. But f1.0 on APS-C is not that fast.
Should have been some sort of weather sealing added
Image Stabilisation is a big fall back
5:44 also known as the T* ghost 😂
In 2023 this lens is selling in Canada for $1350.00......Canadian dollars, its a bargain.
Wasn't rf 50mm f/1.2 sharper than this?
Chris memtions it might be the sharpest 50 he has ever tested.
I only testing that on my old 30mp Canon EOS R. I'm re-testing that particular Canon lens on my EOS R5 soon so you'll be able to compare
This lens isn't nearly as good as the Sigma 50 1.4
Such an expensive lense and with noise in video mode 🤦
That Sony mount is so puny. Makes the lenses look rubbish!
stupidly priced ...