50mm Prime

[Donald Mackie]

Not a big deal at this point but I thought I'd just throw this out there to see if anyone is in the same boat. When I bought my A7 iii I bought the body and the Sony 50mm prime instead of the kit lens. I've since built up my lens collection "a bit" and can cover 50mm otherwise but every now and again I feel the urge to take a walk with a light lens. In my Cannon world that would have been my 50 prime (which I loved). But that said my Sony 50 just really, really blows. It focus hunts to the end of the earth. Often when it does decide to settle the focus point is miles from what the photo shows. I've made grand attempts to get my head wrapped around it's idiosyncrasies and adapt and adjust but every time I think I've got some frame work understood it's inconsistencies throws me for another total loop. I could just toss it into the closet but as inexpensive as it is I paid for a 50 prime and this 50 prime just doesn't work.

Anyone else think this is Sony's biggest dud?

[Pieter]

I think it's the general consensus that the FE 50 f/1.8 is by far the worst native Sony lens. That being said, some people argue it's still decent value for money.

[tinplater]

I rarely use 50mm; when I want to go light with a native prime, I choose the 35mm 2.8.  When I want to have a single prime that covers a lot of situations and produces stellar images I choose the 24mm 1.4.  

[Donald Mackie]

7 hours ago, Pieter said:

I think it's the general consensus that the FE 50 f/1.8 is by far the worst native Sony lens. That being said, some people argue it's still decent value for money.

Yea I kinda have had and heard the same reactions. I guess just a word of caution for folks who haven’t yet invested, this lens (at least mine) is better off skipped  It’s dang near unusable. 

Edited April 20, 2019 by Donald Mackie

[Donald Mackie]

4 hours ago, tinplater said:

I rarely use 50mm; when I want to go light with a native prime, I choose the 35mm 2.8.  When I want to have a single prime that covers a lot of situations and produces stellar images I choose the 24mm 1.4.  

Yes I have a stellar prime 35 in the Sigma but it ain’t light  I rented the 24mm 1.4 and it was a luxurious lens. I want ?, But I’m covered 20 to 24. Just wanna have a light walk around that has a bit more reach. Maybe the Batis 40mm or even further the Sony 85mm. Either way and as I’ve mentioned the 50 prime is a clunker.

[LiveShots]

55mm f1.8, not a cheap lens but well made, and very sharp.

[Chrissie]

12 hours ago, LiveShots said:

55mm f1.8, not a cheap lens but well made, and very sharp.

I'll second that, from personal experience. And according to dxomark.com's lens database, it's actually one of the sharpest lenses around. (9th rank out of more than 7000 tested lenses).

[Lorienwood]

A useful thread, thank you. I'm also after a small light but reasonably fast prime lens in the 35-50mm area. I was thinking about the FE 50mm f/1.8 but now I'll wait for the FE 35mm f/1.8.

[scrane]

The Voigtlander 50/1.2 is an excellent lens, but manual focus and definitely not cheap. But for colors, contrast, and sharpness it can't be beat. The Voigt 40/1.2 is comparable.

[2xbass]

I’ve been thinking about the 55 1.8 recently but since it is one of the “older” lenses, I’m wondering how well it will fare with the A7RIV’s 61 MP sensor.

[LiveShots]

The 55 1.8 is one of the sharpest lenses.

[Pieter]

I don't get the hype around the 55 f/1.8... Yes it's small and has decent sharpness in the center. The list of cons is significant though, especially when used wide open (where fast primes are ment to be used imo):

- Mediocre edge sharpness

- Hefty vignetting

- Nervous bokeh-balls (onion rings)

- Significant LoCA.

I don't care much for extreme sharpness or a bit of vignetting, but the quality of OOF-areas are of critical importance to me when it comes to fast primes. High LoCA and onion-ring bokeh to me disqualifies this lens as a potential purchase.

 

For reference:

https://www.opticallimits.com/sonyalphaff/965-zeiss55f18?start=1

https://www.lenstip.com/483.11-Lens_review-Sony_Carl_Zeiss_Sonnar_T*_FE_55_mm_f_1.8_ZA_Summary.html

[Chrissie]

I can only re-iterate:

the references quoted by @Pieter come to significantly different conclusions than dxomark, for this lens.

Here you'll find some sample pictures I took with my copy of this lens.

[Pieter]

DXOmark doesn't test for longitudinal CA, nor does it assess the characteristics of out of focus areas... Opticallimits and Lenstip tested this lens independently and come largely to the same conclusions. And they provided plenty image samples which support their findings.

I'm not questioning DXO's sharpness test as I'm sure they know what they're doing, all I see is it is contradicting with Lenstip and Opticallimits (which may both have had bad luck with their sample as they both only tested 1).

Honestly, as much as I appreciate DXO's attempt at an objective approach to a lens review, how are their measurements relevant as a full review if not assessing actual photo's and subjective qualities of a lens? And to quote myself: 

High LoCA and onion-ring bokeh to me disqualifies this lens as a potential purchase.

Edited August 15, 2019 by Pieter
rephrasing

[Pieter]

This doesn't look appealing to me...

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Pieter]

Let's bring out another sample from Philip Reeves test. No the water isn't dyed, the LoCA-performance of the lens is just that bad.

https://phillipreeve.net/blog/sony-fe-1-855-za-sonnar-t-review/#Chromatic_Aberrations

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited August 15, 2019 by Pieter

[Lescatalpas]

@PieterIn normal everyday use it is a great lens. Yes, against the light you have some or a lot of ca, yes you can have onion rings, but under extreme conditions. On the whole it is well built, good image quality at any aperture, sharpest around f/5. I own it and use it on an a7r3 and am very happy with it. 

a quote from the review you mention:

All in all the Sony FE 1.8/55 ZA T* is a very well balanced lens which is both a very good performer in about any discipline and yet it is so portable that you don’t have to think twice about putting it into your bag. Few lenses manage this balance as well. In light of this performance the rather high price seems to be justified.

I am in no way defending the lens because I own it, it simply is a very good lens, way above average. 

 

[Pieter]

I'm happy for the people who own it and are happy with it. I'm sure it's a great option for many. The point I'm trying to make here is that there's more to a lens than just sharpness. If you scroll up this thread, people keep on bringing up just sharpness of this lens as an argument to get it.

For me there's very strong arguments to not get it. In the light of this discussion I'm highlighting those so people can make an informed decision. I've had many good shots ruined by ugly green/magenta color cast/haloing due to LoCA. In fact more than were ruined by a lens not being sharp enough.

[Lescatalpas]

@PieterWhich 50-55mm prime would you recommend?  Preferably no ca, no distortion, quick to focus, well built . I am looking for a €900 or less price tag. Oh, i forgot, sharp as well. 

Edited August 15, 2019 by Lescatalpas

[Pieter]

I get your sarcastic rhetorical question as we both know there's no great option @Lescatalpas. Sony really should have made the 50mm f/1.8 to the same standards as the 35 and 85 f/1.8 imo. Afaik we're just discussing pros and cons of the available options here.

I guess I should mention here I'm an APS-C shooter. Then what's my interest in the 55mm FE? At the time I was looking for a replacement for my 50mm f/1.8 E. It was a great lens save for the horrible LoCA, so the 55 f/1.8 FE got on my radar. Both share pretty much the same optical formula except that the 50mm has OSS and no aspherics. Consequently, the bokeh of the 50mm was buttery smooth and much nicer than the 55mm. Due to the similar optical formula, both fared equally poor on the LoCA department. All in all the 55mm didn't seem like an upgrade. I guess you get where my two objections against this lens originate ? I found my solution in the Sigma 56mm f/1.4, which ticks all my requests. Great little lens save for the terrible distortion. I don't care much for distortion though: as long as the lens is plenty sharp there's headroom to correct distortions in post processing at minimal cost of IQ.

But alas, none of this is relevant to you fullframe shooters. Let's hope Sigma starts working on a compact Contemporary line of f/1.8 FE-lenses.

Edited August 15, 2019 by Pieter