Nice review! BUT you probably need to mention the 50 f1.8 is for Sony crop sensor cameras, not like the FE 50 f1.8 for the full frame, just in case newbies buy the wrong lens for their full frame.
Yes, that's why it's much more expensive and it will benefit from a better sensor. Now you make it sound like a expensive lens that's not really better. But on FF the difference is night and day.
I've had the Sony 50mm F1.8 and its autofocus is always fast and accurate, takes incredible low-light shots, and its bokeh is excellent. I highly recommend that lens.
Interesting, of ALL the reviews i have watched ,the Zeiss FE 55mm is the ultimate lens to buy for tac sharpness. Just dumped Sony APSC anyway and gone to full frame A7RII and just bought the 55mm. yesterday
Как снимать видео I have Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 and I shoot my last video just this lens. It is great all around lens, hands down. Super sharp, auto focus works great in video (like nativ sony lens especially after firmware update). I also love a lot semi macro capabilities.
Love your channel. I've recently gotten in to photography and bought the Sony a6000. Question now is where to store and back up all the pics in high quality. Google photo? I did do a search of your videos but don't see anything on photo storage. Thanks!
It's awesome to see this comparison, we all know this SEL 50mm 1.8 OSS is for APSC but providing superior image quality to the FE 50mm 1.8, this comparison is what we need especially when A6700 is viral atm
I have owned the 55mm F1.8 for almost 3 years, and have shot it on APSC, full frame, and for video. It has that Zeiss 3D rendering galore, and is amazing on both APSC and full frame. For video, it rocks on a gimbal stabilizer, and works better than excellent in continuous auto focus mode. Quick, snappy, and decisive. I used to question it's $900 to $1000 price tag, but it also is very compact for what it does. Although it's not an F1.4 or F1.2, it's extremely sharp, and the results from it are a bit different and new compared to other 50mm lenses. A great lens to start on APSC, with the option to go full frame later (especially if you just wait, the price will go down on camera bodies. I believe you can get a new A7rii for $2000 brand new. I bought mine when it came out for $3200!) A7rii has been such a monumental leap for camera technology, though, and it's been worth it in this case to have it from the beginning. Not that it wouldn't have been nice to save $1200, though! I'm waiting for the A7riii or the A99ii to go down in price. A7S and A7Sii are a great deal now also.
If one is shooting APSC then it's a no-brainer. However the full frame zeiss will produce much higher resolution on a full frame even with the same number of megapixels. DxOmark measured that the zeiss on an A7RII resolved 95% of its potential megapixel count, whereas with the 50mm OSS on APSC resolved only 54% of it's potential megapixel count.
hey, i have been watching your videos back and forth and i am trying to find out which lens to get for my A6500. I will be using it mostly for close range video production. Any advice is greatly appreciated. Thank you
Great Job i bought the Zeiss 55mm . so many recondations on youtube , and articles , customer feedback , Thank you Ebay . ( Good Show ) !! Keep up the Good work !!
Interesting comparison. Kinda expected result and right conclusion in the end. Sony's SEL50F18 and her little cousin SEL35F18 are indeed absolutely astonishing lenses. Light, compact, fast, stabilized, sharp, with AF and last but not least - affordable. Got them both and like them both a lot. Basically a must-have or even a no-brainer for any APS-C E-Mount camera imo.
Hello Aurther...FE 50 or SEL 50??? I have alpha 6300....i heard for still both are same... But for video Auto focus FE 50 did lot of noise... Plz mention... Love from India...
I own both lens initially and but I sold my Sony 50mm f1.8. The reason is Sony 55mm has better flare control and sharper at the corner when wide open compared to Sony 50mm (It is important especially if you need to take some night photography) Yes, Sony 50mm is sharp but when you go back and take a closer look at your photos, you will realise photos taken by Sony Zeiss 55mm have a" Zeiss 3D POP" That is the value of the Zeiss Sony 55mm.
The 3D pop I believe is due to the 55mm focal. I have a Takumar 55mm, chinon 55mm and they both have a "3D POP" effect that my Contax Zeiss 50mm cannot achieve.
3D pop is not due to focal length. Focal create slightly better bokeh. Yes, contrast is one factor that causing 3D pop but it is still come down to how the len rendered the photo. Example Sigma 30mm f1.4, although it created nice bokeh but the overall photo is flat.
Nice comparison. But, can you compare autofocus performance on both lenses? Or maybe including the full-frame one FE 50mm f/1.8, since E 50mm f/1.8 OSS is designed for APS-C Sony cameras.
Consider taking a third of a step forward, and crop the subject same for each lens. The 50oss would therefor defocus background much more because it's focusing closer. This is especially appropriate for portrait photography, where photographer/subject distance can be easily changed with a half of step. Your testing method is better suited for landscape and architectural photography, where photographer/subject distance cannot be easily changed, and therefor the focal length of the lens is much more relevant. Thanks for the test.
Thanks for the comparison. From time to time I stumble across the Zeiss lenses in Sonys portfolio and I always think: Yeah ... I want that. But thanks - as a hobbyist, I'm sticking to the Sony one - especially because I own an A6000. Just bought my most ridiculous lens - The 70-300G. And boy oh boy is that thing a beauty. And it's worth every penny. But for the Zeiss lenses? I think it's fine when I use "regular" equipment like my 32mm from Sony. Keep up the great work. Love the "down to earth" mentality that you think of us hobbyists and just don't recommend the most expensive gear just because we viewers might be professional photographers.
Now that I have purchased a6000 please suggest me a lens that is cheap but capture good quality video for my short film which I will start creating soon. Also suggest me an external audio capturing device for my a6000.
Can you do a video comparing this 50mm lens with the 16- 70mm zeiss at focal length 50mm ? And if possible also adjust to 55mm vs zeiss 55mm prime lens too. or if can't. Please tell me who is the obvious winner between them
@@ArthurR thank you for fast reply. Get what you mean. Cos I just got the A6500 and the 16 to 70 zeiss and plan to get the 10 to 18mm lens too as I like to take scenery photos during my travel. But the 50mm range also catch my attention. Maybe for now I need to skip both of these lens first and go for the wide lens. I also aware you have video on the 10 to 18mm vs 10 18mm lens. Hope I get the good qc pc. Love your reviews btw. Keep up the good jobs.
Hi Jaspreet, maybe little later, but still. I have kit 16-50, 35mm f1.8. My story: I wanted something light - the reason, I have a6000. The 16 is wide, super sharp, but big for me. I am a full-time dad, not a slave. So I bought the 35mm. But ... I found it too narrow for real life. Quick focus, nice images .. yes, indoors too narrow. Finally I bought the 20mm F2.8. Sufficient improvement in quality, pancake - almost invisible on my camera. I had to forget the extra bookeh, good portrait ability, but have small, quick beast, that can catch almost all in sufficient quality, even in low light. In my pocket. The target usage target the correct lens! ... And yes, I love how the 16mm is sharp and the 35mm does portrait ... and have some money, I would buy the Zeiss 24mm F1.8 :-). Cheers
@@pavelvon6147 thanks for the suggestion and ur views. I personally know and think 16mm f1.4 Sigma is huge but no choice I can't afford Zeiss 24mm F1.8. and 30mm f1.4 Sigma is good bokeh lens.
Very informative review! this answers a lot of questions for me. I think im starting to comprehend what is a very complex topic. I read in a photography article that even top quality Full frame glass (and this is very high quality glass!) on a crop sensor camera is NOT necessarily the best choice because of a few key points 1. All of the crop sensor is focused on a smaller portion of glass which can magnify and reveal defects in the glass much more. In other words the zeiss glass is really under a microscope here! The fact that the small area of the zeiss glass looked so good and flawless testifies of just how good zeiss optics are. On a full frame camera the quality would be levels higher. 2. As i understand putting a FF lens on a crop sensor camera will add about a full fstop and decrease Dof. its in the math and related to focal length and sensor size. check out a Dof calculator. so the zeiss lens on the a6500 set at f 1.8 is really closer to f 2.8. That may explain why the zeiss 55mm exposure looked a bit darker when you matched exposure settings. if you think the bokeh looks good with the zeiss on a crop sensor its even better on a FF camera. Hope this all makes some sense and someone more knowledgeable please correct me if im wrong. So to me it makes sense to perhaps do this purchase if you intend to upgrade to a FF camera someday otherwise it seems best to just go quality crop lenses for crop sensor cameras.
I’m sure it’s been said but I have to repeat. How can you compare FE lens to crop lens? You do know you lose half the megapixels of the 55 using it on the crop frame? Right??? How does this not get mentioned?
Lenses dont have megapixels. If you are talking about lines of resolution, thats fine. Ultimately, fewer lines or not, the full frame 55 outperformed the Sony 50mm in a practical comparison test. This test is for people who are looking for a 50-55mm lens for their APSC Sony camera.
TechnologyMafia yes. Lenses don’t have megapixels. And yes you technically don’t lose half of them. Just have their ability to process dynamic range. Point being is it’s a pretty glaring omission. I have both cameras and both lenses. I’d never thought to compare the two? Just odd.
I totally agree with your comments regarding the price point and value for money of both these lenses. However, if you are a professional shooting portraits, I don't think that you would be using a crop sensor camera - and using a full frame camera would need a longer lens than the 55mm (for head and shoulders at least). I think if I were shooting portraits professionally, I would use a very high resolution full frame camera with an 85mm lens, most likely the Sigma or Sony f/1.4. The Sony 85mm f/1.8 is a very nice lens but, I would opt for the more expensive f/1.4 models...
Thanks guys, the 50 -100 seems great but i only have an a6000 so no IBIS, probably gonna save for that 18 - 105 f4. But still that 1.8 on the 50 100 sigma and the price 😅
18-105. 10-18 is good if you want ultra wide, but i personally think that in most cases, 16mm prime is wide enough. Plus the image quality isnt the best for the price. Since you own 16mm and 50mm, i’d personally just take the kit lens. Carrying both 16mm and 18-105 can be quite annoying as neither one has a small form factor
@@DogDaddy1969 You'll be more than happy from 18-105 OSS f4. I got 6300 and I had dilemma too but when I bought it my dilemma dissappear thank to technology mafia. 18-105 plus crane v2 works like a charm
@@theizza68 I doubt it. It's a 1.4 which means more glass. Plus Sigma concentrates on sharpness more than size. I'm not sure if there is a single Sigma lens that's smaller than an equivalent Sony lens.
DXO measures 40 Perceptual MP resolution for the 55mm Zeiss on an A7RII with its full frame 42 MP sensor, i.e. it resolves to the limit of that high resolution, full frame sensor. On the A6000 with a 24Mp sensor, the lens performance drops to 15 Perceptual MP, as you would predict from the smaller, lower resolution sensor. This lens will only show its true capability on a high resolution, full frame sensor.
A request...when you are moving around the comparison shots in Lightroom slow down bit when zoomed in. It helps us older viewers comprehend what you're showing. Well, me anyway.
Virtually all the differences between the two lenses are explained simply by the fact that the Zeiss is 10% longer in focal length, especially the resolution and the bokeh (a term derived from the Japanese, translated meaning: "bring lots more money". I shoot landscapes and travel shots and could care less about bokeh. But I do greatly value sharpness.
Great comparison I was shocked how close it was! The Zeiss is hands down my favorite lens and offers a great gateway into full frame! I compared the images of my Zeiss on the A7ii with my sigma 30 on the a6000 for similar field of view and the full frame sharpness is phenomenal.
OFC are the bookehballs on the sony smaller, you got a 5mm shorter focal length, so everything is a bit further away and smaller. (I am total noob and have no idea. Just my logic. So pls don't kill me, if iam wrong)
I think agree, also no expert myself but the subject framing is different. If the subject was the same size in the frame eg back away on the 55mm they would look much closer.
The comparison is not quite fair for the Sony 50 mm lens due to the fact that it is for APS-C sensor...You may be able to do such a comparison fairly on the central region of the image, though. At the edge where the lens performance is at its worse due to chromatic and spherical aberations, the Zeiss lens is not being evaluated due to its image circle is larger than the sensor.
When it comes to APSC I'd still prefer the sony 50mm, the zeiss crop is alittle to pinched it seems like in comparison and it made the focus so much more centered personally i liked when he zoomed in around the models hair and i could see the 50 at the same distance was noticeably sharper.
I can't wait for the Sigma 56mm 1.4 Nice comparison though. They're both good lenses. The 50mm 1.8 is a fabulous lens though for being so dang cheap! No reason to get the Zeiss unless you are trying to do the FF upgrade thing.
Considering the price difference there is not a lot in it. I own the Sony 1.8 50mm and really like it. To me the Zeiss was better below F2.8 but above that they were almost identical.
I have the aps-c 50mm F1.8 & always thought it was a fantastic lens ... I shoot full frame now & the FE 50mm F1.8 is a bloody joke , if only Sony would make a MK 2 , unlikely as they want you to pay $1000 for the Zeiss version. .. good for aps-c users but for those who upgrade to Full Frame be warned Sony doesnt do budget quality lenses.
I also have FE 50mm, it's not as good as aps-c 50mm but it was 200 dollars so I kept my expectations low. I think it's fine for the price, Zeiss is overpriced and the Sigma art 50mm is superb but that size and weight.. that's a fkin joke!
I have the Sony 50mm and I do like it on an a6500. I have never tried a Zeiss lens due to the cost for hobby use. Maybe someday. I also shoot professional video and photography for an avionics manufacturer. I have 40+ years at that profession. There I use high-end gear. The lens starts at the $2K mark. They look fantastic but out of range for me on a personal level.
I'm getting the Sony 50mm f1.8 OSS for my Sony A6300. The sharpness seems relatively sufficient for general purpose, especially at this superb price point. Enjoy.
What a good laugh when you said the Zeiss is definitely better then the E50mm at 8.20. It is not even through pixel peeping. The E50mm is well known for being a sharp lens.
I would like to see my 40 years old Minolta MD Rokkor 50mm 1.4 against those two, even it got no autofocus and u need an adapter. :-) price with adapter around 120€
I have a Minolta MD 50mm 2.0 with an adapter and it's great! It was my dad's. With focus peaking on it's a lot of fun. I hardly ever take it out though because autofocus just makes life so much easier, and the Sony 50mm pics are just as good if not better. It's still kind of fun to use classic lenses sometimes though.
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
Nice review! BUT you probably need to mention the 50 f1.8 is for Sony crop sensor cameras, not like the FE 50 f1.8 for the full frame, just in case newbies buy the wrong lens for their full frame.
Agreed, I was actually curious in this comparison because I thought the Zeiss 55mm was being compared to the FE 50 f/1.8
Good point - the FE 50 is worse than the SEL50 in a number of ways. I wonder how much of a difference there is in image quality.
Yes, that's why it's much more expensive and it will benefit from a better sensor. Now you make it sound like a expensive lens that's not really better. But on FF the difference is night and day.
I appreciate you commenting. I thought this was a comparison between the 50 1.8 FE until I read this!
But if you know Arthur he only shoots APSC, not one review with a full frame
I've had the Sony 50mm F1.8 and its autofocus is always fast and accurate, takes incredible low-light shots, and its bokeh is excellent. I highly recommend that lens.
Over the Zeiss?
Did you have the one with OSS?
Interesting, of ALL the reviews i have watched ,the Zeiss FE 55mm is the ultimate lens to buy for tac sharpness. Just dumped Sony APSC anyway and gone to full frame A7RII and just bought the 55mm. yesterday
What do you think about Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 for video? Thank you for your videos!
Как снимать видео I have Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 and I shoot my last video just this lens. It is great all around lens, hands down. Super sharp, auto focus works great in video (like nativ sony lens especially after firmware update). I also love a lot semi macro capabilities.
Any chance you'd do a comparison with the Sanyang 1.2/50mm ? ;)
Love your channel. I've recently gotten in to photography and bought the Sony a6000. Question now is where to store and back up all the pics in high quality. Google photo? I did do a search of your videos but don't see anything on photo storage. Thanks!
At 7:13, the 50mm is much, much sharper on the hair. I think the focus must have been slightly different? Or is it hair moving in the wind?
It's awesome to see this comparison, we all know this SEL 50mm 1.8 OSS is for APSC but providing superior image quality to the FE 50mm 1.8, this comparison is what we need especially when A6700 is viral atm
I have owned the 55mm F1.8 for almost 3 years, and have shot it on APSC, full frame, and for video. It has that Zeiss 3D rendering galore, and is amazing on both APSC and full frame. For video, it rocks on a gimbal stabilizer, and works better than excellent in continuous auto focus mode. Quick, snappy, and decisive. I used to question it's $900 to $1000 price tag, but it also is very compact for what it does. Although it's not an F1.4 or F1.2, it's extremely sharp, and the results from it are a bit different and new compared to other 50mm lenses. A great lens to start on APSC, with the option to go full frame later (especially if you just wait, the price will go down on camera bodies. I believe you can get a new A7rii for $2000 brand new. I bought mine when it came out for $3200!) A7rii has been such a monumental leap for camera technology, though, and it's been worth it in this case to have it from the beginning. Not that it wouldn't have been nice to save $1200, though! I'm waiting for the A7riii or the A99ii to go down in price. A7S and A7Sii are a great deal now also.
: and what's your opinion which body is fully good at all situation on shooting video with high resolution is that A7Sii or A7Rii or A7S or A6400 ?
If one is shooting APSC then it's a no-brainer. However the full frame zeiss will produce much higher resolution on a full frame even with the same number of megapixels. DxOmark measured that the zeiss on an A7RII resolved 95% of its potential megapixel count, whereas with the 50mm OSS on APSC resolved only 54% of it's potential megapixel count.
That's comparing apples with oranges
Hello Aurther...FE 50 or SEL 50??? I have alpha 6300....
Hi, why you shoot in Jpeg? do you modified setting for best color?
hey, i have been watching your videos back and forth and i am trying to find out which lens to get for my A6500. I will be using it mostly for close range video production.
Any advice is greatly appreciated. Thank you
Hi, any thoughts about the Zeiss Touit 32mm f1.8 (versus the Sony 35mm f1.8 versus the Sigma 16mm f1.4) assuming cost is not an issue?
Great Job i bought the Zeiss 55mm . so many recondations on youtube , and articles , customer feedback , Thank you Ebay . ( Good Show ) !! Keep up the Good work !!
Interesting comparison. Kinda expected result and right conclusion in the end. Sony's SEL50F18 and her little cousin SEL35F18 are indeed absolutely astonishing lenses. Light, compact, fast, stabilized, sharp, with AF and last but not least - affordable. Got them both and like them both a lot. Basically a must-have or even a no-brainer for any APS-C E-Mount camera imo.
Hi. When will you go full frame?
kjakan his niche is the a6xxx series, no need to go ff
In comparison with the objective kit (16-50mm) does stabilization work better in this 50mm? Thank you! And thank you very much for your work!
Hello Aurther...FE 50 or SEL 50??? I have alpha 6300....i heard for still both are same... But for video Auto focus FE 50 did lot of noise... Plz mention... Love from India...
SEL50 if you have an A6300.
Hi, Have you done a comparison between the Sony 50 f1.8 for apsc and the 50 FE f1.8 which one would be better on the A6500 I wonder.
Thanks for the review... What's your all time favorite prime lens and why?
Sigma 16mm F1.4 at the moment because I think it is the sharpest and most usable APSC lens out on the market.
I own both lens initially and but I sold my Sony 50mm f1.8.
The reason is Sony 55mm has better flare control and sharper at the corner when wide open compared to Sony 50mm (It is important especially if you need to take some night photography)
Yes, Sony 50mm is sharp but when you go back and take a closer look at your photos, you will realise photos taken by
Sony Zeiss 55mm have a" Zeiss 3D POP" That is the value of the Zeiss Sony 55mm.
Agree. The SEL50 flaring bothers me
The 3D pop I believe is due to the 55mm focal.
I have a Takumar 55mm, chinon 55mm and they both have a "3D POP" effect that my Contax Zeiss 50mm cannot achieve.
3D pop is not due to focal length. Focal create slightly better bokeh.
Yes, contrast is one factor that causing 3D pop but it is still come down to how the len rendered the photo.
Example Sigma 30mm f1.4, although it created nice bokeh but the overall photo is flat.
@@Asiaflyers the new sigma 56mm f1.4 will bet them both
@@Studatnah Sigma has problem with distortion
I love my Sony 50mm f1.8 with OSS. An absolute no-brainer for APS-C.
How do they compare in terms of quickness in auto focus for video?
About the same, they are both slightly slower than the Sony 35mm F1.8. I didnt have too many mis-focused shots from either one though.
Great video , I have just bought the Sony 50 mm 1.8 . It is a great budget lens.
Hey, can you make a comparison between sony SEL18-200 and Tamron 18-200 for sony a6000. Thanks
What about differences in Autofocus in low light Situations?
Put the both on a fullframe then test again :) would be funny.
Is the T stop different on both lenses or is it microcontrast?
Nice comparison. But, can you compare autofocus performance on both lenses? Or maybe including the full-frame one FE 50mm f/1.8, since E 50mm f/1.8 OSS is designed for APS-C Sony cameras.
Consider taking a third of a step forward, and crop the subject same for each lens. The 50oss would therefor defocus background much more because it's focusing closer.
This is especially appropriate for portrait photography, where photographer/subject distance can be easily changed with a half of step. Your testing method is better suited for landscape and architectural photography, where photographer/subject distance cannot be easily changed, and therefor the focal length of the lens is much more relevant.
Thanks for the test.
I think you forgot to mention the full frame equivalent. Same thing in your other video about the Zeiss 55.
Could you please make a video about the *Sony 50mm 2.5 g and Zeiss 55mm* please
Hey!
What is your current zoom lens?
great review, always wanted to see a comparison, thank you for doing it!
Curious to see the sigma 56mm. Hoping that sigma makes now, a good zoom lens with 2.8 our less...
Cannot find this Zeiss lens anymore. Links in comments only show the Sony lens. Cannot find a Zeiss lens anywhere near $250
When is due date? Ours now nearly 4 months ❤️
Thanks for the comparison. From time to time I stumble across the Zeiss lenses in Sonys portfolio and I always think:
Yeah ... I want that. But thanks - as a hobbyist, I'm sticking to the Sony one - especially because I own an A6000.
Just bought my most ridiculous lens - The 70-300G. And boy oh boy is that thing a beauty. And it's worth every penny. But for the Zeiss lenses? I think it's fine when I use "regular" equipment like my 32mm from Sony.
Keep up the great work. Love the "down to earth" mentality that you think of us hobbyists and just don't recommend the most expensive gear just because we viewers might be professional photographers.
Now that I have purchased a6000 please suggest me a lens that is cheap but capture good quality video for my short film which I will start creating soon. Also suggest me an external audio capturing device for my a6000.
What a great comparison!! Thanks a lot!!♥
How these two compare to sigma 50mm f1.4?
Can you do a video comparing this 50mm lens with the 16- 70mm zeiss at focal length 50mm ? And if possible also adjust to 55mm vs zeiss 55mm prime lens too.
or if can't. Please tell me who is the obvious winner between them
simplyjustdoit the Zeiss 16-70 is very soft at 50mm and above, there is nothing really to compare, both of these lenses are sharper.
@@ArthurR thank you for fast reply. Get what you mean. Cos I just got the A6500 and the 16 to 70 zeiss and plan to get the 10 to 18mm lens too as I like to take scenery photos during my travel. But the 50mm range also catch my attention. Maybe for now I need to skip both of these lens first and go for the wide lens. I also aware you have video on the 10 to 18mm vs 10 18mm lens. Hope I get the good qc pc. Love your reviews btw. Keep up the good jobs.
Dear, which lens should I buy Sigma 16mm or Sony 35mm for my Sony A6000. Plz, advice me soon
Hi Jaspreet, maybe little later, but still. I have kit 16-50, 35mm f1.8. My story: I wanted something light - the reason, I have a6000. The 16 is wide, super sharp, but big for me. I am a full-time dad, not a slave. So I bought the 35mm. But ... I found it too narrow for real life. Quick focus, nice images .. yes, indoors too narrow. Finally I bought the 20mm F2.8. Sufficient improvement in quality, pancake - almost invisible on my camera. I had to forget the extra bookeh, good portrait ability, but have small, quick beast, that can catch almost all in sufficient quality, even in low light. In my pocket. The target usage target the correct lens! ... And yes, I love how the 16mm is sharp and the 35mm does portrait ... and have some money, I would buy the Zeiss 24mm F1.8 :-). Cheers
@@pavelvon6147 thanks for the suggestion and ur views. I personally know and think 16mm f1.4 Sigma is huge but no choice I can't afford Zeiss 24mm F1.8. and 30mm f1.4 Sigma is good bokeh lens.
Thanks for your thoughtful reviews. I didn't buy these lenses but I bought the a6500, the 16-50mm, and some other kit on your links. Cheers.
Excellent comparison 👏 👌
Thanks.
Very informative review! this answers a lot of questions for me. I think im starting to comprehend what is a very complex topic. I read in a photography article that even top quality Full frame glass (and this is very high quality glass!) on a crop sensor camera is NOT necessarily the best choice because of a few key points 1. All of the crop sensor is focused on a smaller portion of glass which can magnify and reveal defects in the glass much more. In other words the zeiss glass is really under a microscope here! The fact that the small area of the zeiss glass looked so good and flawless testifies of just how good zeiss optics are. On a full frame camera the quality would be levels higher. 2. As i understand putting a FF lens on a crop sensor camera will add about a full fstop and decrease Dof. its in the math and related to focal length and sensor size. check out a Dof calculator. so the zeiss lens on the a6500 set at f 1.8 is really closer to f 2.8. That may explain why the zeiss 55mm exposure looked a bit darker when you matched exposure settings. if you think the bokeh looks good with the zeiss on a crop sensor its even better on a FF camera. Hope this all makes some sense and someone more knowledgeable please correct me if im wrong. So to me it makes sense to perhaps do this purchase if you intend to upgrade to a FF camera someday otherwise it seems best to just go quality crop lenses for crop sensor cameras.
Is the Zeiss focus by wire?
Yes
Awesome, thank you!
Great Video👍🏻. Please a comparison between the zeiss 55 and the new sigma 56 1.4😊
Please compare the Zeiss 55mm f1.8 with the Sigma 30mm f1.4 on the A6000.
Hi, could you please review the Tamron 28-75mm 2.8?
My sony 50 mm always shows a vignette around. How to fix this?
I was waiting for this video, thanks.
I’m sure it’s been said but I have to repeat. How can you compare FE lens to crop lens? You do know you lose half the megapixels of the 55 using it on the crop frame? Right??? How does this not get mentioned?
Lenses dont have megapixels. If you are talking about lines of resolution, thats fine. Ultimately, fewer lines or not, the full frame 55 outperformed the Sony 50mm in a practical comparison test. This test is for people who are looking for a 50-55mm lens for their APSC Sony camera.
TechnologyMafia yes. Lenses don’t have megapixels. And yes you technically don’t lose half of them. Just have their ability to process dynamic range. Point being is it’s a pretty glaring omission. I have both cameras and both lenses. I’d never thought to compare the two? Just odd.
I totally agree with your comments regarding the price point and value for money of both these lenses. However, if you are a professional shooting portraits, I don't think that you would be using a crop sensor camera - and using a full frame camera would need a longer lens than the 55mm (for head and shoulders at least). I think if I were shooting portraits professionally, I would use a very high resolution full frame camera with an 85mm lens, most likely the Sigma or Sony f/1.4. The Sony 85mm f/1.8 is a very nice lens but, I would opt for the more expensive f/1.4 models...
Richard Crowe More expensive...and more distortion!
I can't wait to see the Sigma 56mm f 1.4
Got the 50mm oss sony and 16mm sigma 1.4. Im looking for a zoom lens that would atleast keep up with these 2. Any suggestions?
Only 2 real options here, 18-105 f4, 18-135 f3.5-5.6
Only 18-105 Sony oss. ONLY option.
Thanks guys, the 50 -100 seems great but i only have an a6000 so no IBIS, probably gonna save for that 18 - 105 f4. But still that 1.8 on the 50 100 sigma and the price 😅
18-105. 10-18 is good if you want ultra wide, but i personally think that in most cases, 16mm prime is wide enough. Plus the image quality isnt the best for the price. Since you own 16mm and 50mm, i’d personally just take the kit lens. Carrying both 16mm and 18-105 can be quite annoying as neither one has a small form factor
@@DogDaddy1969 You'll be more than happy from 18-105 OSS f4. I got 6300 and I had dilemma too but when I bought it my dilemma dissappear thank to technology mafia. 18-105 plus crane v2 works like a charm
Is Hoovies Garage your brother?
Zeiss 55/1.8 will be the best until the sigma 56/1.4 is out 💪💪💪
The Zeiss will be smaller and lighter though.
@@neogod29 sigma is probably smaller and lighter - about 260 grams VS 281 grams.
Curious about the sigma!
Except that the Zeiss is a full frame lens whereas the Sigma is designed for APS-C.
@@theizza68 I doubt it. It's a 1.4 which means more glass. Plus Sigma concentrates on sharpness more than size. I'm not sure if there is a single Sigma lens that's smaller than an equivalent Sony lens.
I LOVE the SEL50f1.8. If you have a Sony APS-C camera body then you need to get that lens.... esp for portraits
True story!
Zeiss 55mm F1.8 vs Sony 85mm F1.8 on A6500 please.
DXO measures 40 Perceptual MP resolution for the 55mm Zeiss on an A7RII with its full frame 42 MP sensor, i.e. it resolves to the limit of that high resolution, full frame sensor. On the A6000 with a 24Mp sensor, the lens performance drops to 15 Perceptual MP, as you would predict from the smaller, lower resolution sensor. This lens will only show its true capability on a high resolution, full frame sensor.
A request...when you are moving around the comparison shots in Lightroom slow down bit when zoomed in. It helps us older viewers comprehend what you're showing. Well, me anyway.
congrats on your videos - you are doing a great job.
U were using a silver version of the 50mm rite...now u got a new one ?
Raghul Chandru Yes I got a new one
I guess you missed on other factors that makes Zeiss greater than the Sony 50. the build difference is night and day, and definitely the autofocus.
Thanks for this review, very helpful! Will you do a Samyang 50mm 1.2 review? Would love to see it from you!
Virtually all the differences between the two lenses are explained simply by the fact that the Zeiss is 10% longer in focal length, especially the resolution and the bokeh (a term derived from the Japanese, translated meaning: "bring lots more money". I shoot landscapes and travel shots and could care less about bokeh. But I do greatly value sharpness.
Great comparison I was shocked how close it was! The Zeiss is hands down my favorite lens and offers a great gateway into full frame! I compared the images of my Zeiss on the A7ii with my sigma 30 on the a6000 for similar field of view and the full frame sharpness is phenomenal.
Finally these lens 😀
OFC are the bookehballs on the sony smaller, you got a 5mm shorter focal length, so everything is a bit further away and smaller. (I am total noob and have no idea. Just my logic. So pls don't kill me, if iam wrong)
I think agree, also no expert myself but the subject framing is different. If the subject was the same size in the frame eg back away on the 55mm they would look much closer.
The comparison is not quite fair for the Sony 50 mm lens due to the fact that it is for APS-C sensor...You may be able to do such a comparison fairly on the central region of the image, though. At the edge where the lens performance is at its worse due to chromatic and spherical aberations, the Zeiss lens is not being evaluated due to its image circle is larger than the sensor.
Nice comparison. The Zeiss is a little better but I don't think the price difference is justified if you shoot aps-c
the sony fe 50mm 1.8 is for full frame the aspcs is called ef 50 1.8
When it comes to APSC I'd still prefer the sony 50mm, the zeiss crop is alittle to pinched it seems like in comparison and it made the focus so much more centered personally i liked when he zoomed in around the models hair and i could see the 50 at the same distance was noticeably sharper.
You are right the Zeiss zoom lenses are not good, the 24-70mm f/4 for full frame is not so good too, but the prime lenses are excellent
It has been quiet some time you dont talk about tripods.
You could do filters our travel backpacks. That being said... Keep the good work
Still like the 85mm 1.8 for portrait work.
I think if you went a bit closer on the 50mm to get the same zoom level, the bokeh would be even more equal.
That's a fact! He's closer with the Zeiss!
With Zeiss 55mm The Colour Saturation and Micro Contrast is way superior than Sony lense.
I can't wait for the Sigma 56mm 1.4
Nice comparison though. They're both good lenses. The 50mm 1.8 is a fabulous lens though for being so dang cheap! No reason to get the Zeiss unless you are trying to do the FF upgrade thing.
is like 82,5mm vs 75mm 1.4
Considering the price difference there is not a lot in it. I own the Sony 1.8 50mm and really like it. To me the Zeiss was better below F2.8 but above that they were almost identical.
I have the aps-c 50mm F1.8 & always thought it was a fantastic lens ... I shoot full frame now & the FE 50mm F1.8 is a bloody joke , if only Sony would make a MK 2 , unlikely as they want you to pay $1000 for the Zeiss version. .. good for aps-c users but for those who upgrade to Full Frame be warned Sony doesnt do budget quality lenses.
I also have FE 50mm, it's not as good as aps-c 50mm but it was 200 dollars so I kept my expectations low. I think it's fine for the price, Zeiss is overpriced and the Sigma art 50mm is superb but that size and weight.. that's a fkin joke!
i got my Sony 50mm for a bargain £150 brand new on sale. One top quality lens for the price.
I have the Sony 50mm and I do like it on an a6500. I have never tried a Zeiss lens due to the cost for hobby use. Maybe someday.
I also shoot professional video and photography for an avionics manufacturer. I have 40+ years at that profession. There I use high-end gear. The lens starts at the $2K mark. They look fantastic but out of range for me on a personal level.
I'm getting the Sony 50mm f1.8 OSS for my Sony A6300. The sharpness seems relatively sufficient for general purpose, especially at this superb price point. Enjoy.
thank you so mush for rewiew.
i feel like all his videos are ever so slightly biased to make up a viable reason for his new lens purchase to his wife
What a good laugh when you said the Zeiss is definitely better then the E50mm at 8.20. It is not even through pixel peeping. The E50mm is well known for being a sharp lens.
I like your watch
The bokeh you can not compare with different distance between lens to object ( wife ). The closer object to lens the more bokeh you get.
me prefer samyang 45mm
I'm looking for value for money. Sony 50mm that is.
You need to upgrade to sony full frame camera already! Hehhe
$1000 for a standard lens, no thanks.
Watching this months after buying the 55mm to possibly make me feel bad... :)
I would like to see my 40 years old Minolta MD Rokkor 50mm 1.4 against those two, even it got no autofocus and u need an adapter. :-) price with adapter around 120€
I have a Minolta MD 50mm 2.0 with an adapter and it's great! It was my dad's. With focus peaking on it's a lot of fun. I hardly ever take it out though because autofocus just makes life so much easier, and the Sony 50mm pics are just as good if not better. It's still kind of fun to use classic lenses sometimes though.
between the two lenses, i choose the pretty Lady
Sure the zeiss is better but not $750 better. Stick with the sony. It's a great lens for the money.
Little difference in performance, huge difference in price