Had several 50mm F1.4 Zeiss (SEL50F14Z). They were all sharper than all GMs i had. The only problem with the ZA is its age, the weight and the AF is a bit slow compared to modern GMs. The pros of the zeiss are the microcontrast and the cinematic look of pictures. The sharpness of real, good 50mm Zeiss should be expected to be at least he same as the newer 1.4GM. That thing you have is clearly defective.
Nah, they are just paid by Sony to sell the new lens and burry the Zeiss as they are not partners anymore , this is just good marketing by Sony, as always, the Zeiss probably smokes both GM's
I still think you probably got a bum ZA, sharpness wise, but yes in every other respect it is old and slow. But the batch to batch variance in many Zeiss lenses is a reason to tread carefully with it on the used market (where they are in abundance and will now be discounted compared with this new GM). Mine is sharp, many others say the same thing. But there are lemons out there.
You might want to get that 50 mm Zeiss checked out because the focus is very bad for a premium lens like that. the version you have might be defective.
In our tests so far, the biggest difference is going to be for sports shooters. The a1/a9 artifically limit the Sigma lens to 15 FPS, whereas the Sony lenses are not throttled and can shoot at a full 30 FPS. But the Sony lens is also significantly smaller.
That's a massive collection of 50mm lenses you're testing! I've been looking to upgrade from my little 55/1.8 CZ which I've had since purchasing the original Sony A7. I've felt there's so little reason to do so because of the sharpness and relatively bright 1.8 aperture, but I've been wanting even more low-light capability. The difference between $1300 and $2000 is a steep difference so looking forward to the next video!
I also own the 55/1.8 and would like to know if it's worth the upgrade to the 1.4, especially for the autofocus speed? Also, if buying a second lens for jobs, would buying another 55/1.8 used, be worth the savings or not? Currently use an A7R4 and shoot portraits and dance.
Dont upgrade. Its almost as sharp as the GM. The only differences are size and weight (which 55/1.8 is much better) and the f1.4 vs f1.8 which isnt a big deal unless you go for the f1.2. But the price, size and weight difference makes you think twice…
Except it's not, Sony Zeiss Planar 50 1.4 is one of the sharpest lenses, even on 1.4, but especially at 2.8. Maybe they missed the focus showing this one, I don't know. I've bought Zeiss Planar 50 several years ago used, and don't feel like changing it, it makes very beautiful images. The downsides of it are weight, size and maybe a relatively slow focus - it's an old lens - but the image quality is excellent.
@@orlangurs maybe you got a very sharp sample. I think it used to be that the 55 Zeiss 1.8 was even sharper…but my 50 1.2 even beats the 90mm 2.8 Macro G, one of the sharpest lenses ever…
roger cicala has measured actual mtf of zeiss 1.4 and it is among sharpest 50s for sony. T’n’C have veeery bad sample of it - I would say it clearly requires repair or replacement
@@seencere7284 Gerald Undone also had similarly bad results with the Zeiss 1.4. Horribly soft compared to the Sigma and the new Sony. Perhaps every single Zeiss 1.4 has quality control issues lol, or the simple fact that the design is old and not as advanced.
Zeiss 50mm is razor sharp…those samples are simply laughable. I’m no fan of Zeiss but colors that lens produces are imho more pleasing. Macro contrast is great as well.
wish you would compare the za as a used $700 option. i dont think anyone is selling it for 1500 and your only comments were its expensive which it was years ago.
50mm 75mm 100mm 200mm and so on.... Where do these numbers come from?🤔 I understand that the higher the number, the more narrow the field of view, but I want to know is, what does Xmm refer to? Is it the distance from front element to back element? Or distance from front element to image sensor? What is it?
I don’t know what happened to your Zeiss. There was obviously something wrong with it, and you still used it for comparison. I owned Zeiss (switched to GM 1.2), and it was a very sharp lens. 👎
I think there has to be something wrong with that Zeiss lens. No way should it be that soft. You should get another sample of the lens and compare the two.
3:44 why is it that the Zeiss looks way better than the new GM here? The Sony looks clinical and flat. The Zeiss has way more depth. But yes, the new GM is sharper, I'd still pick the Zeiss here. Was the light different somehow? I don't get it. Edit: 5:41 Okay the 1.2 also looks way better than the 1.4.
I’m a little confused. Your first side by side comparison, one is at f16 and the other is at f22. Is it due to one having more aperture blades than the other? Thank you in advance!
I thought that was weird too. Canon and Nikon have amazing 50 1.2s. And Nikon has an amazing 50 1.8. And both Nikon and Canon now have amazing 85 1.2 which Sony still doesn't have
I am unsure if it makes sense to buy it in Europe. The 1.4 is 2000 euros and the 1.2 is 2300 euros. I think in Europe the 300 euros difference makes little sense... it should be closer to 500 euros to actually make sense
Sony really needs a new 50mm f/1.8 G lens with dual linear motors and great optical qualities. The current 50 1.8 is not that great. You should have mentioned the terrible, slow, and loud autofocusing on that lens. Had it and sold it because of those reasons. The 50 1.4 GM is still a little heavy at 516 grams.
omg. I'm a beginner user of a good camera. They are so complicated! I take good pictures with bad cameras; aka smartphones and cheap cameras. Someone liked my pictures enough to give me an awesome professional camera. I'm just starting to learn how to use it. I really love it, but there is so much to learn! Thanks for your help!
Why buy the Zeiss over the new GM - because it is cheaper new (£1,300 Vs £1500), or used for half the price (£670 for a good one) of the GM. Despite that one obviously duff lens they keep complaining about, it is still one of the sharpest 50mm F1.4 autofocus lens you can by... look at every other review or DxOMark for clarification.
In the line up photo I didn't see the 50mm I use: the Vogtlander f2 Apo-Lanthar. MF, but wonderful image quality, and unique aperture blades engineered for bokeh at f/2.0 & f/2.8 but for precision 12 point stars at f/3.5 and up. When I want both AF and speed, I use my Zeiss Batis f2 40mm CF. Both these lenses are in the 350g range, a pleasure to carry. Both are uncompromised even wide open.
When comparing 50mm lenses (next week), please make sure to use up to date Firmware. In my experience with 35mm and 85’m f1.4 Samyangs they improved significantly with updates. I’m keen on the Samyang 50mm f1.4 ver II. I’d love to know that your review was using latest firmware. Thanks!
I'm not a pro, that's why I bought a manual samyang 50/1.4 second hand last year for around 160 USD, you can tell me anything about other 50mm lenses but that doesn't make sense to me anymore, this is how I bought a full manual fullframe F1.4 kit from Samyang 24, 35, 50, 85, 135 (F2.0) for the price of one Sony 50mm f/1.4 GM ... OK, they don't have autofocus on the other hand price versus quality is the biggest, I'm sorry but there is no any discussion is pointless around that.
if you are shooting video then manual samyang is ok. For other uses, it is garbage. if it hasnt decentered yet, it is just a matter of time. Its pointless to try to convince you to check it, as you are already closed to any new ideas. Goodluck with that!
This is just an FYI, OK? There is also an other 50mm e-mount lense, that you should consider and that is the Samyang 50mm 1.4 FE II. It's smaller than the new Sony GM 1.4 and lighter. it's also much less expensive. By the way, it's razor sharp. Here's the specs: weight: 419g. 80mmwide and 90mm long. The filter is 71mm. The cost is $589.00 list price...Not too shabby! Lastly, don't forget about the Sony 55mm 1.8. It's only 280grams, 70mm long and 64mm wide. Even if it's a little "long in the tooth" it's a razor sharp optic. You can pick up a used one for $550.00.
If you're measuring sharpness or autofocus accuracy in any objective fashion, the Zeiss lenses fail every time. Don't let confirmation bias cloud your judgement.
I have a batis 85mm and I love it. You are right the kit doesn’t always make a difference and if you are not in the market for a 50mm due to being happy that is great. I watch these because I don’t love my 55 f1.8 and it might be in my head because I love the size, the price was good, and easy to travel which seems perfect right not really. All that to say if you are happy maybe watch the portrait video Chelsea does which is super, great, awesome… maybe I could add a few more positive words for that video but yeah don’t worry about your kit if you are happy just be you and enjoy the art and passion you clearly have for photography
I look forward to your 50mm comparison. Something I am sure you will cover is how sharp they look wide open. This has often been an issue for last 50mm lenses (like the older Canon EF 50mm f1.2 L DSLR lens). The Canon RF 50mm f1.2 L is the natural competitor to the Sony 50mm f1.2 GM. A cross platform 50mm lens comparison will be very interesting.
Did you use the same defective 50mm ZA 1.4 for this review as you just did in your 50mm Sony roundup review? Why would you complain about the performance of a known bad example. Better yet why would an honest reviewer use a defective lens in a review? Also the current price for the ziess is $999.99. How old is the ziess that you used. Mine was made in 2023 and is a great performer. 😞
Sony is INSANE. Sony makes 7 50mm Full Frame lenses; 9 if you count the 55 and the 40 which are generally considered "standard" lenses even if they are not exactly 50mm. 40mm/2.5 G 50mm/2.8 Macro 50mm/2.5 G 50mm/1.8 FE 50mm/1.8 OSS 50mm/1.4 ZA (Sony-Zeiss) 50mm/1.4 GM 50mm/1.2 GM 55mm/1.8 ZA (Sony-Zeiss) NUTS!
Awesome insight as always..for some photographers at this point..its all about that lower f-stop..1.2>1.4..im sure this 1.4 is amazing like its "bigger sibling" the 1.2..and of course now you are paying for the price difference..is around $700 USD worth it for a 1.2 or 1.4..like I said at this point for some photographers..its just clout and bragging rights that "I paid more than you" for a 1.2..haha at the end of the day our clients can't even tell and even some photographers can't even tell what image is what..1.2 or 1.4 image..its weird that Sony still chose to make this 1.4 GMlens? seems like there is no need for it when you have that 1.2?..now you're putting the lens against each other for sales?..when you could have just made customers not have the ability to choose and make them choose the only one 50 GM 1.2..lol I am just waiting for that 85 1.2 GM!! haha im sure it will be around the same design as that 50 1.2 GM..slightly smaller and lightweight would be perfect..
I think the Sony 50mm 1.8 is okay but not as sharp as other Sony lenses. I own the 85mm 1.8 and i love that lens. but it is a bit too tight. and I want a 50mm and was thinking Sony 55 1.8 due to how sharp that lens is but now with Sigma's 50mm 1.4 being basically the same price the only reason to go with the Sony would be the size. it would be great to see a comparison based on value. the image quality you get, focusing speed, etc. you get for the money. I know that is subjective but you make good arguments for both. like in this case the 1.2 vs 1.4 and how for the money it may not be worth it.
Is it just me or is the color reproduction and visual characteristics of this video is a little different? Is it from the new unannounced full frame ZV camera that's going to be official in the last week of march? 🤔
Would get the the 1.4GM if I didn't already have the excellent 1.2GM. The F1.2 isn't so much big as heavy, very heavy chunk of glass. Were I starting my lens collection knowing what I know now I would say F1.8 is the point of diminishing returns; that is I would only collect f1.8-f2.5 for prime lenses. If you can't make a picture shine at f1.8, f1.2 won't make it better.
Uhm, thats always the case. All of the big RUclipsrs preproduce the videos for all companies and are forced to not release it (or even talk about its existance) until the press release.
I think RUclipsrs saying stuff like “objectively better” than zeiss - especially when it comes to flaring CA and sharpness are so unimportant and is killing off the magic lenses like zeiss which is why we don’t see any new lenses from them anymore. I’m a huge fan of you guys but you forgot to mention that gm lenses can be flat out boring when it comes to character.
Odd request: could you include the sigma 65mm in the tests? Despite the slightly longer focal length I do believe that it is in the 50mm ballpark, and I'm curious about how bokeh compares with the faster and wider 50mm lens. Thanks!
One thing I really like about being in photographer mode is how it changes the way I see the world. It seems to improve the quality of my vision, and my relationship to beauty. It's good for my head. :)
My advice as being a professional photographer: don't by the 1.2. The 1.2 is not even 1/2 stop brighter than a 1.4. The new 1.4 does not justify the high price tag. It is just milking the customer. When being interested in one of the lenses have a look what colour balance look like, how are the high lights rendered, what is the transition between in focus and out of focus. Since new lenses are all very sharp the majority of them become blurry in a sudden and the change is not smooth. In the end of all lenses that have been suggested here are good. No one will ask what lenses were used to accomplish an image. The Sony 50 /1.8, 55 /1.8 etc are all excellent choices.
Canon doesn't even have a 50 1.4. Just embarrassing how much they want to sell you their $2,100 lens. I mean the lens is not even on the road map never has been mentioned nothing.
Hi guys I have an offer to get almost new 50 mm 1.2 for $1400 with 2 filters included. The new 50 mm 1.4 of sony is 1300 lighter. Watched so many videos. Can you suggest what you would do if you were me. Thank you
![Sony A6400 City Street Photography | BEST BUDGET Lens Sony 50mm F1.8 [London]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QGCz3APDYJM/mqdefault.jpg)
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
03:05 - the sunburst on the right looks much nicer
Yeah I see that. Obviously it's subjective. I do think 22 starburst points might be too many...
Had several 50mm F1.4 Zeiss (SEL50F14Z). They were all sharper than all GMs i had. The only problem with the ZA is its age, the weight and the AF is a bit slow compared to modern GMs. The pros of the zeiss are the microcontrast and the cinematic look of pictures. The sharpness of real, good 50mm Zeiss should be expected to be at least he same as the newer 1.4GM. That thing you have is clearly defective.
Nah, they are just paid by Sony to sell the new lens and burry the Zeiss as they are not partners anymore , this is just good marketing by Sony, as always, the Zeiss probably smokes both GM's
then Sigma 50mm f/1.2 would be the choice
I still think you probably got a bum ZA, sharpness wise, but yes in every other respect it is old and slow. But the batch to batch variance in many Zeiss lenses is a reason to tread carefully with it on the used market (where they are in abundance and will now be discounted compared with this new GM). Mine is sharp, many others say the same thing. But there are lemons out there.
they can't not know
Pls compare GM 50mm 1.4 vs Zies 55mm 1.8 (Light, Price & Image Quality...)
You might want to get that 50 mm Zeiss checked out because the focus is very bad for a premium lens like that.
the version you have might be defective.
It's very odd that no reviewer obtains results comparable to yours on the sony zeiss. I'm sure your lens is damaged.
Sony loaned it to us 🤷🏼♂️
@@TonyAndChelsea Doesn't negate the suggestion.
Will be really interesting to see how it compares to the new Sigma 50 f/1.4 DG DN
In our tests so far, the biggest difference is going to be for sports shooters. The a1/a9 artifically limit the Sigma lens to 15 FPS, whereas the Sony lenses are not throttled and can shoot at a full 30 FPS. But the Sony lens is also significantly smaller.
Check Unrald Gedone's video :)
That's a massive collection of 50mm lenses you're testing! I've been looking to upgrade from my little 55/1.8 CZ which I've had since purchasing the original Sony A7. I've felt there's so little reason to do so because of the sharpness and relatively bright 1.8 aperture, but I've been wanting even more low-light capability. The difference between $1300 and $2000 is a steep difference so looking forward to the next video!
I also own the 55/1.8 and would like to know if it's worth the upgrade to the 1.4, especially for the autofocus speed? Also, if buying a second lens for jobs, would buying another 55/1.8 used, be worth the savings or not? Currently use an A7R4 and shoot portraits and dance.
Dont upgrade. Its almost as sharp as the GM. The only differences are size and weight (which 55/1.8 is much better) and the f1.4 vs f1.8 which isnt a big deal unless you go for the f1.2. But the price, size and weight difference makes you think twice…
What is the lens used to shoot this video?
It's funny how the nifty 1.8 is sharper than the Zeiss.
Except it's not, Sony Zeiss Planar 50 1.4 is one of the sharpest lenses, even on 1.4, but especially at 2.8.
Maybe they missed the focus showing this one, I don't know.
I've bought Zeiss Planar 50 several years ago used, and don't feel like changing it, it makes very beautiful images.
The downsides of it are weight, size and maybe a relatively slow focus - it's an old lens - but the image quality is excellent.
@@orlangurs maybe you got a very sharp sample. I think it used to be that the 55 Zeiss 1.8 was even sharper…but my 50 1.2 even beats the 90mm 2.8 Macro G, one of the sharpest lenses ever…
roger cicala has measured actual mtf of zeiss 1.4 and it is among sharpest 50s for sony. T’n’C have veeery bad sample of it - I would say it clearly requires repair or replacement
@@seencere7284 Gerald Undone also had similarly bad results with the Zeiss 1.4. Horribly soft compared to the Sigma and the new Sony. Perhaps every single Zeiss 1.4 has quality control issues lol, or the simple fact that the design is old and not as advanced.
@@willmannering long story short: this lens is too vary in quality and there are much better alternatives
Love to know how it compares with the 55f1.8 ?
That's part of our full roundup coming up this next week!
@@TonyAndChelsea Looking forward to it!
Hi, thank you for so detailed comparison.
I really miss new Sigma Art 50mm 1.4. What is your opinion, is it worth to pay more for Sony?
Zeiss 50mm is razor sharp…those samples are simply laughable. I’m no fan of Zeiss but colors that lens produces are imho more pleasing. Macro contrast is great as well.
Please include the 55mm 1.8 FE Zeis lens in your big review. Thanks. :-)
Will do!
Can I know what lens did you use to shoot this review ? Thanks
wish you would compare the za as a used $700 option. i dont think anyone is selling it for 1500 and your only comments were its expensive which it was years ago.
Please include the old 55mm f/1.8 Sony Zeiss lens in your upcoming comparison. Maybe include 3rd party lenses in a future comparison.
Will do
5:04 the 1.4 is better with backlit contrast because it has less backlight than the 1.2 in the comparison picture
A used 50mm f/1.2 is almost the same price as the 50mm f/1.4
50mm f/1.2, new 16-35mm f/2.8, 70-200mm f/4 - three lens combo for my needs. Great video by the way!
50mm
75mm
100mm
200mm and so on....
Where do these numbers come from?🤔
I understand that the higher the number, the more narrow the field of view, but I want to know is, what does Xmm refer to?
Is it the distance from front element to back element?
Or distance from front element to image sensor?
What is it?
I am undecided between 35mm f1.4 or 50mm f1.2/1.4. What factors should I consider to make the selection between these two?
I don’t know what happened to your Zeiss. There was obviously something wrong with it, and you still used it for comparison. I owned Zeiss (switched to GM 1.2), and it was a very sharp lens. 👎
Yeah that comparison shot at 3:53 was shocking, that lens must have been dropped previously or something
Would like to know how it compares with the Samyang 1.4, which i think has best bang for buck for 1.4 image quality. And also the Sigma.
Yep that's in our upcoming comparison. You're right that the Samyang is VERY sharp.
I love your presentations! Assured, good-natured, well- and respectfully reasoned.
I think there has to be something wrong with that Zeiss lens. No way should it be that soft. You should get another sample of the lens and compare the two.
3:44 why is it that the Zeiss looks way better than the new GM here? The Sony looks clinical and flat. The Zeiss has way more depth. But yes, the new GM is sharper, I'd still pick the Zeiss here. Was the light different somehow? I don't get it. Edit: 5:41 Okay the 1.2 also looks way better than the 1.4.
I couldn't tell so will ask. Is the Sony 50mm f/1.8 OSS lens included in your up coming multiple 50mm lens review?
I think it's incorrect to compare the sharpness of different lenses at different minimal apertures.
I’m a little confused. Your first side by side comparison, one is at f16 and the other is at f22. Is it due to one having more aperture blades than the other? Thank you in advance!
Great opening drone shots!
Thanks!
Do I need the 50mm since I already have a 24-70 f/2.8 GM II?
For night photography - yes
how about the 55mm zeiss?
The elephant in the room in the 55/1.8 Zony. How does that compare to the 50/1.4 GM
That's coming up in our full comparison!
The new Gm is on my to get list in the future
Maaaan another broken Zeiss 50 1.4 :D I am 100% sure your copy of the 50 1.4 zeiss is broken.
I think so too. It's a broken lens.
Hey, what was that about Canon not having an RF 1.4 ???
Who cares with a 1.2 and a 1.8 available.. seriously .. that was just weird …
I thought that was weird too. Canon and Nikon have amazing 50 1.2s. And Nikon has an amazing 50 1.8. And both Nikon and Canon now have amazing 85 1.2 which Sony still doesn't have
I am unsure if it makes sense to buy it in Europe. The 1.4 is 2000 euros and the 1.2 is 2300 euros. I think in Europe the 300 euros difference makes little sense... it should be closer to 500 euros to actually make sense
Sony really needs a new 50mm f/1.8 G lens with dual linear motors and great optical qualities. The current 50 1.8 is not that great. You should have mentioned the terrible, slow, and loud autofocusing on that lens. Had it and sold it because of those reasons. The 50 1.4 GM is still a little heavy at 516 grams.
You left out the ZA 55/1.8; one lens people are most likely to consider over the 50/1.4 GM primarily because of size.
Awesome videos, helps me determine what gear to buy for my camera.
omg. I'm a beginner user of a good camera. They are so complicated! I take good pictures with bad cameras; aka smartphones and cheap cameras. Someone liked my pictures enough to give me an awesome professional camera. I'm just starting to learn how to use it. I really love it, but there is so much to learn! Thanks for your help!
Why buy the Zeiss over the new GM - because it is cheaper new (£1,300 Vs £1500), or used for half the price (£670 for a good one) of the GM. Despite that one obviously duff lens they keep complaining about, it is still one of the sharpest 50mm F1.4 autofocus lens you can by... look at every other review or DxOMark for clarification.
Should've made a 85mm 1.2 gm
I think we'll get that this year
@@TonyAndChelsea let's hope so I'm jealous over Canon's
In the line up photo I didn't see the 50mm I use: the Vogtlander f2 Apo-Lanthar. MF, but wonderful image quality, and unique aperture blades engineered for bokeh at f/2.0 & f/2.8 but for precision 12 point stars at f/3.5 and up. When I want both AF and speed, I use my Zeiss Batis f2 40mm CF. Both these lenses are in the 350g range, a pleasure to carry. Both are uncompromised even wide open.
Got a 50 mm 1.4 za for about 800$ and love it. Sure the GM is gona be a little better but the price was to tempting to pass out.
I'm ditching my auto focus Zeiss 1.4 and ordered the Laowa 58mm f2.8. Manual focus I know but the dreamy bokeh and macro. Can't wait.
When comparing 50mm lenses (next week), please make sure to use up to date Firmware.
In my experience with 35mm and 85’m f1.4 Samyangs they improved significantly with updates.
I’m keen on the Samyang 50mm f1.4 ver II. I’d love to know that your review was using latest firmware.
Thanks!
I'm not a pro, that's why I bought a manual samyang 50/1.4 second hand last year for around 160 USD, you can tell me anything about other 50mm lenses but that doesn't make sense to me anymore, this is how I bought a full manual fullframe F1.4 kit from Samyang 24, 35, 50, 85, 135 (F2.0) for the price of one Sony 50mm f/1.4 GM ... OK, they don't have autofocus on the other hand price versus quality is the biggest, I'm sorry but there is no any discussion is pointless around that.
if you are shooting video then manual samyang is ok. For other uses, it is garbage.
if it hasnt decentered yet, it is just a matter of time.
Its pointless to try to convince you to check it, as you are already closed to any new ideas. Goodluck with that!
Good job !! 🙂 For the comparison I'd say my highest interest would be in bokeh ! Pleeaaazzzz show us comparisons at widest apertures of the same scene
This is just an FYI, OK? There is also an other 50mm e-mount lense, that you should consider and that is the Samyang 50mm 1.4 FE II. It's smaller than the new Sony GM 1.4 and lighter. it's also much less expensive. By the way, it's razor sharp. Here's the specs: weight: 419g. 80mmwide and 90mm long. The filter is 71mm. The cost is $589.00 list price...Not too shabby! Lastly, don't forget about the Sony 55mm 1.8. It's only 280grams, 70mm long and 64mm wide. Even if it's a little "long in the tooth" it's a razor sharp optic. You can pick up a used one for $550.00.
Yeah that'll be in our full comparison
The Zeiss 50 beats all of the others easily in character and rendering and that’s more important that speed, weight etc etc.
Love my 50 1.4 ZA, just love it. IQ is not about markting or charts. Don´t take the magic out of photography.
If you're measuring sharpness or autofocus accuracy in any objective fashion, the Zeiss lenses fail every time. Don't let confirmation bias cloud your judgement.
I have a batis 85mm and I love it. You are right the kit doesn’t always make a difference and if you are not in the market for a 50mm due to being happy that is great. I watch these because I don’t love my 55 f1.8 and it might be in my head because I love the size, the price was good, and easy to travel which seems perfect right not really. All that to say if you are happy maybe watch the portrait video Chelsea does which is super, great, awesome… maybe I could add a few more positive words for that video but yeah don’t worry about your kit if you are happy just be you and enjoy the art and passion you clearly have for photography
@@MattTrevett Only rank amateurs put "sharpness" at the top of their criteria.
@@86BBUB Only a sith deals in absolutes.
Always love y’all’s videos
I look forward to your 50mm comparison. Something I am sure you will cover is how sharp they look wide open. This has often been an issue for last 50mm lenses (like the older Canon EF 50mm f1.2 L DSLR lens). The Canon RF 50mm f1.2 L is the natural competitor to the Sony 50mm f1.2 GM. A cross platform 50mm lens comparison will be very interesting.
They missed the focus and they concluded the zeiss 50mm f/1.4 isn’t sharp , guys it’s as sharp as sony gm f/1.2
Did you use the same defective 50mm ZA 1.4 for this review as you just did in your 50mm Sony roundup review? Why would you complain about the performance of a known bad example. Better yet why would an honest reviewer use a defective lens in a review? Also the current price for the ziess is $999.99. How old is the ziess that you used. Mine was made in 2023 and is a great performer. 😞
Helping Sony sell the new lens?
Sony is INSANE. Sony makes 7 50mm Full Frame lenses; 9 if you count the 55 and the 40 which are generally considered "standard" lenses even if they are not exactly 50mm.
40mm/2.5 G
50mm/2.8 Macro
50mm/2.5 G
50mm/1.8 FE
50mm/1.8 OSS
50mm/1.4 ZA (Sony-Zeiss)
50mm/1.4 GM
50mm/1.2 GM
55mm/1.8 ZA (Sony-Zeiss)
NUTS!
Would have loved to have seen the 55mm 1.8 in this lineup.
Who told you that 50mm F1.4 ZA is 1500 dollars?????
I wish I could make better compositions with my 50. I never seem to get a good shot compared my 16-35.
can yo uactually buy the zeiss new? it shouldnt be more that 600usd today...
Awesome insight as always..for some photographers at this point..its all about that lower f-stop..1.2>1.4..im sure this 1.4 is amazing like its "bigger sibling" the 1.2..and of course now you are paying for the price difference..is around $700 USD worth it for a 1.2 or 1.4..like I said at this point for some photographers..its just clout and bragging rights that "I paid more than you" for a 1.2..haha at the end of the day our clients can't even tell and even some photographers can't even tell what image is what..1.2 or 1.4 image..its weird that Sony still chose to make this 1.4 GMlens? seems like there is no need for it when you have that 1.2?..now you're putting the lens against each other for sales?..when you could have just made customers not have the ability to choose and make them choose the only one 50 GM 1.2..lol
I am just waiting for that 85 1.2 GM!! haha im sure it will be around the same design as that 50 1.2 GM..slightly smaller and lightweight would be perfect..
I think the Sony 50mm 1.8 is okay but not as sharp as other Sony lenses. I own the 85mm 1.8 and i love that lens. but it is a bit too tight. and I want a 50mm and was thinking Sony 55 1.8 due to how sharp that lens is but now with Sigma's 50mm 1.4 being basically the same price the only reason to go with the Sony would be the size. it would be great to see a comparison based on value. the image quality you get, focusing speed, etc. you get for the money. I know that is subjective but you make good arguments for both. like in this case the 1.2 vs 1.4 and how for the money it may not be worth it.
I may be selling my 1.2, and zeiss 55 for this new 50...I will keep some money and I will use it far more than the 1.2 because of the size.
1.2 sony is great. I didn't like how my knuckles hit the lens vs Canon 501.2 - the body grip is a little more rooms for my hands.
Agreed. And with gloves it's really easy to accidentally hit the lens release button.
The 50mm is my favorite (35mm on my Aps-c)
one reviewer says 1.2GM AF is faster and more robust due to 4X XD motors comparing to 2 XD motors in 1.4GM...dunno whom to believe :D
Is it just me or is the color reproduction and visual characteristics of this video is a little different? Is it from the new unannounced full frame ZV camera that's going to be official in the last week of march? 🤔
the sony 1.8 and sony 1.4 looked EXACTLY the same and i been doing photography for several years now
How funny is that the previous sharpest lens 50ZA is much softer than 249$ 50 1.8
Not funny, that lens is broken and reviewer here is so amateur to realize that.50ZA is razor sharp lens.
Would get the the 1.4GM if I didn't already have the excellent 1.2GM. The F1.2 isn't so much big as heavy, very heavy chunk of glass. Were I starting my lens collection knowing what I know now I would say F1.8 is the point of diminishing returns; that is I would only collect f1.8-f2.5 for prime lenses. If you can't make a picture shine at f1.8, f1.2 won't make it better.
OMG whats with the starbursts like who cares about that lol
wow , just announced and Tony's video is out!!!
Uhm, thats always the case. All of the big RUclipsrs preproduce the videos for all companies and are forced to not release it (or even talk about its existance) until the press release.
Sony killing the game with the 1.4 glass 😊
I think RUclipsrs saying stuff like “objectively better” than zeiss - especially when it comes to flaring CA and sharpness are so unimportant and is killing off the magic lenses like zeiss which is why we don’t see any new lenses from them anymore. I’m a huge fan of you guys but you forgot to mention that gm lenses can be flat out boring when it comes to character.
Was nervous one of the lenses might drop juggling 3 of them at the intro.
Wait until we do the 11 lens roundup!
On the other hand, the Zeiss is half the price of the new GM lens on the second hand market...
zeiss has better light transmission and with less elements = higher T value, but not much, wont justify the weight I say
I'd add the 55 1.8 Zeiss to this comparison.....
So when looking at the available 50mm for e-mount I counted 38 unique options, will we see a side-by-side x 38 in the review?
you guys never heard of 3d pop?
Dream Lenses!
I wish y'all would have thrown in the 55 1.8.
sony fe 50.4 za는 불량인 제품으로 테스트를 계속 하고 있으세요. 렌즈 수리 받으셔야 해요
I think photographers buy the gear they buy to impress other photographers because I don’t see much of a difference
Glass. Glorious glass.
Is the 'holy trinity' still a thing?
It's 1300$ dollars or 1800€ in Europe 🫣
Can someone say "lens caps!"?
Odd request: could you include the sigma 65mm in the tests?
Despite the slightly longer focal length I do believe that it is in the 50mm ballpark, and I'm curious about how bokeh compares with the faster and wider 50mm lens.
Thanks!
Always 1.4,
What the.... The canon 50 1.4 is like 100$ used. You buy this for bokeh, nobody cares about sunrays and stuff
If u can afford the f1.2 I'd always go for it...well most of the time.
One thing I really like about being in photographer mode is how it changes the way I see the world. It seems to improve the quality of my vision, and my relationship to beauty. It's good for my head. :)
My advice as being a professional photographer: don't by the 1.2. The 1.2 is not even 1/2 stop brighter than a 1.4. The new 1.4 does not justify the high price tag. It is just milking the customer.
When being interested in one of the lenses have a look what colour balance look like, how are the high lights rendered, what is the transition between in focus and out of focus.
Since new lenses are all very sharp the majority of them become blurry in a sudden and the change is not smooth.
In the end of all lenses that have been suggested here are good. No one will ask what lenses were used to accomplish an image.
The Sony 50 /1.8, 55 /1.8 etc are all excellent choices.
Canon doesn't even have a 50 1.4. Just embarrassing how much they want to sell you their $2,100 lens. I mean the lens is not even on the road map never has been mentioned nothing.
The answer is go with sigma for a 50 1.4 lol
Hi guys
I have an offer to get almost new 50 mm 1.2 for $1400 with 2 filters included.
The new 50 mm 1.4 of sony is 1300 lighter.
Watched so many videos. Can you suggest what you would do if you were me.
Thank you
I have only the 50 f1.4 ZA. Now considering a replacement.