@@PavSZI had the Sigma, the Panasonic has nicer bokeh, more sense of volume and in my opinion better colors. The photos coming from the S Pro has "depth". I also own the 50mm GM and while it has deeper bokeh, it has not the sense of volume of the Panasonic.
I have both the 50mm Planar Sony and the Panasonic 50mm Pro. I can't speak about the Sigma but most people prefer the Planar to the Sigma. All I can say about the 50mm Pro is this lens is awesome. The lens is sharp of course, but the Sigma and the Planar are sharp too. The main difference between these 3 lenses is the rendering. When I compare my pictures with both the Planar and the Pro, I'm always blown away by the Panasonic, it's almost like this lens is f/1.2. It's like a mix between the awesome out of focus of the 35mm Distagon and the 3D pop of the 50mm Planar. For me the price is right.
Hey, is it possible to attach the Planar to the S5? are there any adapters? I love the Zeiss glass - just want to get this camera and use some third party, adapters are ok...
This is coming next week for me, really excited about it! Moved from Canon R5 and RF50 1.2 was 80% on my camera, needed a 50mm lens to keep the magic going! Thank you for the great review and showing the Panasonic S5 the love it deserves!
The photos are really stunning, thank you for this video! (nice channel btw). I am actually seriously considering this camera (not the lens though) as the alternative to A7III. Seems there is no issues with the AF - I sometimes think that there are hired Sony trolls to undermine the latest strong competition from Panasonic. I have been fortunate to have laid my hands on the new Panny S5 and it was a love from first sight - it feels amazing in the hands, like a sleek modern camera with the vintage looks. Anyway, I am really hoping there will be more pocket-friendly standard primes for this system, in the likes of 35mm or 50mm (below f/2.8) that will neither break the bank nor my backbone.
I have been shooting professionally for over 20 years and I shoot with a lot of different lenses for reviews right now and in my opinion the only thing special about this lens is its price. It just doesn't stand out in any way
@@PavSZ IMHO you must have a bad sample. I owned a lot of fast 50mm like the 50mm 1.4 Sony ZA or the RF 50mm 1.2. The pictures just don't have the "POP" of the Lumix.
I love the images you can get from this lens, but nothing can beat a Contax Zeiss 50mm F1.4 for the price and size...maybe only the Summicron R 50mm ahahah Thank you for the video!
Wow. Mechanical focus. Just like my Canon FD 1.4 that gives me great results for VIDEO...and works on all kinds of cameras. It would work great on the Panasonic S5--IF PANASONIC WOULD DELIVER WHEN THEY PROMISED.
I have currently both the Leica summilux 1.4 Sl and the LUMIX 50 1.4. I don’t have the sigma. First off, it’s a mistake to justify one lens over another based on price. A 50 dollar lens might just be fine for your application. Value is very different concept than price. I can buy 2-3 sigmas for the price of a LUMIX, sure but if sigma does not provide you with a look that you value, then is it worth it. One should also consider the true cost of ownership. This includes tax right offs and trade in values. There is also reliably and service options that may determine the value of purchasing a more expensive lens. A failing and or slow sigma Lens will cost you more than a reliable LUMIX lens for instance. The notion of purchasing a zoom lens over this has me straight out laughing. This is not about equivalence. If you value the versatility of zoom over the image rendering of the prime it’s the compromise your willing to make and it makes perfect sense for many occasions. There are many circumstances where character and rendering to one’s own eyes are best provided by a prime lens. Oh and one more thing comparing a 2.8 zoom to 1.4 is chalk and cheese, 2 stops is 400 percent better light gathering, a zoom typically needs to pushed in a little from the widest, and pulled back a little from furthest reaches, in addition to being stopped down to achieve best results. Primes don’t have this problem and the Panasonic along with other L mounts are designed to be used wide open. In shooting the Leica and the lumix side by side, sometimes hard to tell what did what. There are other times where you see the rendering differences and its not insignificant. The value of a lens is not just a rendering question in a general sense of cost it’s about what is does for you. On a trip to Myanmar a few years ago I bought a Leica q and canon m100 with a prime and zoom lens for those telephoto moments. The price for the canon lenses was mid range. The quality and rendering of the images where abysmal for anything better than documenting and memories. The value of the system no matter what the cost was nil. The Q images where spectacular and images won several awards. You can take a Nikon 180mm 2.8 for a portrait prime for 200 dollars and it will render far better than the 900 dollar sigma 50 1.4. It’s not the same focal length, but neither is a zoom compared to prime.
@@AndrewDaddy they are more similar than different and the results are subtle. The Panasonic offers a more neutral bokeh while the Leica offers more a sonar type bokeh. The lumix is brighter in the highlights while it seems the Leica has better highlight control. The Leica seems slightly better at rendering Intertonal colors. The Panasonic seems a little sharper into the corners but this may also mean the image is also flatter across the frame. The differences are small to be sure. I really like the focus clutch of the lumix. Speaking of which the s1r and the Sl, The lumix is faster to focus on the SL and both seem to be about the same..ish on the S1r. Should you buy the Leica or Panasonic, the Leica version is not 3x better image quality, it is however if one values these subtleties then the summilux is for you. If you prefer a stronger highlight, a slightly cooler and more crushed (contrast) modern draw the Panasonic does fit the bill. These lenses offer very close images characteristics. I really enjoy the lumix rendering and appreciate the closer focusing and of course the focus clutch. For hyperkinetic models you’ll appreciate the speed of lumix, for absolute image fidelity with people, slow your talent down a little and enjoy the Summilux.
Sorry but comparing a sigma to this lens is total incompetence. The same way you can ask who needs the cooke lenses or Zeiss CT.3 or summicrons, hasselblad which are 10k for a lens. Nowadays people have NO idea about the true value of good lenses. Yes of course as a beginner you will never value the advantages, these kind of lenses give you. But for professional these little differences are the main reason they choose to pay extra 10k $ on a lens. 1. Contrast and micro contrast 2. The resistance to backlight and redering image while it is backlit, not loosing contrast in such situations 3. Rendering of the bokeh and the falloff! Nobody talks about this 4. Stable performance on all the surface of image , not only in center. 5. Correct render of colors Nowadays modern mainstream photographers can't see the difference between a Sony and a hasselblad. But the real photographers who shoot commercials for big brands, campaigns, they always can see it and that's why they use only good lenses, not garbage like sigma. And that's why they gets hired by those brands. Coz they Can see the difference!
Do you always believe that you get what you pay for? Is very expensive lens always going to deliver the best results?
Just picked up a ‘like new’ for sub 1000 euros. Now it makes more sense 😬
@@firehorseweddingphotograph3995 nice!
Yes, the price is wow, but the pictures coming out of this lens are also WOW!
it's not better than the new Sigma 50mm f1.4 DG DN Art unfortunately
@@PavSZI had the Sigma, the Panasonic has nicer bokeh, more sense of volume and in my opinion better colors. The photos coming from the S Pro has "depth". I also own the 50mm GM and while it has deeper bokeh, it has not the sense of volume of the Panasonic.
I have both the 50mm Planar Sony and the Panasonic 50mm Pro. I can't speak about the Sigma but most people prefer the Planar to the Sigma. All I can say about the 50mm Pro is this lens is awesome. The lens is sharp of course, but the Sigma and the Planar are sharp too. The main difference between these 3 lenses is the rendering. When I compare my pictures with both the Planar and the Pro, I'm always blown away by the Panasonic, it's almost like this lens is f/1.2. It's like a mix between the awesome out of focus of the 35mm Distagon and the 3D pop of the 50mm Planar. For me the price is right.
Hey, is it possible to attach the Planar to the S5? are there any adapters? I love the Zeiss glass - just want to get this camera and use some third party, adapters are ok...
@@Gjuby No you can't attach the Planar 50mm FE f.1.4, this lens is only for Sony E mount.
@@Gjuby You can adapt contax zeiss lenses, there are some samples on my channel if you want to have a look at the footage
This guy's accent is how i imagine Middle-English sounded like something between Germanic and Yorkshire. Very informative video, and beautiful photos!
HaHa! Thanks! Very close, Polish-Lancashire!
thank you for this great review.... it really helped me in my decision making...
Glad I could help!
Very informative, nice examples of what the lens can do and easy and enjoyable to watch.
Many thanks!
This is coming next week for me, really excited about it! Moved from Canon R5 and RF50 1.2 was 80% on my camera, needed a 50mm lens to keep the magic going! Thank you for the great review and showing the Panasonic S5 the love it deserves!
Hope you enjoy it! Good choice!
Thanks for the great reivew.
Glad it was helpful! Thank you
How is the AF with the S5ii?
same as with all Lumix lenses. In my opinion only the price and the weight makes this lens stand out
Thanks very objectives analysis PAV 👏🏽👏🏽
My pleasure! Thanks for watching!
2:47 When the hell have lenses "traditionally" had buttons!?
I'm not talking vintage lenses. Every modern pro lens has got buttons and switches
The photos are really stunning, thank you for this video! (nice channel btw). I am actually seriously considering this camera (not the lens though) as the alternative to A7III. Seems there is no issues with the AF - I sometimes think that there are hired Sony trolls to undermine the latest strong competition from Panasonic. I have been fortunate to have laid my hands on the new Panny S5 and it was a love from first sight - it feels amazing in the hands, like a sleek modern camera with the vintage looks. Anyway, I am really hoping there will be more pocket-friendly standard primes for this system, in the likes of 35mm or 50mm (below f/2.8) that will neither break the bank nor my backbone.
I have both the A7III and S5, I don't want to use the Sony anymore.
Panasonic lent me this lens and I was overwhelmed by it. It is the best lens I have ever used in 40 years of photography but I still can't afford one,
I have been shooting professionally for over 20 years and I shoot with a lot of different lenses for reviews right now and in my opinion the only thing special about this lens is its price. It just doesn't stand out in any way
@@PavSZ IMHO you must have a bad sample. I owned a lot of fast 50mm like the 50mm 1.4 Sony ZA or the RF 50mm 1.2. The pictures just don't have the "POP" of the Lumix.
Hey Keith, you could try to find a pre-owned one and besides, you only live once!
Great video. What profile do shoot videos and photos with?
I shoot only RAW images and v-log
if Panasonic ever release the S Pro f1.4 prime kit. i'll buy them....bit by bit
Maybe they will in the future - who knows
What’s the Leica 24-70 f2.8 like ?!
good question
Has the new S Prime 50mm been released?
not yet
@@PavSZ hopefully soon... not that I even have a full frame camera yet 😅
I love the images you can get from this lens, but nothing can beat a Contax Zeiss 50mm F1.4 for the price and size...maybe only the Summicron R 50mm ahahah
Thank you for the video!
Wow. Mechanical focus. Just like my Canon FD 1.4 that gives me great results for VIDEO...and works on all kinds of cameras. It would work great on the Panasonic S5--IF PANASONIC WOULD DELIVER WHEN THEY PROMISED.
I have currently both the Leica summilux 1.4 Sl and the LUMIX 50 1.4. I don’t have the sigma.
First off, it’s a mistake to justify one lens over another based on price. A 50 dollar lens might just be fine for your application. Value is very different concept than price. I can buy 2-3 sigmas for the price of a LUMIX, sure but if sigma does not provide you with a look that you value, then is it worth it. One should also consider the true cost of ownership. This includes tax right offs and trade in values. There is also reliably and service options that may determine the value of purchasing a more expensive lens. A failing and or slow sigma Lens will cost you more than a reliable LUMIX lens for instance.
The notion of purchasing a zoom lens over this has me straight out laughing. This is not about equivalence. If you value the versatility of zoom over the image rendering of the prime it’s the compromise your willing to make and it makes perfect sense for many occasions. There are many circumstances where character and rendering to one’s own eyes are best provided by a prime lens. Oh and one more thing comparing a 2.8 zoom to 1.4 is chalk and cheese, 2 stops is 400 percent better light gathering, a zoom typically needs to pushed in a little from the widest, and pulled back a little from furthest reaches, in addition to being stopped down to achieve best results. Primes don’t have this problem and the Panasonic along with other L mounts are designed to be used wide open.
In shooting the Leica and the lumix side by side, sometimes hard to tell what did what. There are other times where you see the rendering differences and its not insignificant.
The value of a lens is not just a rendering question in a general sense of cost it’s about what is does for you. On a trip to Myanmar a few years ago I bought a Leica q and canon m100 with a prime and zoom lens for those telephoto moments. The price for the canon lenses was mid range. The quality and rendering of the images where abysmal for anything better than documenting and memories. The value of the system no matter what the cost was nil. The Q images where spectacular and images won several awards. You can take a Nikon 180mm 2.8 for a portrait prime for 200 dollars and it will render far better than the 900 dollar sigma 50 1.4. It’s not the same focal length, but neither is a zoom compared to prime.
How would you describe the rendering difference between the S Pro and Summilux SL?
@@AndrewDaddy they are more similar than different and the results are subtle. The Panasonic offers a more neutral bokeh while the Leica offers more a sonar type bokeh. The lumix is brighter in the highlights while it seems the Leica has better highlight control. The Leica seems slightly better at rendering Intertonal colors. The Panasonic seems a little sharper into the corners but this may also mean the image is also flatter across the frame. The differences are small to be sure. I really like the focus clutch of the lumix. Speaking of which the s1r and the Sl, The lumix is faster to focus on the SL and both seem to be about the same..ish on the S1r. Should you buy the Leica or Panasonic, the Leica version is not 3x better image quality, it is however if one values these subtleties then the summilux is for you. If you prefer a stronger highlight, a slightly cooler and more crushed (contrast) modern draw the Panasonic does fit the bill. These lenses offer very close images characteristics. I really enjoy the lumix rendering and appreciate the closer focusing and of course the focus clutch. For hyperkinetic models you’ll appreciate the speed of lumix, for absolute image fidelity with people, slow your talent down a little and enjoy the Summilux.
Sorry but comparing a sigma to this lens is total incompetence. The same way you can ask who needs the cooke lenses or Zeiss CT.3 or summicrons, hasselblad which are 10k for a lens. Nowadays people have NO idea about the true value of good lenses. Yes of course as a beginner you will never value the advantages, these kind of lenses give you. But for professional these little differences are the main reason they choose to pay extra 10k $ on a lens.
1. Contrast and micro contrast 2. The resistance to backlight and redering image while it is backlit, not loosing contrast in such situations 3. Rendering of the bokeh and the falloff! Nobody talks about this 4. Stable performance on all the surface of image , not only in center. 5. Correct render of colors
Nowadays modern mainstream photographers can't see the difference between a Sony and a hasselblad. But the real photographers who shoot commercials for big brands, campaigns, they always can see it and that's why they use only good lenses, not garbage like sigma. And that's why they gets hired by those brands. Coz they Can see the difference!
So true.
Subbed, now compare the price to the Leica ha
I wish I could 😉
The results are awesome. But refering to the photos, it is similar to what Sigma offers you at 1/4th cost. What do you think? ☺️
yeah, I'd buy Sigma 50mm and another 2 lenses for the same money.
This lens was clearly made woth Leica users in mind 😂
maybe. not my favourite 50mm of all time but very good one for sure
Panasonic 50mm is better then the poo canonnnnn 50cm
maybe
The "S" stands for stupid!
you are so right 50450720
F 🤬 No