DxOmark (Click here) tested the Loxia 50mm lens. And the Loxia scores pretty close to what is yet the best autofocus lens ever tested at DxOmark…our 55mm FE lens! This is quite a good result and DxO writes:
“Anyone looking for a small, high-grade 50mm lens for the Sony A7-series cameras will find a lot to like about the Zeiss Loxia. Not only is it relatively small and lightweight compared with other lens options such as the 55mm Otus (which could be used with an adapter), it is a very good performer, not to mention a lot more accessibly priced. It’s still not cheap, of course, and somewhat bizarrely, it competes directly with the similarly-priced Sony-made Zeiss-designed 55mm f/1.8 which not only is a slightly better performer in the outer field, but is an autofocus model, which may appeal to a wider market. Still, the Loxia is a great lens, but choosing between it and the Sony model may come down to whether you prefer manual focus or not.”
Links to all Zeiss made FE Loxia and Batis lenses:
Zeiss Batis 85mm f/1.8 lens in US at Amazon, Adorama, Bhphoto. In Eu at Amazon DE, WexUK. In Asia at Digitalrev.
Zeiss Batis 25mm f/2.0 lens at Amazon, Adorama, Bhphoto. In EU at Amazon DE, WexUK. In Asia at Digitalrev.
Zeiss Loxia 50mm f/2 Planar T* Lens for Sony E Mount at Amazon, BHphoto, Adorama., WexUK, CameraPro.
Zeiss Loxia 35mm f/2 Biogon T* Lens for Sony E Mount at Amazon, BHphoto, Adorama, WexUK, CameraPro.
Zeiss Loxia 21mm f/2.8 FE lens at BHphoto and Adorama. In Europe at WexUK.
111 Responses
We need more /1.8 and /2 fixes. Most of them have to be around 50mm too.
We need a FE 50f18 (non-OSS), around $250-$350 with a quality like SEL50f18-OSS.
yep, but with OSS 🙂
All FF bodies have IBIS, and the 1st generation does not count. It was just prototyping – and 1st gen is unusable because of bad AF anyways.
good point. agreed.
Let me think: FE55 is faster, has AF, is cheaper, is sharper (according to DXO) and lighter. Why the hell I would want to buy this manual 50 that is softer, is lacking AF, is slower, heavier and more expensive?
I know why! Its tiny bit shorter – like less than half-inch difference. Oh yeah baby! That changes everything.
Many people buy the Loxia for video-centric workflows, namely, predicable and repeatable focussing moves.
Rendering is different, slightly wider perspective and it is a lot more compact than by half an inch especially with the lens hoods attached. Being able to manual focus quickly and not deal with AF issues are also a plus. I’ve had both lenses and currently on the Loxia 50 and would say they’re both great in different ways. I’m pleasantly surprised by how close the scores were though.
Even though I would also choose the sony 55mm myself, I can understand that some value the rendering character of the loxia over the sony. There are several charecteristics of a lens that are not measured by dxomark. Focus by wire is another reason some people might pick the loxia over the sony 55mm. Resell value should also be better with the loxias.
Video
Can someone explain how DXO’s “Sharpness” rating of the FE55 can go from a value of 26 on the A7r to a 13 on the a6000?
This is the problem I have with DXO. Most interpret the result as an absolute rating on the lens characteristics. You can hardly compare lenses across systems. Their data here is pretty meaningless.
Number of line pairs per image height is different due to the smaller sensor. So you have a theoretical 2.25 less resolution (1.5^2) when considering lens resolution alone. Then they include magnification and viewing distance and pixel count into their pmp score, too.
Then DXO gives the false impression that crop sensor lenses are less sharp, when the reality is their ability to measure sharpness is hindered by resolution.
They should have some way to correct the quantitative result. There are just so many gotchyas in DXO’s data that I can never trust their results.
it’s not really a ‘gotchya’ you just have to know what you’re comparing and how the tests are done, dxo even provides links in all their scores explaining how they test..
True, one must understanding the tests in greater detail. I still maintain that any lens test that is not dependent on the sensor is so much better than what DXO is doing. The Lensrentals blog is a good example.
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/10/nikon-24-70mm-f2-8-ed-af-s-vr-sharpness-optical-bench-testing
I think they have “acutance” metric buried somewhere in test results. That one should be comparable across anything.
I think the 90mm macro is better. The DXO measurement values are all better with exception of transmission which obviously is higher.
Better maybe if you’re looking for a 90mm lens with macro? I’m confused about the comparison between a 50mm prime and a 90mm macro prime?
The 55 is named best autofocus lens ever tested. I think the 90mm Sony macro is better, at least the scores of SXO imply that for me. Of course comparing 90 to 55 is a different thing. I should have made this more clear.
To be honest the 35, 55 and 90 are all incredibly sharp. In my experience the 90 has the edge, but the 55 is a close 2nd…
Dxo is very limited.
Video
If you prefer manual focus would be one reason. It has a really nice rendering as well. I rented both the Loxia 50 and the FE 55 and chose the Loxia 50 because I prefer the image quality and really nice manual focus experience. Everything isn’t about pure “sharpness”
Other smaller reasons:
Less minimum focus distance (slightly)
Less tight field of view (47 degrees vs 42.9 degrees)
10mm shorter
Totally agree. It’s the same old on every forum – it’s all about sharpness this, MTF that. Rarely do people discuss rendering, color and contrast, which to me are INFINITELY more important aspects of a lens. There are legions of pixel peeper forum warriors out there who correctly expose super sharp photos of their cats and kids but very rarely take an interesting image. Rant over.
Rendering is important to you? Than you be surprised to know that FE55 wipes the floor with FE50 simply because it’s a Sonnar design. yes baby, it’s legendary Sonnar that has as much character as you can find it out there.
What are you going to say next? Next you’ll say i dont’ care about character it’s the manual focus feel I care.
I don’t own the Loxia 50 yet, but I do have and use extensively the Loxia 35 and Sony 55. I love both. Sony 55 is a marvel of engineering and is my go-to-glass for just about everything these days on the stills side because the images it produces are fantastic. It absolutely sings on A7Rii. But in terms of handling the Loxias are simply more pleasant to handle and shoot with when snappy AF and super cool features like Eye-AF aren’t relevant. And I’m not one of those old geezers that swear by MF. The IQ in all this new glass is so high and so similar that the true differentiators, for me at least, come from usability and practical application. I can’t MF with any of the fly-by-wire lenses in video… it f-ckn sucks balls (except for the cine zoom and the macro). With Loxia I can nail it with ease time and time again. I go for the Loxia even for stills sometimes when I want that FL just because it’s… fun.
Since you compared the two, and concluded that the 55 has significantly better rendering, I can only assume you have owned both? Because if not, I’ll write you off as another pixel peeper internet warrior. 😉 Good day to you, sir.
I know it’s a slightly better lens, but how the hell does one justify a 10x price increase when compared with essentially the same lens from Canon? http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/12142-USA/Canon_2514A002_Normal_EF_50mm_f_1_8.html
If you’re shooting wide-open the majority of the time, absolutely yes! If you’re an f/8 and be there dude, then no, buy the Canon version and the accompanying Rebel T body.
Slightly better? A lot better.
The Canon isn’t very good at wide apertures.
See these two reviews:
http://slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/sony55f18zfe/ff/tloader.htm
http://slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/canon50f18stm/ff/tloader.htm
Is it 10x better?
About 15x.
keep realistic
OK let me put it more succinctly; one is a POS and the other is an excellent lens. Assign any ratio you want to that comparison.
That’s not how things work in the real world you know.. Is a $250,000 Ferrari 10 times faster than a $25,000 Mustang? No.
Noone’s talking about speed. Is Ferrari 10 times better?
Speed is the obvious metric when comparing sports cars. 10 times better at what?
You can compare cars only by speed?
Where did I say only? I just said “Speed is the obvious metric when comparing sports cars”
There are a hundred metrics. Otherwise helicopter engine on a metal tube frame with 3 wheels will be an EXTREMELY fast car – and by your terms, the best car ever.
i think you need to improve your comprehension skills
Noone cares what you think about me.
you shouldn’t care, but you should heed the suggestion
Get back to your troll hole.
you’re joking? because it seems like you were the one trolling this discussion thread…
Yeah right, I’m the one insulting people here? Bye, troll.
insult and observation are two different things… but you’ve been fed enough, you can go back under your bridge
We get these “almost as good” idiots almost every day. Don’t encourage them. One is a cheap old design lens and the other state of the art circa 2015. This fact seems to be lost on them, I’m giving you more credit than that.
It is fifty times better.
like a child: I know a bigger number
I think you missed the point mate.
I think I missed 100 points
I am sure you missed even more, but in this exact conversation, you missed one. You see, my response was sarcastic because there is no such thing as 10 times better, 45% prettier, or 26 degrees nicer. To ask for numerical output of goodness is stupid.
Define better.
It’s infinitely better if edge to edge sharpness wide open is critical.
It has better contrast, it has better light transmission, it is sharper, it is infinitely better built.. it is better in every category imaginable.
When I bought Sony 55 1.8 and open-box in classrom, my teacher asked me : “Do I know 50 1.8 Canon is about 100 ? Why this one so expensive ?”. I said : “This is Zeiss!”. Well at that times I dont have the clue.
Lucky me ? Next day, a len technician is there and he explained everything why one len is 100 and the other is 1000. Yes it will not 10x better. But come on. In the real life situation, you open pay a lot more money just to get something just a bit better than the other. Like a dinner at cheap restaurant can make you full. But you pay a lot more for fine dinning. Does the food is 10x better ? No. But the experience. Does high-end audio is 1000x better than hi-fi gear ? No. But it is better.
Your first answer to your teacher was the correct one. It is not a bit better, it is a bit better than Canon`s 50mm f/1.2L.
I personally bought the Loxia as an experiment, and if i wanted AF I could always sell it. But it renders beautifully, is a joy to use, and challenges me as a photographer. Never have I been so torn about a lens – I still want to try the 55mm 1.8, but right now Im not sure I can bear to lose the loxia. It has character.
So this is how you do optical perfection at 55mm focal length for the short E-mount flange:
http://i.imgur.com/gU6cZNn.png
This kind of makes me wonder which element is the one the lens moves back and forth in order to focus.
I hope it’s the small and light L21 element, and not the huge and heavy L31 element.
Since the L21 is the one with the arrow on top I’d say you’re correct.
The secret to the Zeiss formula here is that non of the elements move. The lens itself bends space and time internally to focus.
The 55 is cheaper than the Loxia (in the UK at least). Price wise of you want pure mf, there’s plenty of more affordable options
That are native mount and have EXIF?
Without AF I don’t care about a native lens this much. And is EXIF worth this much money?
Along with EXIF/native mount comes auto-focus magnification when focusing. This is huge, and probably something people wouldn’t realize how valuable until they’ve tried it vs an old legacy lens.
you could just press the magnication button manually…
Thanks I had no idea…….. Hence I said “auto-focus magnification”. Huge for quicker focusing and just an all around better experience than mashing C1 all the time
Nah, I just found it annoying – having this feature turned on makes it impossible to eyeball the whole frame while focusing, I turned it off pretty quick. Just got in the way, and anyway I much prefer having full control over what my camera’s doing.
The complete opposite IMO. When focused in it’s very hard to keep your framing and you easily lose your subject. That’s why it’s only usable on static objects which means you should be the one who decides when to magnify instead of your camera.
And even better they could select what part to magnify first 😉
Wow, what a wonderful advice. Because hitting the magnification button everytime you focus is not a pain in the *ss, right. FACEPALM
Not all the time if you also use focus peaking and shoot from f4 to f8 (I only use focus magnification when i do wide-open). Or maybe that what I do with my cheap mf len.
You will not be able to tell your grandson what aperture you’ve used for the shot.
Good one, LOL…. XD
Delusional.
Loxia and FE55 are both premium lenses and according the optical quality worth the price. Nevertheless I am missing a reasonable priced 50mm prime additional to this premium lenses.
For use on a high resolution modern camera, I would happily take a few truly excellent lenses or a bag full of mediocre lenses.
Depends on your shooting style.
As I often take pictures in low-light with fast shutter speed. So the ISO is cranked up to strong that a mediocre lens gives me almost same quality as an Otus.
wow, this touched a nerve. I also don’t see why there can’t be two separate markets. I need a decent, but not great, light-weight lens for occasional gimbal video work where the quality between a loxia and a canon 50mm is almost negligible.
So uhm… just buy any old crappy film era lens and stick it on an adapter. Lots of cheap 1.4’s out there.
this is the Sony lens you should compare with Canon’s
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/622190-REG/Sony_SAL50F18_SAL_50F18_50mm_f_1_8_DT.html
Sorry Canon dosen’t have a lens to compare it with Sony FE 55mm 1.8 or loxia 50mm
But you can get Sigma ART for the same price – but 1 stop faster.
http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Zeiss-Loxia-2-50-Sony-E-mount-lens-review-High-grade-manual-focus-option/Carl-Zeiss-Loxia-2-50-Sony-FE-vs-Carl-Zeiss-Distagon-T-Otus-1.4-55-ZF.2-Nikon-vs-Sigma-50mm-F1.4-DG-HSM-A-Canon-High-quality-in-a-small-package
ART is a high quality lens compared to the cheap and plastic Canon 50mm 1.8
And what is your point?
Winston Smith compared price the Canon 50 1.8 with Sony FE 55 1.8 , i replied to him saying it’s not a fair comparison between those 2 lenses that’s all my friend
You just made it for him.
I don’t get you. Seems like our IQ differs by factor 10
This one looks like a better competitor.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Meyer-optik-Gorlitz-oreston-50mm-F1-8-/121798722534?hash=item1c5bc503e6:g:lnQAAOSwsB9V~Nmt
a little better competitor to Canon 50 1.8 .. at least tnis one is not made of plastic
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c304f218a7d6ac9b2cf2a3390deeeb0b9a4e518f7861812f1ded1a9b5290023c.jpg
Nah, this one is manual focus.
I saw a photo comparison between those 2 back when loxia was released, could not find the slightest difference between wide open shots. Although they are totally different design (planar/sonnar), and the photos were full resolution.
Bokeh and constrast is completely different between the two.
I cant find the exact example i was talking about, but this one may serve the purpose. The contrast seems identical to me.
http://www.dearsusan.net/2014/10/10/zeiss-loxia-50-sony-fe-55-leica-summicron-50-great-normal-lens-shootout/
You expect a top-end full frame lens to sell for about the same price as a mass-market APS-C lens? I mean yeah, they’re both 50mm, but they’re in very different market segments.
Melvis, how did you come to the conclusion the Canon is an APS-C lens?
My mistake, edited.
Why APS-C? It is intended for full frame, but it is low grade consumer oriented lens.
Slightly? Put down the crack pipe Winston.
When will they test lenses on a 50mp Canon?
you can’t mount this lens on a Canon
Everyone knows that. But they have yet to publish any test results for any lens on a 50mp Canon. That’s why I’m asking. There are plenty of Canon, Sigma and Zeiss lenses that could be tested on a 50mp Canon, but so far … nothing. I figure they will get to it eventually. Just wondering when.
Maybe they don’t have all those lenses available and simply can’t test them again without high costs. But why do you ask this question here? Write an email to DxO and come back with their answer 🙂
It sometimes seems, as if companies cannot buy scores on dxo but rather dates for the score to be released. Some very interesting lenses get tested 1 year after their release some are on their site 2 weeks after release. Also dxo still lists their lenses in the overall score with the body they were initially tested on despite the fact that most have been tested with higher resolution bodies later on(which always increases the score somewhat). There is a lot of good data to be found on dxo, but you need to consider some pitfalls if you want to have comparable statements.
are you just trolling or do you really not understand what Zlatko said?
First, DXO’s results are very limited and non-intuitive. Second the scores seem to be quite different, as least not “as good as” each other.
I own both the FE55 and the 2/50 Loxia from the day they were available. Love them both. They are both excellent. But at the end of the day I’m only using the Loxia.
The rendering is vastly different between the two. Different enough to justify owning both. I ended up preferring the colors and the bokeh from the Loxia, and of course the shooting experience is pure joy.
I did. MD50f1.4 works fine, but I miss AF and a lens-hood.
The Loxia has lower optical performance, it’s weighs more, has no AF and is much more expensive. But it has this nice smooth MF ring. What a bargain.
Yeah, I don’t know either. My neighbour has a Ferrari. He paid 10x the price of my old Honda, for a car that has only 4 wheels. You get it? Only 4 wheels!!! Haha. I have the same amount of wheels in my Honda. This fool spent 10x the price on what is basically the same car!!!! LOOOOOL
You have to do comparison and you will know why. For instant, the 110$ Canon len is mostly built from plastic, compare to Sony / Zeiss mostly metal (more strong housing). The Canon coating is very basic with few layers, where Zeiss is T* (like Nikon with Nano Coating) much much more…(i cannot recall number layer, it is like from 20 to 70 layer my bad i dont remember). Does the cheap Canon have aspherical element ? So-on…
Well, for starters, the FE55 is a Sonnar lens while the Loxia 50 is a Planar lens. They produce very different contrast and bokeh. I preferred the bokeh on the Loxia 50 so I got the Loxia instead of the FE55. No AF is of course a let down but not end of the world.