Image courtesy: 3D-kraft (Click here).
50mm is the most known, or used focal length on Full Frame cameras. So it could be interesting for you to learn which 50mm lens performs best on the A7-A7r. Just read the full test at 3D-kraft (Click here). Tested lenses are the:
[shoplink 23783 ebay]Leica Summilux 50mm f/1.4 ASPH[/shoplink]
[shoplink 23988 ebay]Zeiss FE Sonnar T* 55mm f/1.8[/shoplink]
[shoplink 23842 ebay]Zeiss Otus Apo Distagon T* 55mm f/1.4[/shoplink]
[shoplink 23781 ebay]SLR Magic HyperPrime CINE 50mm T0.95[/shoplink]
[shoplink 23447 ebay]Leica Noctilux 50mm f/0.95 ASPH[/shoplink]
And here are some more A7-A7r news and tests:
Battle of the mirrorless monsters – Sony A7R vs Olympus OM-D E-M1 (EosHD).
New video sony A7 with Leica R summilux 50mm f1.4 by Dario Viola on Vimeo.
Sony A7r and 35mm lens comparisons (Soundimagesplus).
A7r review at Digitalcamerareview.
A7r review at ePhotozine.
A7r review at Blue Sky.
————————
Specs and Store Links in US and Canada:
Dedicated Sony announcement page at Amazon US (Click here).
Sony A7r body at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS. TheCameraStore Canada.
Sony A7 body at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS. TheCameraStore Canada.
Sony A7 with 28-70mm kit lens at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS. TheCameraStore Canada.
Sony RX10 at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
Zeiss 24-70mm at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
Zeiss 35mm at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
Zeiss 55mm at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
70-200mm A-mount at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
Sony A-Mount to E-Mount Lens Adapter at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto.
Sony A to E adapter with mirror at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto.
A7/A7r leather case at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
A7/A7r vertical grip at Amazon, BHphoto, SonystoreUS.
Sony W Series Battery Charger at Amazon, BHphoto.
Sony FA-CS1M Off-Camera Shoe at BHphoto.
Semi-Hard LCD Screen Protector for A7-A7r at Amazon, BHphoto.
Specs and Store Links in Europe:
Sony A7r body at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO, PT, WexUK, WexDE.
Sony A7 body at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO, PT, WexUK, WexDE, Amazon UK, Amazon DE, Amazon FR.
Sony A7 with 28-70mm kit Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO, PT, WexUK, WexDE, Amazon UK, Amazon DE, Amazon FR.
Sony RX10 at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO, PT, WexUK, WexDE.
Zeiss 35mm at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO, PT,
Zeiss 55mm at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO, PT
Zeiss 24-70mm at Sony DE, UK, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, SE, PT
Sony G 28-70mm lens at Sony DE, FR, IT, ES, NL, BE, CH, AT, SE, FI, NO.
Asia:
A7r at Digitalrev.
A7 at Digitalrev, Amazon Cina.
A7 with 28-70mm lens at Digitalrev.
0 Responses
Zeiss FE Sonnar T* 55mm f/1.8 is no Zeiss Otus but the result make the lens reasonable priced IMO.
I would say a bargain seeing that its performance is only second to the Otus.
Absolutely. I’d like to see some Contax lens comparisons though. And maybe Leica R.
Wow, I know FE 55mm is good but.. that good? 2nd to Otus? Kudos Sony.
I don’t really care too much for pixel peeping, but that Otus just blows them all out of the water in terms of fine detail(although the other Zeiss keeps up well). They all still look great when not blown up to 100%.
That moire in the corners is a little strange. Oddly enough, it only seems to show up on the Zeiss lenses.
True. Probably because of the fine details they produce?
My guess is that the Zeiss are the only lenses capable of out resolving the sensor. This would produce the “jagged” edges in fine details like strands of hair.
I think you have hit the nail on the head. The otus and the fe 55 are showing how they have been designed for a 36 mp camera. They all look good but the otus really shines in this test.
Well done Sony that is a seriously goos lens. Have a 24-70mm on pre order. Hoping it is just as good. Would hate to be a Leica owner….
Leica has a 24-70?
Ah and don’t be disappointed if the Tessar zoom is not as good as the Sonnar prime. Maybe in color and contrast, but all the rest is impossible.
No just a general statement about the terrible performance of Leica lenses in general…. The Emperors new clothes of the photography industry…
ah ok. Well, I wouldn’t exactly hate it as with a leica it’s pretty much possible to make very nice photos. The rendering of a lens and it’s bokeh i more important or Leica owners, not absoulte sharpness. Every Leica lens is sharp at F2.0 though.
But Zeiss was always on the same level or better than Leica. Also Zeiss’ rangefinder camera is better than the Leica M, more precise and smaller. I’m just happy that we have access to Zeiss lenses as Sony users. There is no better lens option with autofocus on the market at the moment.
[But Zeiss was always on the same level or better than Leica. Also Zeiss’ rangefinder camera is better than the Leica M, more precise and smaller.]
Did you ever use any of these camera’s? The only advantage of the ikon over the MP or M7 I can think of is the brighter viewfinder. Further the ikon is just a bessa camera with a zeiss logo. Fine camera for sure but certainly not a better camera.
[But Zeiss was always on the same level or better than Leica. Also Zeiss’ rangefinder camera is better than the Leica M, more precise and smaller.]
BTW, after years of using both leica and zeiss lenses. Its a bit strange to tell zeiss is always on the same level or better. They are just different.
Further there is so much more important for a lens than sharpness or a creamy bokeh.
[No just a general statement about the terrible performance of Leica lenses in general…. The Emperors new clothes of the photography industry…]
Judging a lens by the sensor of another’s brand camera which can’t handle it, isn’t really fair to be honest.
If this is the way to judge lenses than the canon 1200mm f/5.6 scores very bad on the nikon D800 as well. Can’t even reach infinity…..
Try the leica’s on a leica body and try again.
We wait until the new Sigma 50mm 1.4 ART series they are gunning for OTUS!
marketing BS! The OTUS was announced in October 2013 and delivered in december. You really think Sigma said in december “oh let’s make a lens that comes close to this brilliant OTUS!”
Designing a lens takes much longer time. And I guess they started designing it together with the 35 1.4 ART series lens, a time when no OTUS existed. But naming the name OTUS in the same sentence with a new Sigma lens is one of the best marketing strategies I ever heard. I expect it to outperform the canons and nikons 50s, that’s the market and cameras this lens is beeing made for. Maybe it will be on the same level as the FE 55 1.8, this would be close enough to the OTUS.
You don’t think that people working in such a niche industry were truly blindsided by the Otus do you? I’m sure Zeiss worked hard to keep the specifics under wraps but just the fact that Nikon released a slightly-longer-than-normal premium lens at around the same time seems a little too coincidental. I think they all knew Zeiss was up to something but they didn’t know what. Sigma decided to hold off releasing their product until the dust settled because as a third party “value” lens maker they can. Canon already had the 50mm f/1.2 which gives up a lot to the Otus but has that extra half stop you brag about to your friends. Nikon had nothing that looked premium so they came up with the 58mm–an unimpressive lens IMHO.
The Otus was announced in October of 2012 not 2013. It was branded the Otus in the fall of 2013 (it was just called the 55mm 1.4 before then.
It was available to actually hold and test out at photoplus in 2013. Zeiss had been previewing the Otus for a while though.
Source: http://photorumors.com/2012/09/06/carl-zeiss-at-photokina-2012-new-distagon-55mm-f1-4-mirrorless-lenses/
I am with Hans on this one. I don’t think the design, concept and “aim” of the Sigma could be achieved in such a short time since the Otus was announced. That and much less the work needed to get the machining, molding and production set up needed to run with a new lens…
Marketing just wants attention. Maybe it gets close to the 55mm FE…
I would have been good if he included the new CZ 50mm F/1.4 for A-mount (attached via adaptor)
would have been interesting to see the zeiss sony 50 1.4 results in this test.
I did a quick test with a canon fd 50mm 1.4 , konica hexanon 40mm 1.8 , helios 58mm f2 , minolta md 50mm f2 and konica hexanon 50mm 1.8 they were all pretty good. I just need to do some more test to see what I will keep.
I have the a7 and I’m finding the Pentax-M SMC 50mm f1.7 and Pentax-A 50mm f2 work very good @ 24mb.
The Asahi Super Takumar 50mm f1.4, sharp corner to corner wide open but lacks saturation.
To be noted that I’m use to having a higher pixel density sensor for the same physical area and the three lenses I mentioned worked very well on the A3000’s 20.1mp but on as sharp, Zeiss 35mm is a killer performer on that camera.
i am a canon user and i had all available fifties (ef 50mm 1.8, 1.4, 1.2L and the sigma 50 1.4) and i never really got along with any of those. the fe 55 1.8 easily outperforms all of those lenses at any aperture. there is absolutely no need to ever stop it down in terms of sharpness and contrast in real worl shooting. even the bokeh is buttery smooth, something that cant be said for the one stop faster canon 50mm 1.2L – that sometimes produces some nasty structures depending on the situation…so i sold it without any hesitation and never missed it 🙂
i hope sony will introduce some more compact primes with the same quality…so far the a7+55 1.8 is a dream combination for me :)sonething like a 105 1.8 would be the perfect addition for portrait work and i could seel even more of my heavy canon stuff 😀
LOL using a human model to test 1/3 frame sharpness? This is one of the stupidest tests I have ever seen. Most of the pictures don’t even have the eye in focus, with the exception of the AF-capable 55 1.8.
I own a 50mm Summilux ASPH and has used the Noct during personal work. Both lenses are FAR sharper wide open than what these pictures would lead you to believe. My v1 50mm Summilux Pre-A, when focused properly with magnification view, delivers more detail than the Noct 1.4 test shot.
You failed to see the next page?
Mine copy of Lux 50 is better too. I am afraid that guy did a wrong focusing, e.g. used peaking only instead of magnification. Although, A7(r) control scheme is so bad it is very uncomfortable to use magnification indeed. Just a bad camera, that is why I sold it with almost 30% discount.
Did you guys read the review?
“Thanks to the moveable focus magnification aid of the A7R’s EVF, it is possible to focus the lens exactly at that point. Especially for lenses with shallow depth of field and some field curvature this is much more precise than center focusing and recomposing as forced by range finder cameras. As this is not a static object shot from a fixed tripod, each setting was shot in a series of about 10 frames with slight camera movement (“focus bracketing”) and what we see here is the best hit out of each series. So it is not a scientific lab test but nevertheless should give you a good indication of what you can expect from these lenses.”
by the way, the camera is very customizable and you just have to press one button to open the magification view if you want to have it that way…
> by the way, the camera is very customizable and you just have to press one button to open the magification view if you want to have it that way…
and a long way of move
lack of touchscreen makes moveable area practically useless in too many cases
in fact it is only acceptable shooting tripod, this was the main reason of selling my A7 (not R): using MF optics on NEX-5n is much smoother than with A7(r).
Cool story. Now let’s see some full-size wide open Lux samples from your former “bad” A7R to back that up.
“Although, A7(r) control scheme is so bad it is very uncomfortable to use magnification indeed. Just a bad camera, that is why I sold it with almost 30% discount.”
You are so full of s**t.
As Zohee says, let’s see some samples from you.
I’m afraid I cannot, they are all personal. But, what’s wrong with me? I sold that crap only because my experience with MF optics turned to be sh1tty, it was inferior compared to NEX-5n.
As I thought. You don’t ever seem to be able to backup any of your claims. I can only assume that’s because you don’t own or have never owned the equipment you constantly mock on this site.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/12196364/gallery/different/Sony-A7.jpg
And here is the search result which exposed one of my ads. If you wish, I can reactivate it and you will be able to send me a message about a camera, I will reply you with a phrase “SONY A7 IS A CRAP” OK?
https://www.google.ru/search?tbs=sbi:AMhZZiv1ohJ2Amd9h7zlCw8OYNfRxdx9Pk_16Ze5neGDT86pvyjR7QpewdmTwyzOwu21yumdsp0h1HgnvGwy2cBBL_1TyEmf4ObxuPY5C0Syb2iceDrSb_1Xz6ZSRlRLekaTJyvH75Oe6q6YqbMZW16A9EzOeHOx3ni7YtGbR210pZUQ1tUXzVPPBBsGsK8VJrWPeFdoT_17IuCodHX3CadywQfVP-FAn8w1b76X6MHVyAO0_1dzx5hXiXT7wo181oJyvKVy_1aP9eVZEbqLyzjAX05xgoYD51kKKCa5teTt9sORy01iA3RwA5aKasvY1D4CNTVrPxgq-z8CncJUJT14GbMCF226MU8ckNbze4bIfLayXPWdUHL4ZBtuxxjetjGux8SYbpVxegYRpPjRDC6MHfU3p8eEFhyYttJcXzrQ9MWes1nlmpuLxPSbH9cm1hjEYDrI0vsTG_14n4kP6Slzm-1A55yHwuaus_1qH8mQy55oJo96LNeymJgjo6i6dwfgOcTb8Za9PEAurEaOvEdlsfRqyyUCWWVa4pW0JsHGuf59DyhYNgWsxjmscvRP5cuGDB9VDBB9oHanFLMBAUGkcRgJSWKiTjzr-fflfVLZYnZgO65Xm0TNOPdyYXbkFXToE6OLUarfM2faimbd-ivFkrtfb43j66Y2fhsS21ijHXuQwgvSWzIJ_14rhXIMLUouIrSQPsLIJXfrVhiI0YECUNQnUp_1ZdixzvAtrLBximTK2MfDxp1yi2h5Yf9cYM_1E2ZzDipOKMzBboG_1JdKIY3Rt6NdBlh2iOJizHTMZTEsrsrSCsXOTIQGa9gyDM5M2cUBRPEqWq48CCl5tyJU-109Hm8vcbN-y_1BuMafpmr7A8-Xe70AU5o-TRAl65-BzgtxcgfIeEvyEHFSGl8ui_1jhNm2lHZVQYDPFiHtn0xGLLavUJBdTzD5YipPwpbVvJ5lSCiUvdGqj9eb-_1cLvJLIbn-6yOgWCZXyk1ckiAc1MoN7MTLfxr2dmc_1R7OJaprvg2V5oDJCDgVDdo_1IomNf7JjZi-FWsItFn0NaKiRpML57A9IETpTMNZNF2NdF8Chkgq-valjxJfzaV61BUzjryo2uZNs_1FPAz_1UuJfikqcNXB10QerlR8_1TLQiPgJ2EObjHkfZuGwi80f2TdtOvsoJP45E70Wfwpes7d3y9LSZu8SDQK7NIPjae6VW_1DTcxRgEQp_1gjvLY_1YhSjiUNkra7-hzvWd6vSrhkO7T9od5pl3xDgxNwhMxoAMh3Fe6JUgz3xSVzUYA9FwShP0AVvmgPGzC_1HyiIwA9ZE7T3skogEwwhuxP0l4nxI4SxgokYI&newwindow=1&biw=1546&bih=872&site=search&sa=X&ei=sNPXUpXhGozo4gTz6oC4Bg&ved=0CCgQ9Q8oAA
I also experience this “pain” with LiveView of Nikon D5100 – in LiveView mode rectangle moves very slow, there is no way to adjust travel of speed and there is no way to skip from “smooth” to “skip full lenght of the rectangle” option. Small details serve us photographers.
Mate your an idiot…. Learn how to use your camera!!.
As with any new camera, it took about a day to get used to the control layout. Moving the magnification zone is a cinch as long as you have a thumb. Do you have a thumb??
No regrets moving from canon at all. Hard to beat 3 extra stops of latitude compared to the 5D mark 3.
It is slow. Just as slow as it was on your crappy DSLR. But, I used to much faster operation
configuring magnification to the main center button works a lot better than c2 or c1.
It still requires a double click though, when a single click would much smoother.
Magnification without an ability to quickly move the zone to certain place is hardly useable.
Victor, all shots were focused manually with 14.4x EVF magnification. The AF of the Zeiss FE lens did not work that precise to produce consistent and comparable shots. In all settings there were taken series with about 10 shots with some slight focus stacking to be sure to be able to pick one with optimal focus. I would not show 100% crops if I were not sure that they have been focused comparable precisely.
You can also look at the static chart shots shot from tripod for reference but it is important to not only look into the center as you typically would not compose a portrait with a subjects eyes in the image center.
If you have doubts and access to some of these lenses, you are invited to show us your results.
Why would you need to manual focus at 14.4x, without using a tripod for a subject who is standing still? 7.2x would have sufficed. Those Leica and SLR shots are either not very well focused, or perhaps you just have poor copies of these lenses, or both. Nothing wrong with the copies of Zeiss lenses you have though.
I use the 50 Summilux ASPH since three years now and now how to focus it precisely with EVF at 14.4x and a model that is patient enough to pose for a test setup as well as with a chart test shot from tripod. The same for the 0.95 lenses. If these lenses were bad copies or not able to cope with the current Zeiss lenses at all, this is a problem of the manufacturer and not of the tester.
Well said. Thanks.
Victor and emacs are not only clueless but Victor is in deep misery for finding out he spent too much on Leica.
Why did you go to the dark side after hearing vader’s expensive voice.
What I like about the 55mm/1.8 is its extra 5mm focal length. For a given distance you get almost exactly the same DoF as a 50mm/1.4 lens, but in a lighter body, with much better corner performance (I calculated the values for a number of distances). Initially I found the price to high, but after seeing all those tests, I will complement my OMD with the Sony for shallow DoF work.
Another great combination is the LAEA4 with Sigma 35mm/1.4 (see soundimageplus.com). Great lens!
Ah, I was already afraid they wouldn’t test very expensive lenses….
There are some comments here about the softer, wide open shots not being at the right focus point. I don’t see that for most of them.
However, what I do see is a significant degree of what appears to be motion blur in the softer samples.
This is curious, as one would expect a faster shutter speed and for it to be less.
If anyone can explain this anomaly I’d be interested to know.
Perhaps the oddest thing, for me, is that when I have experienced a similar effect I wondered whether it was the sensor stabilising introducing, rather than cancelling, motion. The problem with that explanation is neither of the A7s have stabilisation!
The only other thing that may appear similar is if a lens if decentered. Could manufacturing tolerances of so many good makes be this poor?
First curtain shutter shock/harmonics at particular shutter speeds.
There are some doble structures visible in the 100% magnification of the shots with the SLR Magic HypePrime CINE. They were caused by decentration of the particular copy as mentioned in the text. You see them also in some areas of the chart shots (available in full resolution through the gallery link).
The FE Zeiss is really good if it’s that close to the Otus…
Holy cow. It really is almost too good to be true.
I’ve never really enjoyed using the A-Mount Sony 50mm/1.4 as I had to stop it down to F2.5-F2.8 to get good results. F1.4 was emergency use only. For low light shooting I always chose the 35mm F2.0 as I could reliably use it at F2.0. I can see this will no longer be a problem with the 55mm F1.8.
And as a side note, it’s always fun to read some comments from butt-hurt Leica snobs :-). Keep them coming.
Agree, Sony 50mm at f1.4 is almost too soft to be useful.
I think 3D-Kraft did a good job with this test, but there is always a caveat with the sharpness end of the test that there is lens to lens variation and camera to lens fit variations, plus lens to adaptor to camera variations. So if one lens is a little better or worse then another in a test like this it does not mean a lot to the general public. The SLR lens was defective and we do not know if this is typical of these lenses, low QA levels, or just bad luck. The test did show general trends that can be expected and the sort of variation among the brands. It is a shame that very few are able to test lens body combinations in large enough numbers to get a truer look at the lenses. I would not expect that of 3D-kraft as he would not have the money to buy or rent enough lenses and manufactures will not give a reviewer enough copies. Plus I am sure he spent a lot of time on this test, adding in doing the same for 10 copies of each lens and body would really overwhelm someone.
This a long winded way of saying, if you think your lens was sharper then the one 3D tested, it might be. 3D can only test what he has to test.
I also think he did a good job with this test. My take away is that none of these lenses are terrible although the underdogs–the CINE Magic T0.95 and the FE 55mm do a standout job compared to the competition. Also, if you have an A7(r) and don’t already have one of these premium primes you’re probably best just buying the native FE 55mm unless you also own a SLR or M camera.
For the record I have seen many of Emacs pictures. He is quite good (as if that really mattered about technical opinions) although I don’t agree with this assessment of the A7. I too found if awkward at first–and still wish it had a touch screen but for different reasons–however I now find my 5n clunky when I try going back to it. To each his own I suppose.
I love the German translation using the word “adorable” when they actually meant “admired” 😉 It’s an adorable slip-up that made me smile 🙂
adorable = charming, cute
admired = to hold in high esteem, highly regarded, highly respected
We could probably say “admirable” as well.
Yes, that would work too but adorable not so much – it did put a smile on my face though.
The German translation of adorable is “verehrenswert”, “anbedutngswürdig” and this is exactly what was ment here. Admirable would also come close to my intention.
Great test. Take a 6-years old, give them some vodka, give them a camera, they will not do worse.
One thing is clear tho: these cameras are no good for manual focussing. I tried that, by the way, and I can confirm it. What a pity…
The A7R camera allows to focus a 0.95 lens much more precisely than any Leica M body. Especially when the area that needs wo be focused precisely is not in the center. You propbly never saw the result with such a lens on an M body by center-focusing and recomposing…
No need to explain this to every single hater. None of them can suggest a better way to evaluate the quality of these lenses comparing with what you did. There’s also no better setup to do it then the one you used (36mp A7r) and no better method for accurate focus (tripod mounted, manual, with magnification).
Sure, the test is a technical test and not really a field test, but this is the only way to get consistent results.
And by the way, I’m not biased as I have none of the lenses you evaluated.
eep up the good work. I’ve read several of your lens tests and will be looking out for more. Thanks!
Could the leica Ms be performing worse because of the short flange distance and lack of corrective microlenses on the Sony sensor?
Edges – yes, center – no (as these rays are not hitting the sensor at an angle)