(SR3) New Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 coming along the new FF camera in August.
Rumors are getting stronger about the next Full Frame DDay announcement in late August. I am sure that there will be new Alpha lenses coming along the A99 (or whatever the final name will be). Question is which kind of lens should we expect? I am getting more and more “indications” that there will be a new Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 SSM lens. The rumor still hasn’t reached the SR5 value (which means that many trusted sources confirmed this) but I hope to get the definitive answer soon.
The current Sony 50mm f/1.4 is still based on the lens design typical of the 70s to 80s. It’s a decent performer but we absolutely need a high quality version too! I hope it will not be too expensive.The currently most expensive Full frame 50mm lens on the market is the Zeiss Planar f/1.4 (Click here to see auctions on eBay) which is available for Canon/Nikon/Pentax mount. That is the price I expect for the new Sony Zeiss!
Links to the current 50mm f/1.4 lens from Sony: Amazon, B&H, Adorama, J&R, eBay.
And here a short poll:
Loading ...—
Reminder (SR = Sonyrumor):
SR1=probably fake rumor
SR2=rumor from unknown sources
SR3=50% chance it is correct
SR4=rumor from known sources
SR5=almost certainly correct!
eromance
2 years ago |+1
matgay
2 years ago |homerun sony!!! zeiss 50mm same time as the fullframe!
PhotoNut
2 years ago |-1 . I don’t agree SONY unlike every other camera system does not have an available cheap 50mm lens for full frame. When sony designed the 50mm f/1.8 they made sure to make it only work for crop sensors. They really didn’t have to do this but they wanted to push FF users to the more expensive 50mm f/1.4. Same thing with the Sony 30mm f/1.8. They also made it only for APS-C to push FF users to the very expensive 35mm f/1.4.
A fast 50mm standard lens is one of the easiest and cheapest lenses to make for most platforms. So why should SONY force FF users to pay $750 for this rumored Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 as the only option for a 50mm FF lens?
The competition (Canon & Nikon) both offer cheap ~$100 or so 50mm f/1.8 FF lenses and ~$350 50mm f/1.4 lenses. So why should the upstart SONY introduce its 50mm lens at $750?
Ideally Sony needs to make a FF 50mm f/1.8 lens (~$100), an SSM 50mm f/1.4 (~$350) and then they can release an SSM Zeiss 50mm _f/1.2_ lens for $750 (or whatever). Otherwise this is another example of SONY being unable to provide competitive offerings that everyone normally takes for granted.
Just look at the recent results for the cheap Sigma 30mm f/2.8 lens that bests the sharpness across the frame of the much more expensive SONY/Zeiss 24mm f/2.
If SONY cannot or does not want to release good quality affordable lenses for their own platform they should contract with Sigma and help them to do so!
Sky_walker
2 years ago |“So why should SONY force FF users to pay $750 for this rumored Zeiss 50mm f/1.4″ – noone forces anyone to buy anything. The Sony 50mm f/1.4 is and will be on a market for long long time, while there is also for example 50mm Sigma.
And please, don’t cry on prices of lenses you don’t know yet.
“Otherwise this is another example of SONY being unable to provide competitive offerings” – Rather: another example of Sony not caring about PhotoNut’s opinion.
bas076
2 years ago |For what? In order to produce a crap like canon 50/1.8?
Carl
2 years ago |Buy a Minolta 50/1.7, then. Sony has never targeted full frame at users on a budget.
no nikon no
2 years ago |LMFAO! photonut putdown!
C
2 years ago |Yup. The current 50/1.4 is crap. If they want to sell one for 750 euros then it needs to be AMAZING wide open, with SSM, full weather sealing and outstanding build quality.
If it’s another unsealed screw drive like the rest of the zeiss lenses, there’s not a chance it is worth 750 euros for what is essentially a standard lens.
Vivek
2 years ago |For 750 Euros, I can buy a Summilux R 50/1.4 and change the mount it to any system (Canon, Nikon, Sony) I want.
BMan
2 years ago |But you don’t get AF and in camera aperture control.
I think that the new ZA will be another outstanding performer, and the price will be outstanding as well (just like (most) other ZA lenses).
Rooru S.
2 years ago |+1
matgay
2 years ago |leica “r” is OLD. it’s not the same sharp image quality as the latest leica m.
and then, this sony 50mm will not be a regular sony, but a ZEISS! i would bet my money on it, with the new full frame models being released, that the new zeiss will be higher resolving than the old leica. and then you add autocus with ssm, and dmf option for faster manual focus.
if zeiss release such a 50mm in native alpha mount, i would buy it ten times over before i buy the “old” leica r lens, and have to convert it.
usd$1000.00 for a auto zeiss is right on the money.
Carl
2 years ago |The E60 is from 1997, so it’s hardly ancient.
matgay
2 years ago |“For 750 Euros, I can buy a Summilux R 50/1.4…”
samdman
2 years ago |Or you could go for the hyperprime nokton 50 f0.95 steve huff used for $999, its native e-mount, even better the cine version which is 3 times more expensive.
matgay
2 years ago |f0.95 / T0.95
http://www.photozone.de/sony_nex/732-slrmagic50t095?start=2
Vivek
2 years ago |No AF is a small price to pay if the Sony A “system” keeps getting hick ups with lack of flagship updates to keep up with the other systems. With the Leica R lens, I can easily go from one to the other with the same lens.
Stewe
2 years ago |Go for it. It’s not like anyone cares. Just make great photos with your equipment.
Carl
2 years ago |It’d have to put in a pretty compelling performance to make me replace my Sony 50/1.4. If they had made it faster it’d be an easier sell. Good news for those who haven’t already bought a fast fifty, though, I guess.
Steve
2 years ago |Carl,
I respect your opinion on stuff so I’m asking……I have a 50/f1.4 Minolta that I purchased back in the days I was shooting with a Minolta 9000. It was one of my favorite primes along with an Minolta 85/f1.4 and was great on that body and with film.
On my a850’s it sucks big time and is not useable below maybe 2.8
Question: Is the Sony 50/f1.4 a better lenses than my old Minolta from 1986?
Carl
2 years ago |Only a little, but the Minolta AF 50/1.4 shouldn’t be performing as bad as you suggest.
For starters, I assume you’ve dialed it in with micro focus adjust? Autofocus errors are enough to make any lens look bad. If that’s not the problem then it’ll probably require us to go through a differential diagnosis to get to the bottom of it.
Steve
2 years ago |I don’t recall ever testing and adjusting that lens.
Partly is that it’s so dark in the corners at f1.4 I just never use it, and use the Zeiss 85 instead and step back a few feet.
The old Minolta has a 49mm filter diameter and the later ones moved up to 50mm so I always blamed the dark corners on that.
maybe I’m wrong
Carl
2 years ago |Vignetting can be remedied with most raw converters, so is hardly the issue it was on film where you’d have to resort to burning and dodging.
Clyde
2 years ago |Get the M screen for your a850 and all the f1.4 and f2 lenses become much more useable. The stock Sony screen is unsuitable for bright glass. The stock screen shows misleading DOF, making it look like everything is in focus. The M screen is darker and more coarse, allowing for a more realistic view of bokeh and DOF for bright lenses.
Only problem with the M screen is that the f4 Beercan collection is a little difficult to view indoors. But you get used to it.
The original Max 50f1.4 is identical to the Sony 50 and RS Max. The only difference is filter size. I like the bokeh and sharpness of the older lens much preferred to the newer versions with 55mm filter size.
This job lifestyle shots on the newer Max RS 50mm f1.4… all shots at f1.4 or f2. Look under “locations”. I shot 13 different centers and there are lots of samples with the 50RS in lifestyles. Bokeh looks harsh against bright backlight.
Link
http://www.benchmarkhealthcare.net/locations/western-missouri/lees-summit
This job shot on older first generation 50mm f1.4. All shots at f1.4 or f2 with ring light.
http://comfyjs.com/
All in all, I like the original 50, though I do wish it was 55mm filter size to match my other original Maxxums.
no nikon no
2 years ago |No split prism screens?
SonyFanBoi
2 years ago |Split prism is over-rated. Peaking beats it any day of the week.
mugen
2 years ago |I love my Minolta 50/1.4 RS (last version) on full frame, I think that the Sony version is slightly sharper.
Daemonius
2 years ago |Last Minolta 50mm f1.4 is identical with Sony. Except coating. Same goes to Minolta 70-200mm f2.8 and few others, like STF lens etc.
If someone wanted to have Zeiss lens on Sony, its not hard to conver ZF lens, or Contax ones. And if you have Canon, you can have Contax N 50mm f1.4 converted to Canon. After that they work fully automatic like native lens.
Carl
2 years ago |The Sony is the same as the unreleased Konica Minolta 50mm f1.4 (D), which had a new (or perhaps more accurately, tweaked) optical formula from the 50/1.4 RS. Given the rather small difference in overall performance between the two, I suspect that happened as the result of a glass type becoming unavailable rather than a desire on Minolta’s part to improve its performance.
Spoon
2 years ago |The Sony is quite a bit sharper at larger apertures.
Greg
2 years ago |No, Daemonius is correct. The Sony 50mm is optically identical to the Minolta RS. It’s not sharper. I’ve owned both.
Matthias
2 years ago |Greg, the Sony 1.4/50mm (SAL-50F14) is an optical and electrical re-design of the Minolta 1.4/50mm “RS” (aka “New”) with E55 filter thread. In contrast to its predecessor, the Sony version features a distance encoder for ADI flash metering and better image stabilization. And while it continues to be based on the same basic optical design (elements/groups) as the Minolta, it is one of the lenses which is NOT optically identical, besides a different lens coating. This is not some rumor, but information directly obtained from Sony and Konica Minolta. The differences in the glass are not huge, but they exist and some people claim that they can see them in the images as well.
My guess is that the changes were necessary in order to cope with property changes down to changes in the glass formulation (as the use of lead-free glass became mandantory for RoHS conformance etc.).
Another example of a slightly changed optical design is the SAL-35F14G. Like the SAL-50F14, this Sony lens also introduced a distance encoder, which could not be found in the Minolta predecessor. In addition, this lens also saw mechanical changes for the new auto-clutch mechanism of the non-rotating focusing ring (a feature which cannot be found in the SAL-50F14)).
Rooru S.
2 years ago |I voted yes because this possible new release will have fast AF, auto-aperture control and hopefully, offer some kind of weathersealing. And if priced at 750USD, I’m sure it’s the fair price for that. But more than that, I don’t know… The Zeiss badge adds a lot of credibility for great optical design and quality, but they need to put the price competitive enough to attract buyers and I’m sure this will become the best seller of Sony Zeiss range of lenses.
Upps
2 years ago |Good costumer!
Solo
2 years ago |I’m Expecting it to be around $1299
C
2 years ago |I hope it’s less then that… Otherwise I’d get the f/2 Makro and adapt it. I’ve gone on record saying that I really want a new 50mm, but if it costs more then the Cosina one… It needs to perform like a boss.
Rooru S.
2 years ago |Exactly my toughts…if priced around $1000 people will complain about just adding 200 and getting the Makro Plannar instead of a normal 50mm…It should be priced less than 1000USD/Euros.
C
2 years ago |1299 is outrageous unless it’s faster than 1.4
Upps
2 years ago |The Sony 50mm f/1,4 performs already excellent. On the other hand, the Zeiss lenses are not that top-notch that their price tag indicates. So why should we pay twice or 3x more for just a little bit improvement? And I’m sure, you can only tell the difference in a side-by-side comparison.
We need some excellent wide-angel (prime) lenses!
Hellven
2 years ago |the Sony 50/1.4 is a really good performer, but only in APS-C, in FF it suffers alot in the corners…
eromance
2 years ago |best if paired with the new A9x for only @2k.
Almazar80
2 years ago |I realize that people want the best gear at the lowest prices, but a Zeiss 50mm AND a full frame camera for $2000 USD or 1300 euros? Any camera company will go out of business if this is all people are willing to pay for quality stuff. I want a combo for that price as well, but a Sony A99 body for $1799 would be more than acceptable, assuming it performs WELL for what I need it to do.
Greg
2 years ago |Yeah, would be a cool kit to go back to a 50mm as the kit lens.
Lars
2 years ago |I also buy for 1300 € … I think that’s a realistic price.
Steve
2 years ago |I’m not sure that we shall see a price that low.
$750.00 USD would make it the cheapest Zeiss around
I think Sony will price it closer to $1,000 USD than $750
Carl
2 years ago |The manual focus Zeiss Z* 50/1.4 is about $700, so it would fit with the current pricing pattern.
50/1.4s are always designed for lower price points than 35/1.4s and 85/1.4s, despite not really being much cheaper architectures in and of themselves (that is to say, they’re usually designed to a lower standard). I’d be quite happy personally if Sony broke that mold and made the best damn 50 they could and priced it accordingly, but I doubt they would.
SonyFanBoi
2 years ago |Well, it has to be the best damn 50mm 1.4 out there to justify that price tag. The manual focus Zeiss 50/1.4 doesn’t sell that well either. I’m really happy with my Sigmalux. I am looking forward to seeing if Zeiss can make the ZA version of the ZE/ZF. That is one hell of a lens that I love so much.
Sky_walker
2 years ago |Manual Zeiss doesn’t sell very well because in a matter of resolution it’s far from being the best lens on a market, especially wide-open. And it looks like resolution is thing people care most about these days.
SonyFanBoi
2 years ago |Well you should not group all of the other manual Zeiss lenses into the same group with the ZE/ZF 50/1.4. The Zeiss is decent at WO (but not any better than other 50/1.4). The bokeh, however, is not smooth. Stopping down to f/2 or further really helps but then the Makro 50 is better. Except for being a 1.4 lens, it does not really have the character and uniqueness of any other Zeiss. To me, I prefer the manual Zeiss rendering over the ZA line even though the ZA is certainly better in term of resolution compared to the similar focal length (ZE/ZF 85 is a joke compared to the ZA). The new 25/2 is not as good as the 24/2 and both suffer from field of curvature at landscape distance. I’m a Zeiss fan, but I don’t see myself buying this lens at a price tag higher than $1k.
bas076
2 years ago |That is because 50/1.4 ZE/ZF is real bokeh disaster. If Sony will do some thing like this the system will be without 50mm.
dealaddict
2 years ago |All the Zeiss lenses are priced close or even more than Canon L lenses. the Canon 50L is selling for $1500. I expect the Zeiss 50 1.4 will be at least around $1300. If it is $700, it won’t have the Zeiss badge on it. This is just my guess =)
Carl
2 years ago |The 50L is a f1.2 lens. The Canon 50/1.4 is about the same price as the current Sony 50/1.4.
MooW
2 years ago |You guys really expecting it to sell at those prices you guys mention? Be more realistic. Do you really think it will be selling cheap. Its pro high end lenses.
It will be priced between the 24mm and 85mm. Very likely to happen.
matgay
2 years ago |would not mind higher price at all – if the image quality beats the canikon version – just like the zeiss 85 and 135
Dave Cox
2 years ago |Don’t shoot me but I have the Sigma 50 /1.4 and I can’t fault it. The AF is miles better than the Sony lens I had for a weekend. Maybe that was just a bad copy but I’d much prefer to see a WA fast prime or even better, a really good WA macro.
cbsva
2 years ago |I would rather prefer a damn good super-WA (14mm/3,5), which may be rather slow, and a really good 24-120/4-4,5 or similar…
Steve
2 years ago |I have read that the Sigma 50/1.4 is a good lenses and better than the Sony.
As I recall its not a screw-drive like the old Sony/Minolta
Steve Jones
2 years ago |I’ve got the Sigma 50 f1.4 too and, I would concur. On APS-C at least it is excellent.
C
2 years ago |Ditto. I own one, I highly recommend it if it fits in the budget.
Denis
2 years ago |Interesting. I would like to know how it will compare to my lux 50 asph
Carl
2 years ago |Less vignetting at least, but the ASPH won’t go down in other criteria easily.
The Summilux-R E60 is probably a fairer comparison.
Garron
2 years ago |Yes! And for a higher price.
Zeiss lenses are not just about sharpness, resolution and low light. They render the image differently in terms of shape and micro-contrast. I would and do pay the higher premium for that look which suits me.
I would be very surprised if this is at that low price.
Hellven
2 years ago |we really need another 50mm for full frame
a Zeiss 50/1.4 would be very nice! but sony can’t discontinue the current model, unless they make another “low cost” model, a new 50/1.4 or a 50/1.8 FF (cause the current one is APS)
Carl
2 years ago |Canon and Nikon do it by making their higher end 50s f1.2.
matgay
2 years ago |two zeiss 50s??
C
2 years ago |I think Hellven meant 50mm, not Zeiss
Rc.d
2 years ago |Andrea, do you know which other lenses have a good chance toget renewed? The 70-200 has also the old Minolta design, any hints about a replacement for this lens?
whistler
2 years ago |I really hope that Sony will announce the A99 as soon as possible as we will not even know if such a pro FF lens has any sense on the A-mount.
Sky_walker
2 years ago |Load of people shoot pro with APS-C cameras – in case you wouldn’t notice. And they don’t care about A99.
matgay
2 years ago |im sure a load of those pros also shoot with m43s
saiman
2 years ago |Why again a 50mm f1.4, and not a 50mm f1.2/1.1/0.95 ? That should be the bokeh-machine much worthy of the ziess tag.
So, I vote “No”.
Hellven
2 years ago |yep, a bokeh machine tha you wouldn’t buy cause of it’s price tag…
if you want a bokeh machine you have the zeiss 85mm, it has a shalower dof than any 50mm ever made.
f1.2 are lenses from the film era, when the maximum usable ISO you had was 800.
matgay
2 years ago |because now cameras can go up to iso 25600, all the lenses we need are f8.0 at the widest???
thats what u said.
C
2 years ago |Trap sprung.
Carl
2 years ago |Projection and depth of field are two separate compositional considerations. Taking a couple of steps back and using a longer lens will result in a different image, even if the depth of field is the same.
Of course, whether that even matters to any given photographer is another matter, but if someone feels the need an XXmm fX.X lens to get the shot they’re looking for, then there really isn’t anything else that one can recommend to them.
SonyFanBoi
2 years ago |+1. You can’t really substitute the look of another focal length with the other, but whether that is important is another matter. I don’t think any person here asking for an AF 50/1.2 or 0.95 would be able to pay for that (otherwise they would be shooting with a Canon or Leica already). A new AF Zeiss 50/1.2 would be at least $2500, while the 0.95 version would not be less than $4k (being the first AF lens at such aperture and all). I see the same whiners would whine again.
Carl
2 years ago |There are always enthusiasts with money, and professionals can get a tax rebate on them as a cost of doing business.
samdman
2 years ago |I believe hyperprime nokton 50 is f0.95, altough it’s manual, e-mount version available and priced at us$999 in HK. Or if you prefer the Cine version with t.0.95 at nearly 3 times price.
C
2 years ago |At least the T-version can justify its price
Sky_walker
2 years ago |Let it be weathersealed, Let it be weathersealed, Let it be weathersealed, Let it be weathersealed, Let it be weathersealed…..
matgay
2 years ago |what the hell was sony thinking, releasing the a900 weather sealed… and zero weather sealed lenses?
Sky_walker
2 years ago |The high-end long focal primes are weather sealed – eg. 500 f/4. (on the other hand: weather sealing isn’t the same as water sealing).
SonyFanBoi
2 years ago |LOL, water-sealed…
John
2 years ago |Ocean Submersible?
John
2 years ago |5 years later?
Stewe
2 years ago |Initially they wanted to release this lens at 25 year anniversary. So be thankful to your overlords.
Adam Maas
2 years ago |The A900 is not weather sealed, it has limited dust & moisture sealing (as does the A700, A850 and several older Minolta bodies).
The only weather sealed Alpha is the A77, and every high-end A mount lens introduced since the A77 has had sealing (admittedly that’s just the 16-50 and 500)
no nikon no
2 years ago |Same as useless. The lenses were not moistured or dusted.
voyager42
2 years ago |They repeated that again with the a77!!!…
jkp
2 years ago |750 dollar or 750 euro…..? Thats not by any mean the same….so your poll ?
matgay
2 years ago |im sure that plastic looking lens image above also affected the polls. no way is the new zeiss going to look anything near that plastic lens.
Allan Olesen
2 years ago |US prices in USD and European prices in EUR are almost the same. So the poll makes a lot of sense.
Example, A77 + 16-50, price on Sony’s own sites:
US: $1999.99
DE: €1899.00
JonasM
2 years ago |I’d buy it and I’d pay more, provided its SSM and all metal like the 24mm. Weather sealing for this kind of lens feels secondary.
jack
2 years ago |An updated FF 50 1.4 with the quality and build of the SAL-1650 would be much more reasonable. It should be less than 500 USD.
Dave Cox
2 years ago |The Sigma 50/1.4 is FF and is easily a comparable build quality with the SAL1650 (not FF). I have both.
There seems to be a certain amount of snobbery around regarding the Sigma lens! I’m not arguing just asking why!
SonyFanBoi
2 years ago |Simply they have not tried the Siggy 50. The only reason one would not buy the Siggy is due to the size, much bigger than most 50. I have one, and very happy with. The Zeiss has to be amazing to entice me.
Stewe
2 years ago |Sigma’s 50/1.4 bokeh isn’t as good as Zeiss or Leica, Fuji or Olympus. It’s better that canicon 50/1.4 but that isn’t saying much.
SonyFanBoi
2 years ago |LOL, Stewe, you are the first to say that and probably because you never tried the Siggy. I have not seen a single Zeiss Planar 50/1.4 known for its bokeh smoothness at WO (Only the Sonnar ZM is decent). Please enlighten me as to which Fuji and Olympus you are referring to. And please don’t give me the 25/1.4 and 35/1.4 since they are not even the same focal length. Not being a full frame, none of the “50 equ.” from Fuji and Oly can render the background as smooth as the Siggy at WO. I left the Leica option as the last one since I know you just pull the name without knowing much. Except for the 4k Lux 50 M, the Siggy is the sharpest 50/1.4 with among smoothest bokeh. These observations are quite evident (almost a known fact) on various photography fora. You can easily check the FredMiranda Alternative lens forum to see.
Stewe
2 years ago |SonyFanBoy
You need to stop advertising Sigma 50/1.4. You sound silly.
SonyFanBoi
2 years ago |Then you should stop being ignorant. If you say Zeiss lens has better rendition then I would not care to argue (since it is quite subjective). But you’re the first to dismiss the Sigma bokeh. People don’t call it Sigmalux for no reason. I am a hard core Zeiss fan, but I would not mind getting the Siggy 50/1.4 or the 70/2.8 macro. The rest of Sigma, well, there are much better options to put it politely.
bas076
2 years ago |What Zeiss? 50/1.4 manual? It has bokeh? One of the most terrible things I ever seen.
Zstan
2 years ago |Sigma is known to have quality control issues. Maye that’s why it’s deterring people from investing in that brand.
dyxxum
2 years ago |Would not buy, simply because I have A77 and don’t like 50mm on APSC very much (and already have the Sigma 50). Make it a 1.4/35 ZA (or new G) SSM and then I’ll get excited.
Sky_walker
2 years ago |Woh, I already see £1500 price tag on it.
Stewe
2 years ago |So,
- cheap 35/1.8 SAM;
- 35/1.8 with ssm, weather sealed and with internal focusing system;
- new 35/1.4G with ssm, weather sealed and with internal focusing system;
- expensive 35/1.4 ZA with ssm, weather sealed and with internal focusing system.
That would be good lineup for you?
Sky_walker
2 years ago |Me? I’d be fine with 35 f/1.4 SSM that doesn’t have much CA with sub-2k price (no idea how possible is that though)
I guess you wanted to replay dyxxum though
Stewe
2 years ago |Nah, but maybe, with more constructive ideas andrea could help sony to understand what people are awaiting from them?
Sky_walker
2 years ago |Stewe – once there was a poll on which lenses Sony Alpha Rumors readers would want most.
Besides few unrealistic choices hitting top of the scale, and few possibly great lenses that hit the bottom (eg. my still awaited UWA prime for APS-C) – it should be more than enough to tell Sony what people would want to see.
IMO right now the greatest problem is not in choosing wrong lenses but in actually… releasing lenses at all. Cause Sony didn’t really bother with putting stuff in recent 3 years while (for example) Canon released 2-3 times more lenses including popular and some more rare (T&S anyone?) lenses.
Sekiz
2 years ago |Sony should extend the easy-coice lens line for full-frame too. Why not a 50mm f/1.8 for 110 USD like Canon and Nikon? I luv them easy-choice lightwheight cheap and optically stellar lenses.
JonasM
2 years ago |I respect your opinion but I personally hate those cheap plastic lenses and I doubt they’re optically stellar as you put it. Wish Sony would stop degrading the Alpha brand by making them.
Carl
2 years ago |The 85/2.8 is superb optically. But no one will give it the time of day because of its build and speed.
Pebble
2 years ago |+1
I like this lens better then my Zeiss 24-70 at 70mm, a nice tiny lens for portraits. I don’t bother with the plastics..
Adam Maas
2 years ago |Love mine, recommend it all the time. The magic word when doing so is ‘Contax’, as the 85/2.8 is a clone of the classic Contax 85/2.8, which was a low-cost high performance 85 in its day.
Sekiz
2 years ago |I totally understand what you mean and your position but it is the position of a pro I guess. However, those lenses do an incredible job for enthusiasts like me. I do not make my living on photos nor take too many of them. I learned the hard way that those few photos I take matter a lot. 35mm f/1.8 is irreplacable for me.
Having 50mm f/1.8 in their lines do not decrease the brand values of Nikon and Canon. Somebody below wishes for a Canon L like 50mm f/1.2, a lens 600 grams and 1500 USD with serious optical shortcomings. Photography is an art and IMHO should not be turned into a pissing contest.
Almazar80
2 years ago |People said that about the Nikon E series lenses years ago and they’re saying it again about the Sony Easy Choice line. People who appreciate value and optical performance at least have an affordable choice. A good thing, as far as I’m concerned.
Adam Maas
2 years ago |Agreed.
And I shoot both the Series E lenses (currently own the 50/1.8 and 100/2.8) and the Easy Choice lenses (35/1.8 and 85/2.8, really wish the 35 was FF). They’re great little values and the compactness is a nice win as well.
Adam Maas
2 years ago |You mean like Canon. Nikon replaced their cheap 50/1.8 with the new 50/1.8G AF-S which is similar in cost to the DT 50/1.8 SAM
Sekiz
2 years ago |I did know they had upgraded it, which is a good thing. The older one is still on the shelves and will be there somewhere in ebay for a looong time. Sony counterpart is nonexsistent, DT 50/1.8 SAM being a crop lens. I am primarily concerned with the size and weight, so 100 USD more would not hurt me.For me the differance between f/1.8 and f/1.4 is nonexistent.
SonyFanBoi
2 years ago |So why is it you are shooting with a FF and demanding a cheap FF 50? Even worse, you can’t see the DOF difference between the 1.8 and 1.4 on a FF? I really see no point to shoot with a digital FF if you are going to pair with a cheap and slow lens. Let’s face it, going for a FF DSLR is not about being light weight or small setup. Sometimes I don’t really understand people.
Sekiz
2 years ago |I am shooting with a580, hoping to buy the next Sony FF with A77 size and weight. I also might change a580 for nex-5n. 50mm f/1.8 makes sense in all of them. I do not want carrying all that weight.
SonyFanBoi
2 years ago |No offense, but a light and small FF DSLR would be an unbalanced camera for most high-end DSLR FF lenses; so expecting that is quite unrealistic. And again, if weight is really an issue and you don’t care much about the DOF, then an APS-C camera would fit you just fine. I’m just being realistic; get the tools that fit your need instead of wishing for something non-existent. Now if Sony is going to have the NEX FF, then I would agree we need a small, lightweight lens. Horses for courses.
Sekiz
2 years ago |Bottomline, I went through it thoroughly and what I need in the future is an A77 size FF DSLR and a pocketable nex or PS camera. Bokeh is an issue but not a dealbreaker. I am on a budget and Sony is lacking some core lenses for people like me.
SonyFanBoi
2 years ago |I am sorry to hear that. The fact is Sony doesn’t have what I want as well. I’m an environmental portrait photographer and my preferred focal is a 24mm. Yet, Sony did not push Zeiss hard enough for a 24/1.4. To me, the bokeh and dynamic range is what draw me to FF. I’m contemplating switching to Nikon but the NEX is just too convenient for my style of shooting at the moment.
Sekiz
2 years ago |Man, your problem is bigger. I am planning to go for FF because there is stg about the quality of FF photos that I love so much and I can always get a Minolta 50mm f/1.7 for 50 bucks and take amazing photos.
Adam Maas
2 years ago |The Sony equivalent is the Minolta 50/1.7, which is easily available on eBay for a similar price to the AF Nikkor 50/1.8D. I don’t expect stock of the older Nikkor to last too much longer since it doesn’t AF on most Nikon consumer bodies made in the last 6 years.
bas076
2 years ago |Because canon 50/1.8 is piece of shit.
Sekiz
2 years ago |Average rating of that shit is 4.6/5 based on the reviews of 3381 people at bhphotovideo. I need that shit.
DJ
2 years ago |+1 for the money, that lens was great.
matgay
2 years ago |great toy lens? try telling a client the lens only costs $99.00
bas076
2 years ago |Ok. It is great shit.
bas076
2 years ago |3381 shit users.
Adam Maas
2 years ago |Owned two copies over the years, a good copy is better than the EF 50/1.4 USM. And they’re disposable. For the money, it’s a gem.
Oh, and the DT 50/1.8 SAM is better.
bas076
2 years ago |DT 50/1.8 as portrait lens? Yes, much better. I tried both.
On A700 and 40D.
Bill
2 years ago |With a APS-C body the 50mm is not really a great lens choice and would probably buy something else for the same money if I had it to spend. If I bought the A9X, then I would really consider the lens, but current priorities do not leave me $3000 to buy a new body and lens.
Adam Maas
2 years ago |The 50 is a lousy normal on APS-C, but a great short telephoto, especially if paired with a 24 on a small APS-C body.
My everyday walkaround kit for my A33 was a Minolta 24/2.8 and the Sony 50/1.4 and that’s been replaced by a NEX-7 with the ZA 24 and the 50/1.8 OSS. Great setup, one lens on the camera, the other in a pocket. This does imply that Sony should bring out an Easy Choice 24/2.8 though, probably DT to avoid conflict with the current ZA 24.
Daemonius
2 years ago |I expected f1.2
Disappointed.
Nobody is able to beat Canon?
Sky_walker
2 years ago |I still hold thumbs for f/1.2 at some point
Adam Maas
2 years ago |You’re not going to see many f1.2 AF lenses outside of Canon because of mount size restrictions. Both Nikon and Sony are facing limitations on the mount diameter where they can either do f1.2 or AF, but they don’t have room for both the f1.2 lens’s rear element and the AF control contacts. Canon’s larger diameter mount allows for the f1.2 optics as well as the contacts to drive AF.
Steve
2 years ago |Interesting information about Nikon, Sony vs Canon lens mount.
Thanks!
Sky_walker
2 years ago |Didn’t the Nikon had f/1.2 lens which works fine on cameras with electronic contacts? I can’t recall it.
Also: didn’t Sony patented the f/1.2 lens already? Meaning: they actually know how to build it?
SonyFanBoi
2 years ago |Well I don’t buy that one bit about the mount throat size. With the limited resource and not having a big DSLR market share, I don’t think Sony would want to release a 50/1.2 for few individuals out there. Don’t get me wrong, I would get it. But I don’t see it as a feasible business option.
Adam Maas
2 years ago |Nikon has made several f1.2 lenses, a 50/1.2, 55/1.2 and 58/1.2. All have a rear element too large to accomodate the CPU lens contacts (the limitation is on the lens side as the camera’s contacts are recessed enough to clear the lens element)
Daemonius
2 years ago |Theres no restriction. You can use 85mm f1.2 lens from Contax/Zeiss on Nikon if you wish. Well and have money for that.
Nikon or Sony could do f1.0 lens if they wanted (tho AF would be near impossible).
And yes theres lens from Nikon, although without AF. Nikon 50mm f1.2 AiS, last time I checked you could buy it new still. They make some new-old AiS lens. Pretty good ones btw. if you dont mind MF.
Btw. Leica did 50mm f1.2 lens for R mount, tho it ended in prototype phase (expensive and not high enough quality for Leica standarts). So really, there isnt real limitation, its just bit harder to design.
SonyFanBoi
2 years ago |He means that you cannot have f/1.2 lens and built-in AF at the same time on Sony/Nikon system, though I don’t buy that notion.
Daemonius
2 years ago |Neither do I. Tho ppl actually even believe that its not possible to create such lens in MF only. Guess they eat too much Canon soup (they said something like that when they released 50mm f1.0 L – tho that is remarkable lens in some ways).
Boooe
2 years ago |There is a limitation, and f1.0 is very close to being physically impossible to design for Nikon F, or is impossible. Nikon F bayonet is about 42 mm wide and has 46.5 mm flange distance. If you place a single lens to fill it entirely, it would be only as fast as f/1.1.
Mike
2 years ago |Stop spreading such nonsense. Why was I able to convert a Rokkor 58/1.2 to A-mount using a simple AF-confirm adapter? Surely, the adapter has AF contacts.
The lens does not have AF, but I don’t see how that would matter since the contacts are there and the AF system would be located nowhere near the mount.
Adam Maas
2 years ago |Let me guess, you used an M42 style AF confirm chip, which does not have full-spec contacts (they’re of reduced width, they work but are out of spec). There’s not enough room for full-spec contacts.
If Sony is willing to tweak the spec, there would be just barely enough room if half-sized contacts are used. No such luck in Nikon-land, F mount has a smaller throad than A mount.
Matthias
2 years ago |The Minolta 7000 AF and 9000 AF already supported aperture values up to at least 1.2 (tested by myself, and officially documented in the Japanese version of the user manual) and downto 45’3 (the equivalent of aperture 57 in quarter-steps – seen by myself with PBS-70/PBS-90/EB-90 and Macro Zoom 3x-1x).
The Dynax 9, Dynax 7 and Dynax 7D are known to support apertures up to 1.1 (tested) and down to 64 the least (personally seen with Macro Zoom 3x-1x).
Analysis of the Dynax 7D firmware revealed that it includes code to support aperture values ranging from 1.0 downto 90.
I think it is safe to assume that the whole range of A-mount cameras supports aperture values from 1.1 downto 57 (and quite possibly even from 1.0 downto 90, but nobody tried so far).
Matthias
2 years ago |Mike, there won’t be any mechanical, optical or electrical problems, to fit a 1.1 or 1.2 AF lens to A-mount.
However, the AF sensors in existing cameras might have a too-narrow measurement basis width to really support an 1.1 or 1.2 lens with the desired AF precision. So, while the AF would work technically, a new 1.4-type AF sensor (in addition to the existing 2.8- and 6.7-type AF sensors) might be necessary to meet precision expectations.
Carl
2 years ago |Or they might just do what Canon did and not care that their super fast lenses don’t focus properly.
Manually focusing is the best course of action with macro and super fast lenses in any case.
Richard Harris
2 years ago |I don’t buy this for a-mount. My 1.2 lens fits in with a pcb, plenty of room in there to create other mechanisms, heck, with enough time I could even make it AF myself.
Sky_walker
2 years ago |BTW: Didn’t we have this rumor already? Like.. here: http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-new-a-mount-zeiss-50mm-f1-4-ssm-coming-with-the-a9x/
With SR5 rating?
Why it got demoted to SR3?
Carl
2 years ago |I think it’s the “coming in August” bit that hasn’t been confirmed.
Steve
2 years ago |+1
RVN
2 years ago |i’ll buy it and combine 50mm/1.4 zeiss with Alpha mount and E-mount with adapter
i hope this zeiss have a small size with high quality optic and build well
Adam Maas
2 years ago |The current most expensive 50/1.4 full-frame lens is the Summilux-M ASPH, which at $3995 USD is over $3000 more than the ZF.2 or ZE 1,4/50 Planar.
SonyFanBoi
2 years ago |And this is relevant to SLR lens how?
Adam Maas
2 years ago |The post says most expensive FF 50/1.4, not most expensive SLR 50/1.4
Rafael
2 years ago |Sorry, I cannot answer your short poll.
I cannot answer “No” because I really would a high quality 50mm f/1.4 Zeiss lens.
I cannot answer “Don’t know yet” because I know what I want and how much to pay for it.
I cannot answer “Yes!” because I don’t approve nor share that estimated price. I neither share the pretended parity, 750Dollar=750Euro.
FK
2 years ago |Good thing that they took the dicision to make it F1.4 instead of going for a F1.2 design. I’m really courious to see how well it will perform wide open.
Renato S.
2 years ago |I basically gave up on Sony but I won’t sell my camera until there is one with same cost x benefit but I don’t think Sony will fulfill their promisses of fast primes and pancakes, I use basically old lenses only, but sometimes I need AF and IS, anyway, it’s hard to support a system that doesn’t have lenses.
SonyFanBoi
2 years ago |Probably you need to enlighten us as to which lens you want to see on the Sony system. Then might be at the end, you realize that Sony is not the right system for you, and you should move on to Canikon. The grass is always greener on the other side. Without the versatility and adaptability of the NEX system, I would have left Sony already. Now they just need to release a FF NEX then people are free to choose the lens they want without the focal length penalty.
Sky_walker
2 years ago |“Sony will fulfill their promisses of fast primes and pancakes” – Sony made any promises on pancakes?! Never ever heard of it. Heck: I don’t even recall any promises of fast primes.
Unless you talk about NEX…. but if so than you hit the wrong topic.
FK
2 years ago |They have talked about that referring to the E-Mount system. Basically they said that they had understand that people would like to see Primes and Pancakes for that mount. However I don’t see how this is related to a high quality A-Mount Lens.
JB
2 years ago |I want this lens now!
Pebble
2 years ago |I just want an affordable 28mm lens….
Carl
2 years ago |Any 28mm lens would be more than they have currently.
Pebble
2 years ago |Kiril
2 years ago |Any rumor about Zeiss Planar 85/2 for E mount?
Ken
2 years ago |as of right now, between my 50mm (Sigma HSM), 85mm (Sigma HSM), and CZ135, the 50mm is the least used. I may even sell it. For portraits, I reach for the CZ135 first then the 85mm… for walk around, my CZ1635 or Sigma 24-70 HSM…. I have very little need for the 50mm.
usch
2 years ago |No, because I am perfectly happy with the Minolta 50mm/1.4 that I bought along with the Minolta 7D, even on the A900.
A900 Tog
2 years ago |Great news but Sony can we also please please have the same but 35mm!!
voyager42
2 years ago |There’s already a Sony FF 35mm G lens… SAL 35F14G… Don’t have it and have never used it… but it’s a “G” lens!!!
Adam Maas
2 years ago |Yeah, and it’s the weakest lens in the G line, weaker IMHO than the current SAL50F14.
I’d much rather have Sony replace the 35G with a 35/1.4 Distagon akin to the ZF/ZE in performance than a new ZA 50/1.4, and I’d be lining up for the 50 as it’s the key lens in my lineup (right now my FF lineup is a 17-35D, 50/1.4, 85/2.8 and 70-210/4)
I’d kill for Sony to bring me a ZA 35, ZA 50 and an Easy Choice 28/2.8 that’s a Contax clone like the 85/2.8
sgoldswo
2 years ago |The SAL35F14G is sharp (or at least my example is on my A900) whereas the SAL50F14 is a blunt spoon to the SAL35F14′s scalpel. About the only thing wrong with the 35mm is the screw drive.
Carl
2 years ago |My 35/1.4 is significantly better than my 50/1.4, FWIW.
Richard Harris
2 years ago |I wouldn’t say there is. Massive amount between the 35 50 85 combo in terms of simply rendering detail, assuming you get the damn thing in focus.
voyager42
2 years ago |I have my Minolta 50mm f/1.4 currently for sale on eBay because I have never used it… either on my a55 (sold on eBay) or my current a77…
ee
2 years ago |f 1.2 please god, f1.2 or lower….
voyager42
2 years ago |As far as I can see Sony don’t have a single duplicated lens between Sony, G and Zeiss lens in their entire range!!!.
If they come out with a FF 50mm f/1.4 Zeiss it will be the FIRST DUPLICATED lens in their lineup… The SAL 50f14 sells for $450 and gets great reviews…
If Sony comes out with a Zeiss 50F14 for FF then you know what will happen… reviewers will put the SAL 50F14 and Zeiss 50F14 on the same camera and review it… No way is the Zeiss going to be 2 or 3 times better…
It’s really dumb marketing to bring out a Zeiss version of a lens that already exists… it’s like competing against yourself!!!…
On the other hand, if they come out with a Zeiss 50mm f/1.2 then it will be a DIFFERENT lens and worth looking at!!!…
And the chances are, it will almost certainly perform better than the existing Sony 50F14…
dk
2 years ago |I had the Canon 50/1.2L and sold it, too heavy, too special. I would prefer a Zeiss 50/f2.0 with best possible IQ, small and practical. I paid dearly for my tech-craze. Today I shoot 99% of my time with a CV f2.0 40mm Ultron, what is a unbelievable superb gem of a lens. If Sony could deliver a small FF body together with a small high IQ Zeiss, I would even change brand. Thats why I am sneaking around at SAR….
Adam Maas
2 years ago |We may see small, high-IQ and Zeiss-derived, but it won’t be labelled Zeiss. The current Sony 85/2.8 is exactly that. A compact 85 with great optics (but a cheapo barrel) and the optics are a direct clone of the great little Contax 85/2.8, with the only change being the 0.6m MFD on the Sony (vs 1m on the Contax).
Sky_walker
2 years ago |ever heard of thing called “upgrade” or “update”? Noone expects Zeiss to be 2 times better than Sony, yet: everyone expect SSM primes to be released finally and updating post-minoltan lenses which start to show their flaws all around with new sensors and cameras made for video too.
NIKO
2 years ago |I voted no for this lens not because I don’t want it, but on the price. I know it would be a Zeiss lens, but I think the price is pushing it; Zeiss or not. I have to compare prices with the Canon and Nikon offerings. Nikon’s top 50 f1.4 is currently $459 and B&H Photo Video. Canon’s price is $399. Sony’s current 50 f1.4 is priced at $450. Sony’s variant doesn’t even have SSM so why is it about the same price as the Nikon’s? It should still be at a $350 level price tag. If a Zeiss 50 f1.4 SSM was to come out I think a $550-575 price tage would be more appropriate. Hey…..it’s a simple 50mm design. Not much is going into it. Zeiss T* coatings will be nice, add a focus hold button I suppose, but the price should still be well under $600.
@ voyager42 – No Zeiss duplications of Sony lenses? What about the 85 f1.4 Zeiss. Sure, no Sony made (Minolta re-badge) of the lens. However, when the Zeiss lens came out it was compared to the Minolta 85 f1.4′s wasn’t it? Of course it was. Same goes for Nikon when they came out with their new 70-200 f2.8 II zoom lens. It was compared to the older variant immeadiately. All new stuff from a company will be compared to their old stuff whether it be Sony branded (Minolta re-badge) or Minolta branded itself.
Adam Maas
2 years ago |Note the Canon 50/1.4 is inferior to any of the Minolta 50/1.4′s, and the Nikkor is only very slightly better.
The current ZE/ZF 50/1.4 Planar from Zeiss wipes the floor with either of these lenses aside from the lack of AF. The ZE/ZF runs $725 at B&H, which is a good ballpark figure for the ZA (I’m expecting $800 and slightly better performance, akin to the discontinued Contax N 50/1.4 AF from Zeiss).
I agree with you on the subject of duplication. Sony’s at the point now where it’s time to start replacing some of the older Minolta glass in its lineup even if those are good lenses. Sony needs a consistent high-end prime lineup, all ZA’s, and a consistent low-end prime lineup, all Easy-Choice. Right now the Sony lineup is a hodge-podge of old Minolta stuff, new Minolta & Sony designs and new Zeiss designs, all with different rendering characteristics (Classic Minolta, Minolta D-style and Zeiss). They need to nail it down to no more than 2 rendering styles and offer a complete choice of both, the high-end as Zeiss (aside from Telephoto’s, which are not a traditional Zeiss strength) and the low-end as Minolta D style (all of the non-ZA Sony’s rendering like the D lenses from Minolta), with the latter including the G Telephotos.
Richard Harris
2 years ago |I agree re: duplication. We’re a step closer to a full 24/35/50/85/135 ZA prime set, which would be pretty hard to ignore I think. Get a 50 in there, then bring the rendering of the 35 in line with the 85ZA. Anything else in that area would just be a bonus… I personally see little point in brining in choices like 28 or 100 for a good while.
Oleh
2 years ago |Sigma 50 is the best,
I think that with new 50\1.4 Sony try to earn money as with 16-50\2.8 whis has double price than Tamron 17-50/2.8…I mean with the same quality Sony is trying to make more money, as a consumer I don`t like it !!!
Richard Harris
2 years ago |Please don’t compare apples to oranges. The 16-50/2.8 is a different class to that Tamron 17-50/2.8, which is built like a toy. You get what you pay for. If you don’t value it, don’t buy it, simple.
DBFoto
2 years ago |This was an SR5 last year, why SR3 now?
admin
2 years ago |SR5 that the lens is real. SR3 that it is coming with the A99!
Richard Harris
2 years ago |Excellent for the system, but not one I’d personally jump on immediately given that I already have good lenses in this area. It’s a 1.2 version that would have me part with my cash… Admin, what happened to the suggestion of a 1.2/50? Gone completely? I do hope not anyway.
Carl
2 years ago |Sony merely patented an optical design; they’ve never given any indication that they’d actually use it.
The design was by the ex-Minolta team, not the Zeiss team, so it may have just been on the wrong side of some internal politics as to whether they should make a ZA50 or 50G. Personally, I’d take a 50/1.2G over a 50/1.4ZA in a heartbeat, though.
matgay
2 years ago |50g will be same quality as the 35mmG. $1,500usd, worst reviews ever. Thats what to expect from a 50G.
Please 50ZA Zeiss colors sharpness and microcontrast!
Carl
2 years ago |It isn’t 1986 anymore.
ee
2 years ago |Agree completely: 1.2f or this isn’t even worthwhile news. I’m ready to buy into FF but need wide apertures for the shallow DOF, f1.2 or lower is where the magic is at for me. Apparently, Canon is the only company who wants my money–Nikon and Sony are ignoring my needs.
Godsakes
2 years ago |There isn’t really anything wrong with the current Sony 50mm 1.4, I recently got the much praised sigma 50mm and the improvement isn’t much and comes with it’s own set of drawbacks.
Adhib
2 years ago |Maybe be a Zeiss 50mm F1.2 Planar would be cooler, probably would be around the same price as the Canon 50mm f1.2 L, that would be EPIC
SoulNibbler
2 years ago |I could see a 1000€ f1.2 or f1.0 as being reasonable. As far as a 1.4 I won’t spend more than 500€, for a normal lens.
Michael
2 years ago |What is the thinking on the 19mm & and 28mm Leica new version (ROM) lenses on this camera?
Sincerely,
Michael
Carl
2 years ago |They’re two of the best R mount primes. The 19v2 has visible radial distortion and benefits from removing that in post processing, though.
Michael
2 years ago |Carl,
Are you referring to slight barrel distortion? It is something I hadn’t doticed in the sorts of things I shoot.
Many Thanks,
Michael
Carl
2 years ago |To me it isn’t slight at all, but everyone is sensitive to different things.
Michael
2 years ago |Carl.
As I rarely shoot anything longer than 24mm, I am pretty familiar with wide angle characteristics
& like you say, an easy trick to correct in PS if one deems it neccessary which I do not. What I am most
sensitive to is the final image.
Sincerely,
Michael