Minolta AF 50mm F1.4 A-mount lens reviews
 Doublejayz#10235 date: May-25-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 2 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 50 f1.7 Minolta 24 f2.8 Minolta 28 f2.8 |
| price paid: | 224 USD (Boxed) |
| positive: | Everything it is! |
| negative: | Built-in Hood (but good for me) Flare Not very sharp wide open |
| comment: | Everything is great with this little len At f1.4 is usable sharp and so sharp from f1.7 to very very sharp from 2.8 Worth upgrade from a cheaper 50 f1.7 Unless you love this generation design of Minolta lens, grab RS version instead with more working hood (I think) *edited Flare control is kinda terrible |
; 14MP| JamieZ#10036 date: Mar-19-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 28-70 f2.8, Minolta 28-85 (mini beercan) Sony 18-55 kit lens. Minolta 50 f1.7 |
| price paid: | 125 |
| positive: | This is a goto lens for me at work. Low light and vivid color is what I am shoting as a Lighting designer. Even when jumping range with it by adding a 1.4X or 2x tele adaptor. |
| negative: | a little soft a f1.4, but that would be it. |
| comment: | I have had this trusty little guy forever. It has always given me great shots. It has gone from my first real SLR a 400si, onto a 600si then a A100 and now a A580. It is always with me, on camera or in the bag. |
| ghmcs#9997 date: Mar-5-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 50mm f/2.8 macro Sony 50mm f/1.4 |
| price paid: | 249 USD used |
| positive: | Small, light, inexpensive, sharp from f/2.8 on at reasonable print sizes |
| negative: | Slight green color cast Not quite as sharp as the 50mm macro from f/2.8-5.6 Some purple fringing at f/1.4 and f/1.7 |
| comment: | I can only comment on the copies I have used, but this is a better lens than the current Sony version. The Sony I bought had a terrible back focus issue; this lens does not - in fact, I ended up with a focus adjust setting of zero. Worse, however, the Sony lens just didn't sharpen up nicely until f/8. I ended up selling the Sony lens to buy this one. At any reasonable print size, this lens is sharp from f/2.8 on. At unreasonably large print sizes, this lens is not quite as sharp as the Minolta 50mm macro from f/2.8-5.6. I also noticed that this lens gives a slight green cast compared to the Minolta macro lens. At f/1.4 and f/1.7 the lens is usable, but noticeably softer and with some purple fringing. As long as you're not shooting test targets at those big apertures, you'll be very happy with this lens. |
| R_Ae#9558 date: Nov-2-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | 200 USD |
| positive: | Wide f1.4 Build Sharpness stopped up Light |
| negative: | Focus ring Focus noise |
| comment: | Tack sharp at f2, and quite usable at f1.4. Just need to be careful of the quite shallow DOF at f1.4. Pairs nicely with my Maxxum 5 and A77. |
| MichaelMeyer#9401 date: Sep-9-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Nikon 50mm. F1.8 Nikon 55mm f2.8 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Sharp Light Compact Solid 49mm filter |
| negative: | None |
| comment: | Great lens in a compact package. I could shoot most anything with this lens. |
| CapturedByCiara#9216 date: Jul-8-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 1 overall: 3.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 35mm f1.8 sony, 28-70mm f2.8 sigma, 50mm f2.8 sigma. |
| price paid: | 200 US |
| positive: | Bokeh! Sharp, colors. contrast |
| negative: | haven't tested flair control yet. |
| comment: | I really love this lens, its a perfect coupling to my 35mm f1.8. bokeh is beautiful! |
| trongkien#9094 date: Jun-6-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 50mm f1.4 Minolta 50mm f1.7 |
| price paid: | 180 USD (used) |
| positive: | color is great sharp light well built |
| negative: | none |
| comment: | I like this lens a lot great. Color is great, it's wide open. Good for portrait, not for landscape. |
| snajper#9092 date: Jun-6-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Min 50mm f1.7 Sony 35mm f1.8 |
| price paid: | 50$ |
| positive: | Compact 5 star build quality sharp from F1.6 bokeh |
| negative: | no lens hood flare |
| comment: | Along with Sony 35mm f1.8 this is my favorite lens as I enjoy taking photos below F2 mark.Build quality is excellent. I have managed to get it for $50. |
| chriseen#9088 date: Jun-4-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 35-70 mm f4 Babybeercan Minolta 100mm f2.8 macro Beercan Minolta 50mm f1.7 Beercan Minolta 75-300mm f4,5-5,6 Beercan Tamron SP 90 Macro Minolta 28-135 f4.0-4.5 Beercan Minolta 80-200mm f2.8 Beercan( black) Sigma 70-300 DL Macro Super Sony kitlens 18-70 |
| price paid: | 230 euros (like new) |
| positive: | Very sharp, right from 1.4 Nice Colors Great Sharpness AF Speed Wide Aperture (f/1.4) Very good Bokeh Nice build quality Fast, Accurate AF great focal length Relatively light, Small size, yet solid |
| negative: | none |
| comment: | Better color reproduction than the compared zoom lenses. So small, it can fit anywhere in the camera bag. Excellent lens. Having a lot of fun when shooting in low light situations. I got this lens off ebay at 230 euros. This is a very good lens, expecially for sharpness and colors. I'm very impressed with the lens' focusing speed, lack of noise in AF and great sharpness, overall an excellent optical quality. the pictures i took, at f/2 ~ f/6.3 were amazing sharp, very sharp and clear. It is a great portrait lens on a digital camera! I do not have any flare complaints. If you can get it, buy it. Btw, I have also used the F1.7 version and the F1.4 is better (but much more expensive!) if you can get one at a good price So these primes have become my favorites. Highly recommendable - if you find one: BUY IT ! Go for it. |
| alolio#9030 date: May-15-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | MAF 28-135 f4 MAF Beercan MAF 28mm f2.8 MAF 50mm f2.8 Macro Sony Kit |
| price paid: | 125usd |
| positive: | Colors Sharpness Bokeh Speed Build |
| negative: | Flare (minor) |
| comment: | I got a great deal on this lens on Craigslist. This was the first non-kit lens I bought, and I didn't really know what I was getting. After dropping it for a $35 cleaning, I was delighted at what I'd found. The build is solid and the colors are exceptional. It's fast, and I no longer use a flash indoors If you come across a good copy, by all means, pick it up. |
| Argote#8792 date: Mar-14-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony DT 50/1.8 SAM Sony DT 30/2.8 Macro SAM Minolta 50/2.8 Macro Sigma 18-50/2.8-4.5 DC OS HSM |
| price paid: | ~250 USD (used) |
| positive: | - Very Sharp - Wide Aperture (f/1.4) - Good Bokeh - Nice build quality - Relatively light, yet solid - Not much distortion |
| negative: | - Some light propensity to flare - Colors are good but not spot-on - MFD not as good as Sony 50/1.8 - Some CA and Coma wide open |
| comment: | This is one very sharp lens, with really nice and creamy bokeh. It focuses really fast and has a nice build quality. I moved up from a Sony 50/1.8 SAM to this, it is certainly sharper than the Sony and I was lucky to find a copy in good condition. It is better in almost all regards to the Sony 50/1.8. The Sony is only better in MFD, Coma and Flare control (due to modern coatings). The colors it produces are a good but my A200 seems to be using a "cooler" AWB setting with this lens compared to the Sony 50/1.8 under similar conditions which means there is a bit more adjustment to do when processing (though I usually adjust that anyway). I haven't used it that much and these are initial impressions, will keep you posted. Sharp enough for the 24 MP sensor. |
| sturatcliffe#8742 date: Mar-5-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 24-70 2.8 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Fast, Accurate AF light great focal length |
| negative: | Flare Hood (if you can call it that) |
| comment: | I've bought this lens to use at a wedding at the end of March The low light capabilities are amazing, and 1.4 is very usable It produces a nice soft colour at 1.4 in a dimly lit room The af is fast and accurate and is a great colleague for the A900, distortion is not really noticeable and can be easily sorted pp. I seemed to get a green ghostly flare just right of centre frame when shooting a scene with light in the background. I have however been able to eliminate that by removing the uv filter when shooting. I only found out the lens had a hood by reading all the reviews, and even then it was hard to find! |
| silversurfer#8725 date: Mar-1-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 50/1.7 35/1.4 |
| price paid: | 249 USD (used) |
| positive: | Fairly cheap Small size Pretty sharp right from 1.4 |
| negative: | CA @ 1.4 Hood |
| comment: | I just received this lens yesterday and these are my initial thoughts. I'll use it mainly for it's larger aperture in low light. Pictures seem sharper at 1.4 than my 50/1.7 is at f2. At 1.4, CA doesn't take vacation in normal or low light, but stopping down to even f2 helps. Nice bokeh wide open and with close focus, but not as nice as 35/1.4 IMO. Colors appear warmer with this lens compared to the 1.7. First shots showed no distortion on A700. If I had to keep only 1 between the 1.4 and 1.7, it would be the 1.4 because of noticeable differences without pixel peeping. Though it's the older xx version, it's in fantastic shape and a good compromise compared to the Sigma 50/1.4. Should last like most other Minolta lenses - forever :) |
| Yugus#8169 date: Nov-3-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 3 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | 300 CAD (used) |
| positive: | Inexpensive Fast lens (large aperture) Fast AF Lightweight Good sharpness across the frame No distortion Bokeh is smooth |
| negative: | Heavy amount of veiling haze wide open in very well lit scenes CA is pretty bad wide open as well but goes away when stopped down to F2 Coma is pretty bad wide open |
| comment: | This is a very good lens for the price as it is the cheapest and fastest lens you can buy for your camera. Coming in at only around $300 CAD used you really can't go wrong. Though using it wide open during the day maybe a little to much for the lens to handle as it suffers from pretty bad veiling haze and CA (like most wide aperture lenses) though it mostly goes away when stopped down to F2-2.8, though even in low lit scenes it has another issue. Which is the coma, though its not the worse I've ever seen its not that well controlled either, you'll have to stop down to around F4 for it to completely go away. If you really enjoy taking shots in low light this is the lens to get. It's relatively inexpensive and allows you to shoot in very low light conditions without the need of a tripod. Though if money is an issue and you do not plan on going full frame you can also invest in the Sony 50mm F1.8 DT lens, or the Minolta 50mm F1.7 (this can be used on full frame) as that preforms just as well but for 1/3 of the price used. |
| last125eagle#8086 date: Oct-13-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 24mm sigma f 1,8 Minolta 50mm f1.7 minolta 28mm f2.8 sigma 24mm f2.8 |
| price paid: | 250 |
| positive: | fast fast fast small light |
| negative: | none really. The hood leaves some to be desired |
| comment: | great low light lens, great lens all round. I am glad That I have it. Though on an smaller sensor I find myself using my 24mm a lot more. This lens is still very wow. |
| Cauldfield#7954 date: Sep-8-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | - nikon 50mm 1.4 - Canon 50mm 1.8 |
| price paid: | 200 |
| positive: | - perfect quality - amazing sharpness (!) - highest IQ at this price - fantastic bokeh - fast AF - a lot.. |
| negative: | - nope. |
| comment: | I can't say any negative thing about this lens. It's a so "fine" piece of my minolta collection, maybe with the best image quality. When I saw how sharp it is, for the first time, I thought that maybe tuned up the sharpness in the menu.. but NO. So, if You like the 50mm focal range, than this is the "have to got this one" lens. No need to hesitate. Of course there are better lenses.. but not in this price. |
| Ovas#7878 date: Aug-27-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | zooms |
| price paid: | 130 USD used |
| positive: | Fast and light. |
| negative: | unsharp at wide open f 1.4. |
| comment: | Better than any zoom I have used. Very good for darkness photography. Standard in my Fixed lense bag, but not very much used. |
| hayasa8#7703 date: Jul-21-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 30/1.4 Minolta 50/1.7, Minolta 50/2.8 Macro |
| price paid: | 160 USD |
| positive: | Its well built and fast. Sharp and great landscape color |
| negative: | Not consistent. One of the few lenses that demonstrate great variables in quality between units and uses. Portrait color isn't my fave, but didn't expect it to be. |
| comment: | Great lens, head and shoulders better than the 1.7- which was a surprise to me. This lens is finicky. You can get amazing results at one distance and stop, move five feet and it goes to crap. Its just one you need to know like the back of your hand... |
| mambo#7516 date: Jun-1-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | minolta 50mm 1.7 minolta 50mm f2.8 macro sigma 18mm f3.5 zen |
| price paid: | 200USD |
| positive: | light, fast lens. Much better than the 1.7 for low light shooting. |
| negative: | hood is a joke prone to flare ok from f3.0 onwards mine had oily blades |
| comment: | A very good lens. Reading from other reviews.....it seems to have an issue with oily blades. Mine has just been repaired. Well worth the trouble. A great asset. |
| Red Fern#7515 date: Jun-1-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron 17-50 Minolta 50 1.7 Sony 18-70 |
| price paid: | 80 USD (used) |
| positive: | Sharp, even wide open Great bokeh Minolta build quality Plenty of them out there! |
| negative: | A bit of sensor ghosting/flare (non-D lens) Hood is a joke Colors seem a little muted |
| comment: | I bought this lens for cheap due to some oil on the aperture blades, but about 10 min. under a hair dryer and the oil became a virtual non-issue -- now they only seem to stick for the first shot I take after a while on the shelf. I noticed that a fair amount of the reviews claim this lens to be soft wide open. That might be true at the corners, but my copy is bang-on sharp at the center at 1.4, which is where you want the sharpness at that aperture. Honestly, it looks sharper to me at 1.4 than my 1.7 did wide open (and that was already great). The only thing as sharp in my bag is the Tamron 90 2.8. It's really excellent. I did notice that the colors seem more muted on this lens than the others I compared it to (even the other Minolta 50). Not sure why that is. It's not bad, but it certainly doesn't pop. It is, however, fantastic for dreamy portraits, especially on APS-C. All in all, for the price I paid, this was a steal. |
| paso144#7478 date: May-25-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 50 F/1.7 24 F/2.8 28 F/2.8 135 F/2.8 |
| price paid: | 150 euro |
| positive: | Sharp wide open. Really sharp from F/1.7. Compact and heavy build. corner sharpness |
| negative: | My version of the F/1.7 is sharper above F/2.8. Shallow DOF makes focusing difficult on my 7D. |
| comment: | I've upgraded this one from a F/1.7 and have some mixed feelings. The extreme thin DOF troubles my 7D occasionally. Luckily this body has direct manual override and it's part of the learning curve for these extreme lenses (also a A700 would help I guess). The sharpness is a different story. My version is already sharper full open then the F/1.7 stopped down to F/2. Till F/2.2 it beats the F/1.7 on sharpness but then the F/1.7 gradually takes over and above F/2.8 the F/1.7 is sharper which quite surprised me. Nevertheless I sold the F/1.7 since you have this lens for it's full-open capacities. Sometimes I think the bokeh could be a bit better but that's compared to my 135 which is exceptional on that point. The corner sharpness is way better then that of the F/1.7. |
| dpp#7392 date: May-3-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 30/f1.4, CZ 24-70/2.8 |
| price paid: | 150 EUR |
| positive: | Very good and compact lens! Great for portraits of Crop and perfect for FF! Very sharp in center from f1.7-f2! |
| negative: | Slightly soft at the edges .. |
| comment: | Perfect lens!Бeautiful Minolta colors, compact and sharp! |
| lss_1405#7382 date: May-1-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | SAL 18-70 Beercan 70-210 f/4 Zuiko 50 2.0 Zuiko 14-42 Zuiko 40-150 Zuiko 14-54 |
| price paid: | 245 USD (used) |
| positive: | Sharp Light Build Cheap Nice bokeh |
| negative: | Slow AF Noisy AF (doesn't matter to me) Little rattle in build Lenshood |
| comment: | My first lens after the kit lens. I was, and still am very impressed. It's the lens I choose when i need something to look nice and sharp. Also it's very light, and therefore you can allways have it with you. The lenshood though is rubbish, but I haven yet experienced flares - so far so good. You are getting alot for you money on this lens |
| PeteMag#7208 date: Mar-31-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Min 50 1.7RS 28-135mm |
| price paid: | Ł150 |
| positive: | useable f1.4 very sharp stopped down a touch lightweight good length on FF |
| negative: | vignetting |
| comment: | I didn't think upgrading from a 50mm 1.7 would show much difference, but having found a copy of this at a reasonable price I decided to try it. Its definately better than the 1.7. I wouldn't use that wide open very often, but this gives good reults at 1.4. Its sharper above f2 and the vignetting is noticable on FF when the lens is open. The colours are fantastic, shooting in low light with SSS on and at 1.4 is a joy (hello canikon users!) - I see colours in the image that I can't see with my own eyes in the gloom! The portable nature of the lens is great as well. The built in hood as always feels like an inadequate afterthought, but flare is not awful. |
| godsakes#7046 date: Mar-10-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | minolta 50mm f1.7 minolta 50mm f2.8 macro cz 16-80 tammy 17-50mm |
| price paid: | L150 |
| positive: | Sharp colours good value compared to sony version |
| negative: | Prone to sensor reflection? not a huge upgrade from the f1.7 |
| comment: | image quality wise this seems to be slightly better than the f1.7 version up to f4 - less green CA and crisper by f5.6 they're more or less the same. Although this version is supposed to be prone to sensor reflection (where as the f1.7 is not). While i'm content with it's sharpness i believe a lens of this class could be sharper (i understand the sigma version is supposed to be notably better). |
| Richalf#6833 date: Jan-27-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | $300 CDN |
| positive: | Sharp to F1.7 Pretty Solid construction Quick AF Minolta colours Small & light |
| negative: | Built in lens hood is hard to pull out |
| comment: | I wanted the extra stops over the F1.7 version so I paid a little and more and have no regrets as I have used many times at F1.4 and F1.6 they are a little soft but very usable and I figured 1.7 on this lens would be sharper than 1.7 on the 50 F1.7 version. Focus reliability on my KM7D was hit and miss at 1.4 to 1.7 but very reliable on my A700 and Maxxum 5 film camera. F2 is very sharp on all cameras |
| Lars Schmidt#6772 date: Jan-18-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Kit 18-70 Zuiko 14-42 Zuiko 50 f/2 Zuiko 14-54 Zuiko |
| price paid: | 250$ |
| positive: | Aperture size Build SHARP! at f/2 |
| negative: | Little soft at f/1.4 Focus rotates Filtersize - 49 mm can be hard to find |
| comment: | Great lens - specialy for the price. Love this lens. |
| ferretracer#6655 date: Dec-31-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 50mm 1.7 |
| price paid: | 249 USD used |
| positive: | Color, size, focus speed, bokeh |
| negative: | built in lens hood |
| comment: | This lens is phenomenal! The colors are typical Minolta, the bokeh is awesome! The lens focuses quickly and it is very sharp! The only reason it got a 4 in the rating is because of the built in hood. It may be only my copy, it maybe because it is 24 years old, but it is hard to pull out unless it was in manual focus and it also doesn't seem like it would do much. Also, i don't really use them anyway (so take this all with a grain of salt!) I got it for 249 USD used on eBay (227 USD after Bing cash back). |
| atlbrv405#6145 date: Sep-30-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta F2.8 24mm RS |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Sharp from F/2 and up Nice Creamy OOF areas -Light weight -Fast Focus -Colors -Sharp |
| negative: | -Useless hood -Noisey focus -Purple fringing on high contrast areas -lots of OOF CA wide open |
| comment: | I use this lens for taking portraits and indoor candids. I love how sharp the lens is around F/2. It's still usable at 1.4, but the DOF is very small which lends itself for more artistic shots. Having nice colors, creamy OOF areas, fast focusing, and light weight, I typically use this lens in most of my low light situations. I have experienced some flare but only in very few instances. As with most F1.4 lenses, you will experience OOF CA's when shooting it wide open. Even with the age of my XX version, It still performs well on my A700. If you have a chance to buy this lens, do it. |
| zeroone#6010 date: Sep-7-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 50 mm macro f3.5, 35-70 f4. 28-85 mm f3.5, 24-50 mm f4 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Useably sharp from about f2 upwards Good contrast Low distortion Fair price |
| negative: | Good but not stellar performance for a 50mm fixed Corners never get fully sharp |
| comment: | I realise there is a lot of invested hype for this lens and I agree it is quite good, and much better than the f1.7 which frankly is a pretty average performer full frame, but here is the rider. It is only a really good lens if your need to shoot at apertures wider than f3.5, if not there are actually cheaper or sharper options with in the Minolta stable. This is no hollow statement and I make this from the background of running very comprehensive tests of this lens compared to the above listed lenses under both test chart conditions and real world shooting of scenes, close-ups and a whole array of specific tests. The end result is simply this. For ultimate resolution the 50 mm 3.5 easily creams the f1.4, even wide open, but in fact the 35-70 mm f4 is also superior from f4.5 upwards and it gives some real framing options and will cost you a fraction of the price. The 28-85 doesn't compete with it except on colour, where it is probably better than all of these lenses. As for Bokeh, its pretty personal but I opt for the 28-85 on that too, with the 50 mm macro close, then the 1.4 and the 35-70 last, but frankly none of these lenses are wildly different in this department. Edge sharpness, the 35-70 and 50 mm macro are virtually line ball, but the 50 1.4 sits somewhat behind these two but a fair bit ahead of the 28-85. CA is great, but not as good out at the edges as the 35-70 and the 50 mm 3.5 is exemplary in this respect. So in conclusion, yes it is a good lens, its well made, and will do what ever you need of it, but in real world shooting where apertures of smaller than 3.5 are needed for DOF it is not the ultimate weapon, that is easily the 50 mm 3.5 macro. If you have to shoot at the wide apertures though in low light it is very good value. It is by the way a clear winner against the 25-50 mm lens which is rather brilliant at the wider setting, say 40 mm or shorter but is somewhat compromised at 50 mm on full frame. |
rating summary
- total reviews: 124
- sharpness: 4.68
- color: 4.81
- build: 4.64
- distortion: 4.77
- flare control: 4.13
- overall: 4.60
to add your review
you need to login
you need to login