Sony AF 50mm F1.4 A-mount lens reviews
 LKB#9603 date: Nov-17-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 35-70/4 Minolta 50/1.7 Sony 35/1.8 Zeiss 135/1.8 |
| price paid: | GBP 148 (as-new) |
| positive: | weight&size price works great with +4 Hoya filter |
| negative: | plastic feel annoying hood MF ring |
| comment: | This was an upgrade to Minolta 50/1.7, one of my most used lenses. My two major concerns with the predecessor was bokeh and softness comparing to 35/1.8, which I believe those lenses address very well. It is also a newer lens, with distance reading for flash. I'm very pleased with it. Firstly, Bokeh is much more pleasing with faster and more precise AF. It is sharp from 2.0 and have a pleasing softness while wide open.Flare seems to be much better controlled, even with reasonably small hood. It does nice work in low-light conditions - one of the mayor uses for my old 50/1.7. I currently use it mostly for this purpose and partly street photography, as 16-50/2.8 seems to be now exclusively used by me as walk-around lenses. Its AF&sharpness is not in Zeiss league, but this would be asking too much I think. For the price it deliver a very good punch. I dont like the plastic feel of the lenses, it seems solid but compared with 50/1.7 look like plastic toy. And hood is annoying and troublesome to mount. Also MF ring is annoying, too small and cumbersome to use. I have recently used +2&+4 Hoya filter with very good results. Pictures are sharp, no visible distortion and final bokeh very much to my liking. This does not make them dedicated micro lenses but offer a possibility of such work should need arise. I find this better to Minolta 35-70/4 which where working superbly. Just don't forget to step it down heavy (>F10) To sum it up, this is my favourite lenses now, always in my bag - due to weight, size and performance. Highly recommended , great improve over 50/1.7. I find focus lenght too long but this will change if I buy FF. UPDATE: micro work, minor wording changes, compaision with Sony 16-50/2.8 , Minolta 35-70/4 |
; 20MP| Deasy#9562 date: Nov-2-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | CZ 24-70 |
| price paid: | UKP 330 |
| positive: | Lightweight, solid build. Pleasant bokeh, worth it just for that! |
| negative: | MFD too long |
| comment: | I've owned this lens for about 9 months now, I hesitated for a long time before buying it as I already own the excellent CZ 24-70. Although I don't mind the bulk of the CZ, it's a treat sometimes to have a small light prime on my a900. So do I regret spending GBP 330 on a focal length I already had available?.. not at all, the bokeh from the little 1.4 is definitely more pleasing than the CZ and the benefit of the 1.4 aperture is very useful. Only negative comments are the MFD is a little long, I really wish this could be improved, also as others have noted softness can be an issue at large apertures- I avoid anything larger than f1.7 when possible to ensure sharp results. |
| AlphaMan#9560 date: Nov-2-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 50 1.4 (v2) Minolta 50 1.7 other Sony 50 1.4 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Sharp compact |
| negative: | missing |
| comment: | This is a good version, acceptably sharp at 1.4 on an A700 and an A900. Other Sony 50 1.4 and Minolta 50 1.4 (v2) and 50 1.7 lenses tested previously weren't as sharp wide open. Recent information has lead me to believe that the A55 may have some focusing accuracy issues with this and other wide aperture lenses such as the 35/1.8 SAM. |
| Churst#9125 date: Jun-12-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Min 50mm f1.7 Tamron 17-50 f2.8 |
| price paid: | 210 GBP |
| positive: | - f1.4 - bit sharper than the Min 50mm f1.7 at f1.7 - extremely sharp by f2 - fast AF |
| negative: | - at 1.4 the sharpness and bokeh aren't very appealing - focusing grip is a bit too smooth |
| comment: | This lens is so good for the price I can barely explain. 50mm f1.4... what's not to like! Fast, accurate AF on my a580. Bokeh is a little harsh at f1.4 but is beautifully smooth by about f2 It just makes low/practical light shooting a real pleasure |
| trongkien#9095 date: Jun-6-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 50 f1.4 Minolta 50 f1.7 |
| price paid: | 260 USD (like new) |
| positive: | sharp light compact |
| negative: | don't like the color |
| comment: | This lens is great. I just like Minolta color better. |
| ciupo35#8963 date: Apr-26-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 5 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 50/1.8 SAM, 50/1.7 MAF |
| price paid: | 330 USD |
| positive: | Good sharpness, fast and accurate AF, small and light |
| negative: | Barrel distortion (visible), 'plastic' build, |
| comment: | This lens can be used wide open (F1.4), is little soft. On F2.0 is far better than MAF 50/1.7. However, colors look more neutral. The weakest point of this lens is the distortion. |
| filipescu1007#8893 date: Apr-8-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Min 50/1.7 |
| price paid: | 350 USD (new) |
| positive: | Very small Very sharp f/1.4! Sexy bokeh |
| negative: | Some flare issues Ridiculous hood AF kind of loud |
| comment: | I love this lens. I do need to step it down a little but its sharpness and bokeh are very good. I use this lens for portraits and it never failed me so far. What I don't understand is why they put such a ridiculous hood on a lens that goes all the way to 1.4. You're bound to have some flare issues if you're not careful but nothing too serious. AF kind of loud but it's still way better that the one on the Sony 28/2.8. |
| kurja#8889 date: Apr-8-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | -sigma 28/1.8 -sony 35/1.8 -sony 18-70 -minolta 28-80 |
| price paid: | 300€ (new) |
| positive: | -super sharp accross the frame @F4 -small, convenient build |
| negative: | -rather soft @F2 and wider, especially at the borders/corners -MF ring rotates during AF |
| comment: | Wide open the image is a bit soft even in the center, but improves greatly when stopping down; F2.5 is already pretty sharp, F4 is *very* sharp. My sharpest lens. Colors are quite the usual Sony colors. Build is solid, my only complaint with the mechanics of it is that the manual focusing ring rotates during AF. Background blur is often a bit "coarse". Overall a nice lens, albeit not truly spectacular either. |
| MVKregg#8855 date: Apr-2-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Konica Hexanon 50mm F1.4; Kit and Tamron f2.8 zoom lenses at 50mm |
| price paid: | 340 USD (new) |
| positive: | Compact, light, fast Good color and Bokeh |
| negative: | Back-focus has been an issue Wish it had a closer min. focus range Noticeable off-center softness and vignetting wide open on FF Some cosmetic, non-performance build issues. Plastic hood is a pain |
| comment: | I bought this lens for its low light capability a number of years ago, remembering my spectacular old Konica Hexanon f1.4 glass (which I still occasionally use with an Autoreflex T). Although generally satisfied with the Sony lens on my A100, I would often have fairly significant back-focus problems at close range and wider apertures, which is what I bought it for in the first place. Sent it in for repair, but the problem persisted (hence the poor sharpness rating). Consequently, it wasn't on my camera as much as I thought it would be--usually only when no other lens could snag the photons. However when I upgraded to an A850, the lens came alive. Going to a true full-frame field of view makes it a great walk-around-at-night or "indoors without a flash" rig, yielding great candid shots. Autofocus speeds and accuracy also improved dramatically, especially in low light, where it would often hunt on the A100. Great color and bokeh in low ambient light on the A850. Although it still doesn't hold a candle to the old Hexanon lens for brightness, contrast and close focus, we (the Sony lens and I) are both much happier now. --Update, Aug 2012 The lens is light enough and small enough that it is almost always in my camera bag, but find I hardly ever end up using it over my Tamron 24-75 f2.8. I'll go months without mounting it on the camera, unless I know I will need the extra speed, or that I will need the discretion of a much smaller lens. I know this would be different if its minimum focus distance were better. |
| brian33#8741 date: Mar-5-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | nothing else at 50 |
| price paid: | 399 EURO |
| positive: | Light Sharp by f2 super compact |
| negative: | mush wide open vignetting wide open bokeh can be a bit busy depending |
| comment: | I like this lens. I have some images I'm very proud of that I took with it. But as I say, wide open it really is soft, even for me (not a very important criteria for me), and the vignetting really is bad, even for me (I usually like a little vignetting wide open, but this is too much.) Would I be happier with the Sigma? I'm not sure, because on FF 50 is the ultimate everyday focal length so the fact it is so light is very important to me. For instance it's on my camera for all my tourist activities, it is the walk-around lens for full frame; 50 is the "perfect" focal length and the compactness means you barely notice the camera around your neck. In a word, I want my "normal" lens to be super light. Only way I would replace this is if Zeiss came out with a 50/1.4 that's reasonably compact, otherwise I'll keep this and work around its mild shortcomings. |
| My December#8731 date: Mar-2-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 50mm f1.4 EX DG HSM |
| price paid: | 1400 MYR (New) |
| positive: | - Sharp - Small - Light - Quite cheap |
| negative: | - Loud AF (Lack of fast & silent motor) |
| comment: | Do not underestimate this lens, and don't judge a book by it's cover. This lens really can deliver what you expect from a prime lens. There's no real big difference in optical performance compared to the more expensive and bigger 50mm f1.4 Sigma, though the Sigma is sharper than the Sony when stopped down. The Sony also have cooler colors than the warmer Sigma. Well.. some might not like it (it gives some blueish feeling to the picture), but it might be useful for outdoor pictures. The Sony lacks a fast and silent motor, though it can still focuses very fast (a little noisy though). The build is very decent, very light, but some might not like it, since it doesn't balance with a heavier cameras. If you're looking for a 50mm prime, and the Sigma 50mm f1.4 is out of the budget, get this lens instead. It is very sufficient for our needs. On APSC sensor cameras, it translate to ~75mm, which is quite nice for portraits. |
| farfisa#8603 date: Jan-31-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 50/1.7 |
| price paid: | 300 CAD (used) |
| positive: | Small, light, fast AF, nice bokeh stopped down |
| negative: | On FF, out of focus highlights start to look a little strange especially in the corners |
| comment: | Great all purpose lens on FF. Nice and light (which is the flipside of being less than superbly built) and AF is very quick. I love this lens stopped down to f/2 or so. Wide open it is definitely useable, but it can be a little disappointing, as the out of focus highlights get some outlining / CA and can start to develop a cat's eye look, especially in the corners |
| countmoo#8581 date: Jan-27-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | F1.4 when needed Prime quality |
| negative: | Not significant |
| comment: | Not so sharp at wide open but improve when stop down to F2. Very sharp from F2.8 onwards. A very good studio portrait lens as I shoot at F5.6 |
| BobIndy#8541 date: Jan-18-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Min 50/1.7 Son 35/1.8 Sig 70-200/2.8 |
| price paid: | 370 USD (new) |
| positive: | small light price |
| negative: | not sharp enough wide open |
| comment: | I wanted to love this lens, I really did. However, the whole reason I buy a 1.4 prime is to be able to use it wide open. After testing side by side, the 50 barely, and I mean just by a smidgen, was any sharper than the 35/1.8 at equal apertures. Almost indistinguishable. Sure it's fantastic and has really nice bokeh when you stop it down, but for me, that defeats the purpose. I guess maybe this is as much of a praise of the 35 as a problem with the 50. Stopped down a few notches, it still didn't out resolve my Sigma by much, which isn't known for being supremely sharp. Maybe I just expected too much, but this lens is being returned. I may try the Sigma 50/1.4 next... or just take a half step closer to everything and be happy with the 35/1.8. |
| infractal#8136 date: Oct-24-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony DT 18-250mm f3.5-6.3 Sony 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 G |
| price paid: | 175 GBP (new) |
| positive: | - small & light - fast - tactile focus ring |
| negative: | - label ring sticker issue (see comments) |
| comment: | Purchased to accompany my 18-250mm when traveling, this great little prime has become a favourite to use when out and about in the evening. Sharpness is excellent from f2.8, and great from f1.4 if focused properly. Build quality is great, it feels solid in the hands and about the right weight for it's size. Some people dislike the narrow focus ring, but I find it to be just right and enjoy focusing manually with it. One issue I do have with the lens is the label around the front element is stuck on, and on my copy it overhangs slightly. At some point when replacing the lens cap I seem to have caught the label and lifted it up a little. Doesn't affect the image quality at all, but annoying that I have to be aware of it when replacing the cap. In summary, I've found the lens to be indispensable, especially when heading out at night and just wanting to carry the camera over one shoulder with no additional baggage (although It is a little long on APS-C). I think I would love this lens on full frame. |
| NLPIX#8075 date: Oct-11-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 2 flare control: 2 overall: 3.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 50 mm 1.7 Minolta 28 mm 2.8 Sigma 24-70 2.8 DG HSM (at 50mm) |
| price paid: | 379,00 EURO |
| positive: | - small - light - sharp - accurate - fast - build |
| negative: | - flimsy hood - flair - distortion (full frame) |
| comment: | I love the minolta and sony primes because they are so small and light you can easily carry a few in your pocket, and they give results that are better than the big heavy zoom lenses. This is a very useful lens in a prime lineup for full-frame. It is in no way a re-branded minolta, it is a full re-disigned lens. So it should be designed with the a900 in mind. But strangly it has a lot of barrel distortion on the a900. With lightroom 3 this can be fixed easily, so not a real problem. Detail and sharpnes are superb. |
| woodmen#7918 date: Sep-1-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 50mm f/1.4 Minolta 28-135mm Minolta 85mm f/1.4 Minolta 17-35mm f/2.8-4 Minolta 100-300mm APO |
| price paid: | 300 CAN (used) |
| positive: | Small Light AF very precise Color Bokeh Cheap |
| negative: | CA wide open |
| comment: | What a great little lens; especially for the price. It's almost as good as my Minolta 85mm even wide open. I had the Minolta 50mm f/1.4 before but I prefer the sony version. I think it's a little bit faster to focus and a little more precise. It's always spot on with the Sony. Edit October 11, 2010. It has a little more CA if you compare it with it's Minolta brother but, when stopped down to f/2.5, it's almost gone. |
| dumbasadoorknob#7902 date: Aug-30-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Min 50/1.7 Tam 28-70/2.8 |
| price paid: | usd 294 new |
| positive: | good for family fotos in available light, and D capable |
| negative: | wimpy hood, so flare not quite the 50/1.7 colors |
| comment: | I prefer the 50/1.7. I have bought two new copies of this lens, each from B&H at good prices, and one lives with my daughter, and the other with my son. They like and use them, particularly inside for candid shots. But I found little real use for the lens. The lens hood is wimpy, and fiddly, and even less use than the integrated 50/1.7 |
| VirtualMirage#7862 date: Aug-25-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 50/1.7 Sony/Zeiss 16-80/3.5-4.5 |
| price paid: | 369 USD (New) |
| positive: | -Compact -Well Built -Fast, Accurate Focusing -Very Sharp from f/2.8-8.0 -Pleasing colors and bokeh |
| negative: | -Soft wide open (1.4) but starts to sharpen up quickly from f/2.0 on up. -Screw drive focus, no SSM or SAM |
| comment: | I was in need of a fast lens to handle low light photography (weddings, churches, museums, etc.). My Sony/Zeiss 16-80 is great but quickly loses its luster in darker situations. I purchased this lens after using my father's 25+ year old Minolta 50mm 1.7. I enjoyed using his but the aperture blades kept on sticking due to oil build up. Cleaning the lens inside and out only fixed it for a few weeks. That lens was great when it worked, but very soft wide open and didn't start sharpening up until 2.8-3.5. It also had quite a bit of lens flare and CA when opened up. I don't get to use this lens as often as I would like, but it is so much fun to use when I do have it on the camera. All my shots have such an inviting and pleasing look to them. Colors are great, very Minolta-like. When stopped down, pictures are tack sharp. Wide open can be a bit soft, but usable in low light and portraits when you are looking to get that soft/hazy appearance. Great for outdoor use, large interiors (churches, museums, etc.), portraits, and staged settings. It maybe a bit too long on a cropped sensor when indoors in small spaces. |
| SChurchill#7836 date: Aug-20-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta AF 50mm 1.7 |
| price paid: | 200 GBP (used) |
| positive: | Sharp on APS-C Fast autofocus Works well with my film bodies |
| negative: | Some bad CA wide open I find the hood a little insecure. Maybe not so sharp at the edges on film, so probably the same on Full Frame |
| comment: | I've been using the Minolta 50mm 1.7 for ages and I must admit that I didn't see much point upgrading to the Sony 1.4. However one came up at a good price so thought I'd give it a go. The sharpness is far superior and it works even better in low light than the 1.7. Also the 55mm filter diameter is much more convenient if I carrying my other Minolta lens as well. I also really like using it on my Dynax film bodies. |
| KlikArt#7834 date: Aug-20-2010 | |
|---|---|
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: | missing |
| positive: | Size, quality, sharpness and light sensitivity. |
| negative: | missing |
| comment: | And objective which sometimes underestimated. |
| jmcgee131#7819 date: Aug-16-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 85 1.4 |
| price paid: | 360 |
| positive: | Sharpness, size, colors, AF speed, build |
| negative: | None |
| comment: | I love this little lens. Full open it has very shallow DOF, but that's a lot of the fun of it. It's prowess at taking candid portraits is hard to beat. This was my first fixed focal length lens and that took a while to adjust, after leaving this on my camera for a few weeks I found ways to use it. I don't own a FF so I can't speak of the crop factor, but I love this lens on the AP-C bodies. It was my standard until I just received the Ziess 85 1.4. |
| Ayasha#7805 date: Aug-10-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | 450 USD (new) |
| positive: | light, sharp wide open more so when stop down a little. |
| negative: | A bit long in my A300 for normal view. |
| comment: | This lens hardly comes out of my camera. I'd love to try this on full frame though. |
| MartinM#7696 date: Jul-16-2010 | |
|---|---|
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 USD |
| positive: | - Small - Lightweight - Large apperture - ADI - AF precission |
| negative: | - Nothing so far |
| comment: | I am impressed how good this lens works on my FullFrame A850. At night it is a perfect walkaround lens. Paired with my 28/2.8 and the 85/1.4 a small lightweight combo for AL. The lans is really tack sharp wide open. Far better than the Sony 28 2.8 The ADI support is excellent. I noticed that the AF is more precise than my Minolta 85GD on which sometimes i need to re focus. |
| jamesmd#7695 date: Jul-16-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | CZ 85 1,4 Min 50 1.7 |
| price paid: | 350 € new |
| positive: | light, small , very sharp , fast AF |
| negative: | nothing to date |
| comment: | Great lens for nearly everything , and very light and small. AF is very fast , never miss anything . Love it . |
| marc-104#7618 date: Jun-27-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | 350€ |
| positive: | very small high sharpness |
| negative: | none |
| comment: | missing |
| Bill73#7561 date: Jun-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: | Sony 18-55/f3.5-5.6 SAM Sony DT75-300/f4.5-5.6 Sony DT18-70/f3.5-5.6 Sony CZ 16-80/f3.5-4.5 Tamron 90mm/f2.8 di MACRO Tamron 18-200/f3.5-6.3 Sigma 28-200/f3.8-5.6 |
| price paid: | $600Aus USED |
| positive: | Great build Wonderful sharpness and color f1.4 Small Super zippy auto-focus Bokeh is sublime (though sometimes |
| negative: | Absolutely nothing! |
| comment: | I managed to get this lens with the Sony CZ16-80 for $600AUS! After using the lens for 6 months I went and sold my used version and purchased a new one. I use this lens alot - mainly on APS-C as translates into mid prime. Suprising to many I use it for action shots for indoor sport and at skate bowls. Needless to say I burn the calories in such instances as I am ever on the move. I cannot recall an occasion where this lens has failed me. I cannot find a single fault with this lens either - for my needs it's ALMOST perfect. It is a very solid piece of kit. |
| RyanTheLion#7507 date: May-28-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Nikon 50/1.4 D Minolta 50/1.7 MD |
| price paid: | 540 SGD (new) |
| positive: | Compact Relatively sharp wide open Great colours |
| negative: | Soft wide open |
| comment: | missing |
| Mrmot#7502 date: May-27-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | SAL 18-70 Minolta 28-80 xi Canon 50 1.4 |
| price paid: | 400 € |
| positive: | Color Sharpness Bokeh |
| negative: | Focus ring |
| comment: | Amazing lens, in my opinion. The sharpness of this lens really spoiled me in a way, so now a lot of lens appear to be not very sharp :). Great colors, pretty fast focusing, but not so great focus ring, like a lot of people stated. I have compared this to a Canon 50 1.4 on a 40D and the Sony is much sharper. But, I have come to a conclusion that this is not the ideal focal length for me (on a crop body) - I feel that it's too "tele" to be a walkaround lens and to wide to be a portrait lens, so I'm now aiming more at something like 30mm on a crop body.. You may not feel this way. It remains the fact that this is, objectively speaking, an amazing lens. |
| teejay#7434 date: May-13-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 50/1.7 RS Sony 18-250 Minolta 100/2.8 macro rs |
| price paid: | 360 USD (new) |
| positive: | Sharp across the frame at f2 Nice Bokeh Nice Colors Great microcontrast |
| negative: | Some Purple fringing and longitudinal chromatic aberration below f2.8 Dreamy image at 1,4 (can be considered as a positive) |
| comment: | I usually shoot this lens at f2 for people shots, it is great in this respect. At f1.4, not only is the d.o.f very thin, but veil hazing is present, which gives a dreamy look to photos - this may or may not be beneficial to the picture. Compared to the 50/1.7, this lens really shines from 1.7 to 2.8, where the images are more crisp and the bokeh smoother. Also, the sony coatings bring that extra microcontrast that the older minolta lenses lack. At landscape apertures, this is one of the sharpest lenses out there. |
rating summary
- total reviews: 138
- sharpness: 4.70
- color: 4.78
- build: 4.20
- distortion: 4.79
- flare control: 4.49
- overall: 4.59
to add your review
you need to login
you need to login