The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

ZA 50 1.4 over the 85 ZA 1.4

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Ill try and get some images up but a clear case the Zeiss ZA 50mm 1.4 is extremely under rated and maybe better than the 55 1.8. Its clear from 1.4 to F4 the 50 is a higher resolving lens over the 85 and i did 2 tests that say the same thing. That just tells me to pass on the Sigma 50 art lens. Here is the bonus it has the exact look of the 85mm. Its expensive as all get out but I think it is worth. I was questioning this purchase . No more and the bokeh actually looks slightly nicer on the 50. This is a newer design over the older 85mm

In other news the 16-35 does not beat my Canon 17TSE or 24TSE but it does look respectable. This is all tested on the A7r. I bought the 16-35 for the A7II so corners do not have to be perfect.


Just thought I would report and Ill try and get some test images up.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
Hi Guy,
I would like to add that the 50 ART allready feels big on a 5dIII-so I cant beliebe it would feel balanced on an A7x body.
In regards of the native SOny lenses I feel Sony is trying to find the right compromise between small-reasonable size, speed and optical quality.
However..if one prefers all those A lenses and EOS lenses and wants/needs their speed and optical quality, would an A77 or A99 be the better option in regardinds of overall handling?
Having said this I find the 55mm focal length quite nice for my need, like a very short portrait lens or a long normal lens, very flexible. I still prefer my 50 APO on the M can do, but I am also (so far) totally fine with the 55.
 

cam

Active member
Guy, you're getting a bit too rich for my blood, but I'd love to live vicariously through you.

Very interested to see some 50mm shots (people, if possible)... and know how fast it focuses, size, weight, balance on the camera, etc.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I just did a lens test for now. What I was after since i have yet to test the 50mm was compare it to the 85 which I have tested before against the 55mm 1.8 and 135mm 1.8 . Now in that test the 55mm placed second to the 135 which was first and 85 was last but by F4 they all where the same. What I wanted to see is just how good this 50mm 1.4 ZA is since i was after the same look of the 85mm but was hoping for a razor in the 50mm mostly wide open or at least by 2.8. My suspicion looks to be correct and exactly what I was after.

Now why the 50mm one would ask, well I did have both the FE and A mount cameras. Today I do not but have 2 FE mounts so I could switch to the 55mm but Im reluctant to do it since one the lens is very much like my 85 so a comfort feel level. Also not going to gain in IQ and i like the look of this lens
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
As you can see the 50 has the edge this equals out pretty much at 2.8 I believe from just viewing but lets see the shots
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I ran another test just as backup and its clear the 50mm is better wide open. I totally expected this so no surprise except I know i have a good 50m and I'm going to stay with it even though it is bigger than the 55mm Im okay with that. The smaller body size is more important to me than lens size.







test done moving on to the 16-35 lens test
 

fotografz

Well-known member
Guy, I've been working with the ZA50/1.4 since it launched and found the same results. It has the "feel" or "look" of the 85/1.4 while being a bit crisper wide open … nice balance of image characteristics. While I do like the FE55/1.8, I often think it is a tad clinical. So I use each for different subject applications.

The ZA85/1.4 is over-due for a make-over IMO. The CA sometimes drives me crazy, and Sony needs to update the screw drive to SSM.

- Marc
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Guy, I've been working with the ZA50/1.4 since it launched and found the same results. It has the "feel" or "look" of the 85/1.4 while being a bit crisper wide open … nice balance of image characteristics. While I do like the FE55/1.8, I often think it is a tad clinical. So I use each for different subject applications.

The ZA85/1.4 is over-due for a make-over IMO. The CA sometimes drives me crazy, and Sony needs to update the screw drive to SSM.

- Marc
Well said and with you 150 percent.
 

Malina DZ

Member
That just tells me to pass on the Sigma 50 art lens.
50/1.4 ZA is a nice lens, but I couldn't justify its price tag for that amount of CA and distortion it endows the shots with. You need to try 50/1.4 Art before dismissing it. I just had a chance to snap a couple of shots with Sigma 50/1.4 A, and I can tell that at f/1.4 it beats 50/1.4 ZA in sharpness and CA.


Click for a full size.
Canon 6D, f/1.4, 1/50, iso8000

Don't mean to highjack the thread, but I know your lust for great optics :angel:
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Thanks. The issue is size I know the art lens is a truck. I'll have to think more about it. I picked up my Minolta 200 2.8 HS today.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
50/1.4 ZA is a nice lens, but I couldn't justify its price tag for that amount of CA and distortion it endows the shots with. You need to try 50/1.4 Art before dismissing it. I just had a chance to snap a couple of shots with Sigma 50/1.4 A, and I can tell that at f/1.4 it beats 50/1.4 ZA in sharpness and CA.


Click for a full size.
Canon 6D, f/1.4, 1/50, iso8000

Don't mean to highjack the thread, but I know your lust for great optics :angel:
May I hijack your hijack?

Do you have another example from the Sigma 50 shot wide open? Nothing in your shot is in critical focus when viewed at 100%. I'm sure it is a great lens.

My POV on the ZA50/1.4 differs from yours in that I've not experienced CA, and when used on a A99, the AF is quite accurate … and just as importantly, it is very fast at AF. Perhaps the ZA50/1.4 you tried showed sample variation?

One thing I do agree on is that all these fast 50s are priced to high (this coming from a hypocrite who owns a Leica M50/0.95:ROTFL:) Actually, for the amount of times I use a 50mm on a DSLR, the Minolta based Sony 50/1.4 wasn't all bad, was very small … but way to slow to focus for my needs, and not tough enough for pro duty as I see it.

- Marc
 

Malina DZ

Member
May I hijack your hijack?
Do you have another example from the Sigma 50 shot wide open? Nothing in your shot is in critical focus when viewed at 100%. I'm sure it is a great lens.
My POV on the ZA50/1.4 differs from yours in that I've not experienced CA, and when used on a A99, the AF is quite accurate … and just as importantly, it is very fast at AF. Perhaps the ZA50/1.4 you tried showed sample variation?
- Marc
Marc, your opinion is always valuable to this community, myself included.
a99 might be doing some magic to compensate for CA, I don't know. I shot 50/1.4za alongside Sony (Minolta) 50/1.4 on a850. There's the same amount of axial and lateral CA produced right from f/1.4.

I'll share more shots taken with 50/1.4 Art, but in the Canon section.
The shot posted shows my initial excitement over 6D's utmost AF points accuracy. It was shot handheld in a dim tungsten light at iso8000! ... and I'm spoiled by IBIS.

I brought 50/1.4 Art to ZA party since they are almost of the same size & weight.
I'd stick to FE55/1.8 for a7 if AF speed/accuracy, dimensions and weight were in priority.
 
Top