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!

fast 50 for A900

Hank Graber

New member
The Leica 50/1.4 R definately has the glow. I'm still learning it in terms of contrast, resolution colour, but it is everything I expected.
I can see this is going to get expensive :) When it comes to fast 50's I'd agree you really can't beat Leica. I've been looking at the E55 and E60 versions of the Summilux-R 50. Spectacular performance- at spectacular prices. The E60 is really in nose bleed pricing territory.
 
C

curious80

Guest
I have the Minolta 50/2.8 macro which I absolutely love but would like a 50/1.4 for low light and I really don't care for the look of the Sony/Minolta 50/1.4.

I have used both Minolta 50mm 2.8 and Sony 50mm 1.4 and I am surprised that you like one but not the other. I found them to be very similar in their rendering and color rendition (though I only used them on a crop camera so that could be a factor).
 

JimU

Not Available
well, i got my 3 cam 50'lux e55 and 50 mp zf.1 each < $1k via ebay / craigslist.

doesn't have to break the bank.
 

Hank Graber

New member
I have used both Minolta 50mm 2.8 and Sony 50mm 1.4 and I am surprised that you like one but not the other. I found them to be very similar in their rendering and color rendition (though I only used them on a crop camera so that could be a factor).
I've never seen OOF rendering from my Macro 2.8 like shown in the picture of cattle above from the 1.4. Always very smooth.
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
If you want to consider the Nikkors the 58 1.2 NOCT is the one to get . It took me 6 months to find one at around $3000 as they are in high demand . But wide open thru 2.0 its very special . You can find a thread and examples on several of the Nikon Forums. For night shooting and available light its in the same class as the Noctiluxes with a different signature .

One thing I look for in a lens signature is the depth of color its transmits . You can see it in a minute with the leica 50mm 1.4 E60 especially in the blues . Same for the Noct Nikkor or the Leica Noct 0.95.
 

Hank Graber

New member
If you want to consider the Nikkors the 58 1.2 NOCT is the one to get . It took me 6 months to find one at around $3000 as they are in high demand . But wide open thru 2.0 its very special .
While the Noct is a wonderful lens there is no way I'd pay 3,000+ for it. I might consider paying that amount for the Leica Summilux-R E60 as it's probably the best SLR 50 ever made and gives you both resolution and beautiful rendering at every aperture. It's like having your cake and eating it to.

But I'm happy with the macro 2.8 for use at 2.8 and smaller apertures and I get full compatibility with AF and metering, etc., The occasions I'd be using 1.4 or larger would be hand held in low light - not conditions for getting the sharpest pics due to combinations of focus error and slow shutter speeds.

I'm looking for a very painterly rendering and I could probably be happy with the Rokkors that are going for $4-500. (and some post-processing) If I could get a Noct for close to that price I'd jump on it, but for 3,000+, not so much.
 
L

lightdreamer

Guest
The MC Rokkor 1.2 58mm also, as nearly all double Gauss construction 5xmm lenses does not not show creamy bokeh wide open. Its bokeh is very nice and creamy at f2-2.8 and f2.8, where the bokeh is clear better than the Minolta AF 1.4 50mm (which also is good concerning bokeh at f2.5 and f2.8).

Wide open (f1.4) also Takumars, Canon and Nikon lenses are anything but bokeh champions.

Wide open the Sigma 1.4 50mm is the best but I sold it and kept my 1986 Minolta AF 1.4 50mm because it showed better performance at any apertures other wide open on my A900.

Don't forget, manual f1.4 lenses are really hard to focus spot on without a peaking mode.

BG lightdreamer
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
I had an as new 50 summilux E60 for a few days last spring at a bargain price of $2000 but I decided ...just too many Leica R lens in my cabinet . Wish I would have kept it as I agree its the best all around for a DSLR .

But for night shooting I would still go with the Nikon NOCT .
 

alphaman

New member
I personally don't rate the Minolta or Sony 50/1.4 lenses as they are all slightly soft (IME) wide open. The whole point of a 1.4 aperture is for it to be sharp at 1.4 or you might as well go for a 1.7, etc.

I have had good experience with the Sigma 50/1.4 and think that one is worth consideration.

If Sigma doesn't appeal and if Sony don't bring out an improved 50/1.4, I'd be tempted to look at a converted Zeiss.
 

philip_pj

New member
For human subjects and street scenes, I am very happy with my late E55 Summicron 50/2, on the A900. A fabulous allround 50mm with serious character, fine resolution, excellent bokeh and great colour and shadow detail rendition. For this task, I like it better than the 35-70/3.4 CY, which is all over the Leica for landscapes however.

This thread has plenty of examples of the Leica contenders:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/895186/44
 

alphaman

New member
The Leica Summicron is a fine lens, I agree. Argueably better than the Zeiss. The main thing in favour with the Zeiss is if there are existing Zeiss optics in the OP's camera bag and so the "house style" stays consistent (a minor consideration).
 
Top