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!

Help me pick a 50 for the A7r

Ben Rubinstein

Active member
Does it have to have AF, weather-sealing, sharp across the frame, nice oof rendering,? If yes, the FE55 is the only game in town. Avoid m-mount lenses, they are no match for the FE55`s overall performance (I tried the 50 Summilux asph and non asph, ZM 50 Sonnar, 50 Elmar). Considering performance, built quality and versatility, the FE55 is reasonably priced imo.
I'd be interested in your findings for the lux non asph and the sonnar as I'm considering one or the other for my A7r.
 

hcubell

Well-known member
You mean you're relying strictly on Chambers for your benchmark and haven't shot this lens yourself? The only thing Chambers does for me is nudge me in the direction of trying for myself.

Victor
Reading comprehension does not seem to be a specialty of yours. Nowhere was that stated in my reference to the test results.
Lloyd Chambers tends to fault most everything, usually with justification, so if he concludes that a lens is capable of exceptional performance and it is backed up by 100% crops of HD images, then, yes, I will rely upon that to believe that if I can get a good copy of that lens, chances are pretty good that I will be happy with it. Poor performance in a lens may be attributable to poor technique. Great performance cannot be attributable to great technique. That's why I ordered the 55mm Sony Zeiss and see how my copy performs.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I'm leaning towards a look lens . My thoughts are a Leica 50 cron or summilux, Nikon 50.12 just not sure what I want in a 50 it's not my favorite focal length. I did get the 35FE and ZA 85 1.4 and maybe the old Leica R 60 macro .

This FE 55 does intrique me though. But I was planning on the 24-70 for PR work so I might get something funky looking.
 

hcubell

Well-known member
Thanks all, and please keep the suggestions coming.


I have learned that reviews are not particularly useful because my photo interests are my own. However, this Lloyd guy (I am not a subscriber) did spot the shutter vibration issue when most of the other popular pundits missed it. Good on him. Wonder what his lens reviews are like.
Lloyd Chambers' lens reviews are very thorough and include exceptionally detailed 100% crops at most apertures that should be viewed on a retina iPad or MacBook. The tests generally include field tests. The only problem is that Lloyd tends to fault everything, so if you threw away everything that has "issues", you wouldn't own any camera equipment!
 

Ron Pfister

Member
Lloyd Chambers' lens reviews are very thorough and include exceptionally detailed 100% crops at most apertures that should be viewed on a retina iPad or MacBook. The tests generally include field tests. The only problem is that Lloyd tends to fault everything, so if you threw away everything that has "issues", you wouldn't own any camera equipment!
Absolutely - and I think he follows a pretty consistent damnation-euphoria-realism pattern in most of his reviews. Once you adjust for that, you can read them for what they're actually worth. :)

Edit: and I'd like to add that IMO, they're worth what you pay for them.
 

cunim

Well-known member
What 36MP and the FE55 did to make me feel comfy. Works well for this type of casual shooting.

The large image is a 4600 pixel crop. The other is 100%. Done with ambient + flash. I sure do wish you could take the shutter up to 1/400 or so with flash.
 
For what it is worth, I am really enjoying the Minolta AF 50/1.4

Here is a series of snaps from a golf outing with the family. The second photo was shot at f/7, the rest at or near wide open. I don't care much for sharp edge to edge but this one has it when stopped down. More images via the blog link...

Chad Wadsworth Photography





 
Last edited:

philber

Member
After lengthy tryouts with the Summilux 50 on A7RR, I cannot recommend it without warning. If you shoot at infinity at anything open wider than f:8.0, don't expect sharp corners. Furthermore, the 'Lux will show severe field curvature, and the A7R smears the corner portion of the OOF picture. That makes it a difficult landscape lens to work with at less than, say, f:5.6, and that is not being especially picky either.
Otherwise, the rendering of the 'Lux on A7R is a joy. But it is earned rather than freely given out.
 

Ben Rubinstein

Active member
Not sure if that's such a problem, not that much landscape shot wider than 5.6? Smearing though is a problem, does it go away when stopped down?
 

Ron Pfister

Member
Not sure if that's such a problem, not that much landscape shot wider than 5.6? Smearing though is a problem, does it go away when stopped down?
If you already own the lens (as Philippe does), I agree with you, Ben. But I certainly wouldn't lay out the cash for an expensive Leica lens like that which promises excellent performance WO, only to see that promise hobbled by a poorly performing lens-camera combination. There are many far less expensive options that perform brilliantly at f/5.6-8 (e.g. the ZM Planar).
 

Ron Pfister

Member
I agree with you at that price level. It does seem to be the camera not the lenses fault though.
Ben, I wouldn't speak of a 'fault' here, really. In my view, it is simply an incompatibility. Leica had to invest a great deal (in-camera vignetting and color cast removal as well as oblong microlenses come to mind) and accept a fair few compromises (APS-H sensor size and lack of IR-filter in the M8, IR-contamination due to thin cover glass in later models) to make their lens designs work in the digital age. And even doing away with an OLPF in the case of the M9 was probably a necessity (thinner sensor toppings) rather than anything else. We can't possibly expect any other manufacturer to go to such lengths to accommodate 3rd party lenses that are poorly suited for current sensor technology in the first place.

That said, I think it's great that M-mount lenses work very well on most NEX-bodies, cropping away most of the problems with their APS-C sensors. As a result, I am happy to use my M-mount glass on these bodies, but I certainly don't expect that level of compatibility of a FF camera from any other vendor than Leica themselves...
 
Top