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!

Loxia or FE 55?

Barry Haines

Active member
I am also uninterested in AF lenses, especially when it is a pain to use them in manual focus mode.

It is AA Summicron 50/2 or just the OM 50/1.8 that I am using. ;)
The DMF focus mode turns native FE lenses like the 55mm FE (and Loxia 50mm) into a manual focus dream come true, it enhances the manual focus experience as far as I'm concerned (not lessens it)...The DMF mode won't work with non native manual focus lenses.
What I miss is the solid feeling of the Lux and that tiny bit of extra Oof rendering of a F1.4 lens but that's it.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
The DMF focus mode turns native FE lenses like the 55mm FE (and Loxia 50mm) into a manual focus dream come true, it enhances the manual focus experience as far as I'm concerned (not lessens it)...The DMF mode won't work with non native manual focus lenses.
What I miss is the solid feeling of the Lux and that tiny bit of extra Oof rendering of a F1.4 lens but that's it.
I am quite familiar with fly by wire pseudo manual focus since NEX-5 and that is not true. Manual focus sucks with the native lenses.
 

Viramati

Member
Exactly, Louis. It (Lux asph) is not very useful on a digital camera. I can understand sentimental attachments that David has. But with a shiny brass RF coupling rim it is unfit even for digital M. Luckily, Leica have woken up to modernizing their lenses as seen in the latest APO 50, Summarits (no shiny innnards) and such. The Zeiss ZM lenses OTOH are better built and digital ready from this aspect.
Can't say I have had any IQ issues with the lux 50 asph on either the M9 or M in fact it renders beautifully. I have had a lot of Build quality issues and it seeming to lose focus calibration for no apparent reason (has had to go back to Leica 4 times over the last 5 years) and back focus issues which it shouldn't have as it has a FLE. Basically a problematic lens in many ways but capable of some lovely images when it's working
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I bought 2 samples of the Zeiss labelled Sony FE 35/2.8, one sample of the FE 24-70 f/4- they all went back and I have given up on the FE lenses. Your persistence with the 50/1.4 Lux is commendable. :)
 

biglouis

Well-known member
A bit off topic but there is a fantastic video in Vimeo of a test of the Otus 85/1.4.

Now my initial reaction to this lens was jewellery for people with too much money and not enough sense but having seen the samples in the video I'd definitely have one if I could afford it. In the video he shows sample wide open of hair and eyes in portraits and it is drop dead amazing.

But to bring it back on topic - the 55/1.8 is no slouch either.

LouisB
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
I have it and not really as it suffers from smearing. Performs quite well on the A7s. It used to be one of my most used lenses when I had 2 M9's but since getting the A7 and FE55 it lives most of it's life in the back of the safe, can't bring myself to sell it though.
I'd tend to agree that most of the newer Leica lenses are imperfect optically and are enhanced by software corrections thus are better used on M cameras. I'm sure there are exceptions to the rules but I on a 24 Elmar, 35 Cron ASPH, and 50Lux ASPH. My Leica 90 Pre-AA is my only Leica branded M mount lens that works great without PP corrections on the A7r. All of the Zeiss and Voigtlander lenses I still own work fine but some work better than others depending on the camera they're on.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
I am also uninterested in AF lenses, especially when it is a pain to use them in manual focus mode.

It is AA Summicron 50/2 or just the OM 50/1.8 that I am using. ;)
This thread is reminding me that I have yet to test the Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 AI-S on the A7. Another lovely 50mm in my over-stocked camera cabinet... !

G
 

philber

Member
You are a bunch of talented 'togs, but I really wonder how you can love the FE55. Sure, it is sharp as all hell, including wide open. But I found the colours of mine (I tried 3 copies, bought one) indifferent, and totally failed to get any emotional connection with mine. Once I got the Loxia, it was gone presto! And not a single shot in my Top 200 to show for my ownership of it.
Sure the Loxia isn't perfect (what lens is, this side of 3000€?), but it is so much richer emotionally than the FE...
[dons flack jacket and ballistic helmet, hunkers down in anticpation of retaliation]
 

Chuck Jones

Subscriber Member
I bought 2 samples of the Zeiss labelled Sony FE 35/2.8, one sample of the FE 24-70 f/4- they all went back and I have given up on the FE lenses. Your persistence with the 50/1.4 Lux is commendable. :)
I'm with you on the rest of the present Sony slower lens offerings, but on the 55mm f/1.8 we disagree. I find it a pleasure to use in manual focus with the focus assists. And far more precise than autofocus. Autofocus landed on the mic stand in front of the gal on the left twice, while using manual focus I was able to bring both gals into focus at f/1.8 but throw the mic stand out enough to not be such a big distraction.

Given it is contrast sensitive, that nice vertical black line is just too much for the autofocus robot to resist against the singer's white outfit. The manual feel of the lens is a bit lighter than I am used to, so it took some time to build up my confidence in using it, but it is very quick and responsive while at the same time being very sensitive for precise movement. But then, the proof of the pudding is in the eating as they say....

Up and coming LA Pop band "Cousin Kate" at the Old Town Pub in Pasadena. Sony a7s, 125th Sec. @f/1.8, ISO 12800, Sony FE 55mm f/1.8

 
V

Vivek

Guest
Chuck, What you describe is exactly the reason reason why I say the fly by wire Pseudo MF sucks. If it works for a few it is well and good.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
You are a bunch of talented 'togs, but I really wonder how you can love the FE55. Sure, it is sharp as all hell, including wide open. But I found the colours of mine (I tried 3 copies, bought one) indifferent, and totally failed to get any emotional connection with mine. Once I got the Loxia, it was gone presto! And not a single shot in my Top 200 to show for my ownership of it.
Sure the Loxia isn't perfect (what lens is, this side of 3000€?), but it is so much richer emotionally than the FE...
[dons flack jacket and ballistic helmet, hunkers down in anticpation of retaliation]
:)
 

johnnygoesdigital

New member
I've had the 55mmFE, very nice lens, but when I shoot 50mm and beyond, I usually use manual focus anyway. It's when I shoot outdoor sports and stuff that I need AF, and that will be reserved for the 16-35mm f4. Dear Susan has a great review on the Loxia 50mm.
 

biglouis

Well-known member
I would also like to point out that I use the 55/1.8 a lot for landscape shots. I actually like shooting wide open at 1.8. You have to choose your plane of focus but it can yield some lovely, glowing shots. I think I posted this before but this is a woodland path at the Wield and Downland Museum in Sussex. One thing I find an advantage with AF is that you can exactly choose the focal plane even if it is not central to the picture, in this case it is at the point about a third from the top where the trees either side of the path meet. You could sort-of do that with a manual lens but not keeping the horizon level and certainly not with the same degree of exactness.

 

Paratom

Well-known member
one thing I still miss in most mirrorless is a direct fast control to move the AF area around. Plus still often AF-point is still a little too large.
On the other side I have pretty good success with face detection which I now use very often. Here an then a shot is off but most of the times it seems to work quite well.
 

johnnygoesdigital

New member
It's funny because as an A7 user, i've have had to be really patient for a native prime lens in the portrait range. i've come to rediscover the importance of the 50mm focal length. It's virtually distortion free and just by moving in/out for composition is extremely useful as a wide and portrait combo. The 50mm more closely resembles our natural FOV too.
 

turtle

New member
What, you only tried TWO 35mm FE lenses? Pah. It took me three to get a good one :D. In raw technical performance terms, it is well ahead of my 35mm Summarit or 35mm ZM F2 Biogon on the MM.

My first 55 FE focused the left at 5m when the right side was focused at 20m. In normal use the left never got sharp at any aperture. My second copy is just wonderful. I got lucky with a great 70-200 F4 OSS on the first hit.

As I say, buying FE lenses is a process :D

I bought 2 samples of the Zeiss labelled Sony FE 35/2.8, one sample of the FE 24-70 f/4- they all went back and I have given up on the FE lenses. Your persistence with the 50/1.4 Lux is commendable. :)
 

Paratom

Well-known member
This sounds not so great.
My 24-70 seems really fine so far and so does my 70-200. I also bought 55 and 35 FE lenses and I dont really want/have the time to extensivly test each lens before using it. All this AF fine calibration stuff and lens testing sucks. I had to do it for Pentax (which I quit) and also for Canon.
One of the things I love about the Leica S system - so far I have not had any issue with lenses or focus inaccurancies. The same is true for the higher end m43 lenses. Of course one pays for it.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
My compact/lightweight normal lens for the A7/r.



At infinity:



It is similar to a "collapsible lens". I just need to extend the focus helicoid to get to infinity (close focus ~0.3m).

(One can do this with pretty much any macro lens that has a very long focus throw.)
 
Top