True. One of the most successful mirrorless lenses developed so far, and it was one of the first three for Sony FF. Amazing achievement and almost perfect lens.
It's far from perfect. Especially the longitudinal chromatic aberration can be an issue. However it's imho still the best "budget" 50/55mm lens for Sony.
@@oliverlison For a 1970s camera maybe 😅 I love several Voigtlander lenses like the 50mm f1.2 Nokton or the 50mm f2 Apo Lanthar for Sony E or Leica M. These lenses are very different. The 50mm f1.2 Nokton has an incredible bokeh and a nice vintage look. It's not sharp wide open. I don't care. The 50mm f2 Apo Lanthar is razor sharp, but has a so-so bokeh. The new 55mm f1.2 is in my opinion simply not as good. If it's good enough for you, take it. I sent it back.
I just can't believe the price difference on these lenses. I've shot with the 55 1.8 for years (pro photographer for 12+ years) and I get tempted about once a year to upgrade to the 1.2, but then I watch these videos and I'm like why would I??? Plus the 55 is SO TINY and great for travel.
Agree, 55mm f1.8 is a little gem of a lens. It was my first lens when switching to Sony Mirrorless from Nikon 3+ years ago. I now own 13 Sony lenses many GMs and yes the 50 f1.2 seems, on paper to be attractive, but honestly it's very hard to justify paying 3x price, handling circa 3x weight, heft etc. I heard that the 55mm Zeiss was a 'keeper' and for sure I'm keeping mine. The fast f1.2 makes so little sense as a priority for what I do. f1.2 is def niche appeal and of limited application. OK it's great at yielding figure ground separation but honestly the 55mm is quite good too. Main thing against the 55mm is the quite long minimum focus distance and perhaps additional barrel controls, but none of these downsides are showstoppers. If I need closer then I can always shoot 70mm f2.8 on my 70-200 GM mkii. I don't yet have a 24-70mm f2.8GM mkii but although a bit more than the 50mm f1.2 would for most be a much better option. I'm lucky enough to have and shoot the GM 135mm f1.8 it's lovely for blowing out backgrounds. I suspect the 50mm at f1.2 will possibly do a similar albeit less dramatic job. But although I love primes the new 70-200 f2.8 mkii is generally a lot more versatile and not far behind. I also have and love the 35mm GM f1.4 another great lens wide open, good at separating a foreground figure from a background. But for ultra light and minimalist shooting I still retain my 35 mm f1.8. So even if ever bought the 55mm f1.2 I would likely still keep my Zeiss 55mm. -😢
I'm a videographer and I typically use a 50mm handheld with manual focus. My gimbal lenses are usually my 24mm, 35mm, or my 24-70mm. So I don't need a 50mm with amazing auto focus. However I have used the 55mm f1.8 on a gimbal and the autofocus was incredible. Terrific gimbal lens, fast and small. I ended up buying the Sigma Art 50mm f1.4, but that was before the 50mm GM was released. I'm often tempted to upgrade to the GM, but the Sigma Art gives me everything I need. I haven't been able to justify the purpose (yet).
What I love about this video and I wished more creators took from you, is that during your ad read, you still gave us functional information about why we really clicked on the video. Its the first in video add that I haven't fast forwarded through. Very nice job using that time and keeping me engaged. Also, I wish the 55mm was f1.2 like it shows in the video but its still a super lens
I picked the 55 because the wait for the 50 was mental…..I love the 55,size,aperture and it has a picture quality all of it’s own…..aaannddd it’s half the price brand new.Love it.
50mm is my favorite focal ranges, and so for me it was well worth the extra investment for the extra flexibility and functionality. Boy is it heavy though!
The reason why the cheaper 55mm has more micro-contrast, better contrast rendering and better color detail rendering is because it has way less glass elements. Usually the general rule with lenses is; More glass elements? Better sharpness! Less glass elements? Better micro-contrast and better contrast rendering! By the way, micro-contrast is what gives images that alive feel aka. the ''3D pop!'' aka. ''Zeiss pop!'' (Which by the way, it wasn't Zeiss, it was Hasselblad who was first to make ''3D pop'' lenses!)
The 55 was the first lens I bought when I switched to Sony Mirrorless system and it was a great lens to have. I love it for street photography when I travel for pic quality and the size and weight. However recently I just purchased the 35 1.4 and that is now my go to lens when I travel. I prefer the 35mm focal length over 50 or 55.
Thanks for your tip and sharing some experience here. I am quite new to the Sony mirrorless world, I have the Sony 20mm f1.8 and the 55mm being now my latest aquisition and I love it for probably the same reasons most people do. Small and light, but feels like a good quality lens, smooth and fast in focusing with great picture results. I will consider some time to buy something in between, so you basically use the 55mm not much anymore?
I've had my 55mm for about 8 years and won't be getting rid of it any time soon. It has a charm all of its own. For close ups I attach a Nikon 4T using a 49-52 step-up ring. It's a high class two-element supplementary lens and there's very little degradation of image quality.
55/1.8 is an awesome lens but there it’s worth noting it does have quite a bit of CA. Especially waves/ocean shots. Not necessarily a deal breaker (I love mine) but it’s worth noting.
Great Video! I picked up the 50mm f1.2 and was super excited about it but...found it awfully big and the difference in blur wasn't enough for me for the extra weight and size. I'd never carry anywhere and only shoot in controlled, near my house shoots. So I returned it and stayed with my older 50mm.
I saw a video by the Northrups about the 55 1.8. They were quite dismissive of it and said that lens tech had marched forwards and upwards. I was quite disheartened as the 55 1.8 Zeiss was my first ever lens and I have grown to love it so much, especially the small size and unbelievable performance. Your review gave me hope again, as I could not see that much by way of tech improvement from the tests that were carried out. Thank you for a great review! I have subscribed!
I really considered upgrading my 55mm to 50mm 1.2. Considering 55mm is highly regarded for its sharpness. After watching this, ill stick with my 55mm and save money for other lenses
Thanks. That was a really useful comparison. I have the 55mm 1.8 and love it. I already have the Sigma 24-70 but wanted a prime for the extra low light performance and the low weight advantages. My only concern was that I might be missing out on some really next level sharpness and autofocus capabilities in GM, but after seeing this comparison I felt the Ziess really held up well, so can't really justify upgrading, for now anyway. For me it would be better to invest in other areas such as lighting.
Unless you do side by sides the DoF difference will never be noticeable. In the dslr days we chose the 1.2s because the 1.8s just had poor image quality. These days like with the Z 1.8S, one of the best optically 50s ever, there is no reason to get the 1.2s, especially the gigantic Nikon version.
The 55 is basically a 1.4/1.2 lens in quality, but with a minimum aperture compromise to get to that size and handling. A perfect compromise IMO. 1.8 already gives a ton of blur on 55mm.
When I want to have excellent Bokeh, I take the Sigma 85/1.4 ART, or the Sony 135/1.8GM. For the 50mm lense I prefer the light weight Sony-Zeiss 55/1.8.
I'm a big fan of the Zeiss lenses. I have the APS-C SEL24F18Z and the Full Frame 35mm F2.8 and looking to get the 25mm Batis F2 and that sweet 55mm F1.8. Also from experience I can tell the Zeiss lenses have less focus breathing when it comes to video in general compared to their Sony counterparts. That said, it's not a huge difference but the Batis 25mm F2 has quite less focus breathing compared to the 20mm F1/8 G. Also those Zeiss 3D pop and colours I can really describe but if you're a fan, well then you understand where I'm coming from. All in all, the 55mm F1.8 is crazy value for money and given it's age it performs amazingly well.
The most intelligent commercial break because it’s not a break, it’s part of the video. Skip this part, is like skipping every other part of the video. Well done mate,
I shot a whole wedding with the 55 last year and it really surprised me. There were times I wished I had something wider but it definitely did the job and did it really well
after have 50gm all other lenses are tasteless( 28-75, 85 1.8, 24gm, 16-35f4), usually use it with my laowa 15 f2 on R4。it is ridiculously sharp on 1.2，nice color, great background, and fast focus, perfect range( good for indoor, outdoor after apsc it is 85 1.8 looking with 1.2 speed)
The 55 was the first lens i bought when i went to Sony and bought the A7r lll. I just always loved the look and feel of the lens how perfectly the size and weight was on a smaller mirrorless camera. And after buying it I was more than pleased with its image quality. I also have a couple of older 50 f1.4 lenses that i can adapt if i want. But never seem to use them. But i am tempted by the newest Sigma 50 f1.4 Art. Just because its f1.4. Even thought its allot heavier. And in my opinion GM lenses are over priced. But Sony is setting there GM prices similar to Canon and Nikons fast glass which is also over priced. But there will always be those people who think they will be a better photographer with a lens with a red ring on it or because its a GM. And for some people the money doesnt even enter into their buying decision. They just want what they concider to be the best. But what i find interesting and funny is that the people who buy Sigma, Tamron and Samyang or non GM Sony lenses. seem to be the more creative and better photographers then 3/4 of the lens snobs who will only buy GM glass and look down at any lens that is not a GM.
GM 50/1.2 - it is clearly portrait lens. 55/1.8 is great and best value for money, but 50/1.2 at wide open can create magic frames. 55/1.8 is must have lens for sonyboys, but truly piece of art from Sony - is 50/1.2. One thing you can say for shure: noone need 50/1.4 CZ lens :)
regarding low light the 55 punches a bit above it's class though: it actually also has a transmission of 1.8 - e.g. the ZA 50/1.4 has a transmission of 1.6, so the difference in light gathering is quite a bit less than expected. would actually be interresting to compare that in real life between the 55/1.8 and the 50/1.2.
55z is actually sharper on average across the frame than the 50 1.4, as well. People debated its price for years but in fact the 55z is a pro quality lens with a size compromise, hence 1.8. Wish more lenses were designed like that but there probably is more money in the pro photography audience.
You don't insist on the versatility which is much more important with the 50mm GM: it has replaced my 35 GM and 85 GM in most of the weddings I have covered since June.
Looking at the skintone on your face and the white border of the window in the background, I think the 55mm za has more of a magenta tendency. (Or more contrasty?) I wonder if the 50mm GM has a cleaner image.
The 55/1.8 vs 50/1.8 is a similar argument at the other end, except I picked up a minolta 50/1.7 (already had the LA-EA3) for a steal and manually focus... It is gorgeous. Yes the 55 would be similar in sharpness, but the saving helped me get the 16-35/f4 used.
Hi. Liked your video, especially as I am a very fresh owner of the 55mm, just got it last week ;). The pros why I bought this one, after doing my share of work in research and days and nights of reflecting, have been mainly confirmed since using it. It's sharp, fast in focusing, smooth and quiet. From the built quality it's very light and small but still feels like a good Zeiss lens. With all this the GM was simply too big/heavy and expensive for me. The only thing I will probably miss in the 55mm which the GM has, could you please confirm me that, is the weather sealing :(. There are a lot of confusing and probably false reports out there stating the 55mm is weather proof, but a missing gasket I don't think so... Cheers, and I'll keep following you! :)
I've owned the 55 mm F1.8 for around 3-4 years now. I bought this as my portrait lens for my Sony A6500. With the 1.5x crop factor it's equivalent to a 82.5 mm F2.7 lens. Regardless it's worked perfectly. About to upgrade to the Sony A7IV and plan on using this as my walk around "nifty fifty". I for one couldn't tell that much of a difference. Not for 3x the price anyways.
I own the 55 1.8 and love it! But there are things I want to point out in this review. Using a 1200mp camera to test lens sharpness is ridiculous, both these lens’s resolution power greatly exceeds the cmos resolution. You didn’t mention the chromatic aberration of 551.8 and the concentric bokeh, which the gm is much better at.
Late to this one, but great video thank you! I was considering the 50 GM, but this helped alot. Size and weight are a bog deal for me. I can see I would much prefer the 55 and the IQ stands up to the GM. So I'm good.
@@0action847 as much as I know it's a super sharp lens, I cannot come to terms at the fringing and it's why I never purchased one after using it for some shoots. Removing that in post isn't fun when there's more than 50-100 shots per event.
Great video. Thank you! One comment on the focus breathing section…. Maybe stack the images vertically so we can see left right edge to edge? Stacking horizontally we can only see top bottom breathing which is less.
1.8 does great we’ve always known it. But for professionals who shoot weddings in extreme low light, that’s the biggest reason for the 1.2. And ego I suppose lol. My wife doesn’t take the 50 1.2 off her camera now. Always stealing it from me.
I love the 55, used it for years. Light and compact, super sharp, but the chromatic aberration and purple fringing are pretty bad, kind of a known issue. You can see the CA around 4:16 , very noticeable purple at logo area and highlight area, which is quite annoying when shooting certain stuff. Besides that and the minimum focus distance, it's a really awesome lens.
@@chrisbrockhurst wow! Very surprised! Its incredible that the 55mm still holds its own against, sony's flagship lense! I always knew the 55 was sharp, but still... this is very impressive! Bonus info, I bought the 55mm because of you 😉 Thank you so much for this video my man, have a great one!
There's a lot of labelling mistakes in your video. I had to go back & remind myself the 50mm was F1.2 & the 55mm was F1.8. Eg. You often caption "55MM F1.2 @ F1.8". Apart from that it was a good review. I think the 55mm F1.8 has more focus breathing than the 50mm F1.2. The autofocus of the 50mm F1.2 is faster & just as accurate considering the margin of error is smaller. The sharpness tests could be done with atleast 3 focal lengths (eg. F1.2 vs F1.8, F1.8 vs F1.8, F4 vs F4, F8 vs F8). At F4 & smaller appatures they should both look very sharp. The new lens has small improvements to chromatic aberrations. It's a lot of small improvements that make the GM a significant achievement but it comes at great cost (money, size, weight). If you're an amateur, don't start with the GM lenses. If you're making money from Pro photography then you can judge the value for yourself.
I'm glad i bought 55mm F1.8 it's sharp and it's small. I'm not much of a lover for 55mm but sometimes having it is amazing. It's in that regard that this Sony is perfect solution, cause 281 gram is nothing, so i always have it with me. Still i always like landscape sharpness, 35mm and i drooled at F1.2. So i choice the Sigma 35mm F1.2 Art over the Sony 35mm F1.4 GM. So glad i bought the big one there F1.2 is epic for full body portraits (my favorite style for people), epic for landscape, but also creative shots and dim light shots. I thought i would never use the aperture ring, and while shooting landscape i wouldn't small or no change in aperture, around F8, But, sometimes i switch between F1.2 and F8 (keeping the auto on F8 and manual on F1.2) wich is much faster in setting changing. As for image quality, the Sigma is epic. And the Sigma costs only 1530€ I got it for 1180€ with a cheaper price that was further discounted. When i compare that to the 50mm GM's price, i know i did the right thing: better focal length for me cheaper, etc. I might even get the Sigma 35mm F2 as portable option and still be cheap out. I love the choice in lenses at Sony E-mount, if you prepare your choice well, chance to be dissapointed is slim (just look at how much 35mm options we have, Canon and Nikon are jealous).
Hi again Chris, thank's for the video. Is it just me or do the colours from the 55 seem warmer (and perhaps more pleasing) ? Also i wanted to know if this lens is even usable on a gimbal in regards to it's weight and size. Again thank's for sharing everything.
another thing worth noting: the 55 will have stronger background blur at the same aparture, due to it's slightly longer length. i only realised this seeing your direct comparision, so again big thanks for that!!
I kept saying this over and over Sony took the 55mm and just revamped it in size but took the same technology and upgraded the mechanics and slapped a Sony badge on it. Yes 1.2 is amazing but for price size and quality image I’ll hands down grab the 55mm
Thanks Chris. I almost had the intention of selling my 55 for the 50. Your video came across and i decided i am gonna keep my 55. Its versatility and dimension are what 50 doesnt have. Also keep me save $1000
it's like comparing a gucci bag with a plastic reusable bag at this point. Both holds well and people dont get the gucci just because it's "worth it". it's more like a show off when someone swings around with a big giant GM f1.2 lens compared to me holding a kit lens
All the zeiss involved AF lens are really overlooked for Sony(except the f4 zooms). I would go as far as to say. I prefer the zeiss 1.4ZA 50 to 50GM any day of the week. In the past I have this love/hate relation with prime lens in sony because while the lenses are wondeful, the body are really dust magnets if you keep changing lens during the day. Now with both A1 and A7m4 having shutter protecting sensor I can main all my wonderful prime lenses.(only exception being the 100-400GM).
Great video, mate. The only bit I found a little confusing was the sharpness comparison. Seems a like a moot point on a 12MP camera body. Both lenses punch well above that in terms of resolving power. Although, I'm not sure your conclusion would change on an A7RIV. I used to own that 55mm and I know how blisteringly sharp it can be.
Hi. In 1,37 there is mistake , and it's confusing a little bit. Both lenses are aperture 1.2 when we know this is comparison between 1.2 and 1.8 . Except that, I really like this content, because I know I don't need to sale my Zeiss lens, to buy Sony one. . 😁
@@rattoh huh, my focus is pretty good.. it's just the apertures rings opening and closing that makes noise. If I have set to constant focus, there's no noise.
I had the 55. But I gave it back. It has been a little to "nervous" hitting the right focus. It wasn't noticable in the object to be in focus, but in the background, the bokeh. You can see it here at 2:23 ff in the windowframing, but only slightly. I had that effect much worse. And it was unpredictable. All my other lenses did'nt do it (well, meanwhile I noticed my 85 has a tendency as well). I Guess it has to do with the older focusmotor. It occured on every lighting condition. Even here you can see at 2:23 ff the 50mm focuses more ... let's say camly, more smoothly. As I said, it's not to prominent here. I had it worse. I recorded examples, but did'nt come to upload them yet. - Nice video, btw. :-)
One thing might be important for video is the manual focus feedback. I do not have 55mm. but I know from early days all sony lens has non linear manual focus feedback which is kind deal breaker for video shooter. I hope Sony come out a new midrange 50mm lens priced similar to their 35mm f1.8.
@chris Brockhurst how did the manual focus on the GM feel to you? I agree with Kai Liu Visual that the manual focus on the 55 is practically unusable in a run n gun situation because of the fly-by-wire focusing.
Lol I was literally searching for a video about this and then your popped up in my subs 😂 the only other comparison I wish was in here is the 1.4 Zeus. That’s the only one I’ve used.. but I don’t know if all the features are worth the price difference against the 55! I think I’ll need to rent them to see. Thanks for the review man!
How does the Zeiss 50mm 1.4 perform for video AF for interviews/talking heads. Most reviews talk about photo performance and the comments I’ve found are conflicting
@@davidlongenecker9414 that is so helpful to know for my studio interview use case. Some people have said it’s noisy and unreliable but maybe they are using old bodies or the wrong settings. I would be using it with the A7Siii at medium responsiveness and the locked in subj. sensitivity setting. As an experienced user does that make sense?
I just bought a A74 yesterday and tried the 55mm on it. Booooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooy. I'm getting the 55! Don't really need the 1.2!
I like my 55.8 very much, very light in weight, cheaper and depth of field is better than 50. However, the chromatic aberration of 55.8 is extremely serious even at F2.2 F2.5
Hi! I saw your review and was very surprised about the comparison between the zeiss 55 1.8 and sony 501.2 I have in 55mm 1.8 and I must say that it is a great lens but I use it very little and I wanted to ask you for advice but it is worth buying the sony 50mm 1.2 GM The only lens that satisfies me in full is the Sigma 85 1.4 DG DN art and when I use it everything else and nothing my question and the Sony 50 1.2 would give me the same satisfaction. I am a fan and could you give me some advice Thank you
The 55mm 1.8 auto focus motor is held by a glob of glue. When the glue fails, the lens is rendered useless. I'd buy it at $500 but for $900 it's a no for me.
Shoutout to my daughter for painting my nails.
Just about to say why you paint you nails? now I understood, you are one lucky dad!!!❤
Minimum focus distance is measured from the sensor, not the end of the lens, this is why you get 33 instead of the advertised 40+.
Yeah there's a circle with a white line cut through it on the body. That's where the centre is and the place to measure from
I adore the 55/1.8. It’s perfection in function and size. It is inline with the reason mirrorless was initially developed.
True. One of the most successful mirrorless lenses developed so far, and it was one of the first three for Sony FF. Amazing achievement and almost perfect lens.
It's far from perfect. Especially the longitudinal chromatic aberration can be an issue. However it's imho still the best "budget" 50/55mm lens for Sony.
The 55 makes much more sense than the 50/1.2. The 50/1.2 is not needed unless video is needed.
@@stefanbecker9526 who cares about CA? Pixel peeper? the 55 is good enough!
@@oliverlison For a 1970s camera maybe 😅 I love several Voigtlander lenses like the 50mm f1.2 Nokton or the 50mm f2 Apo Lanthar for Sony E or Leica M. These lenses are very different. The 50mm f1.2 Nokton has an incredible bokeh and a nice vintage look. It's not sharp wide open. I don't care. The 50mm f2 Apo Lanthar is razor sharp, but has a so-so bokeh. The new 55mm f1.2 is in my opinion simply not as good. If it's good enough for you, take it. I sent it back.
I just can't believe the price difference on these lenses. I've shot with the 55 1.8 for years (pro photographer for 12+ years) and I get tempted about once a year to upgrade to the 1.2, but then I watch these videos and I'm like why would I??? Plus the 55 is SO TINY and great for travel.
Great info. Ty.
Same lol
Same it's amazing quality and that small size/weight is such an insane benefit that a lot of people don't think about too much
Yeah size isn’t worth it
Yes! The 55 is superb
Agree, 55mm f1.8 is a little gem of a lens. It was my first lens when switching to Sony Mirrorless from Nikon 3+ years ago. I now own 13 Sony lenses many GMs and yes the 50 f1.2 seems, on paper to be attractive, but honestly it's very hard to justify paying 3x price, handling circa 3x weight, heft etc. I heard that the 55mm Zeiss was a 'keeper' and for sure I'm keeping mine. The fast f1.2 makes so little sense as a priority for what I do.
f1.2 is def niche appeal and of limited application. OK it's great at yielding figure ground separation but honestly the 55mm is quite good too. Main thing against the 55mm is the quite long minimum focus distance and perhaps additional barrel controls, but none of these downsides are showstoppers. If I need closer then I can always shoot 70mm f2.8 on my 70-200 GM mkii. I don't yet have a 24-70mm f2.8GM mkii but although a bit more than the 50mm f1.2 would for most be a much better option.
I'm lucky enough to have and shoot the GM 135mm f1.8 it's lovely for blowing out backgrounds. I suspect the 50mm at f1.2 will possibly do a similar albeit less dramatic job. But although I love primes the new 70-200 f2.8 mkii is generally a lot more versatile and not far behind. I also have and love the 35mm GM f1.4 another great lens wide open, good at separating a foreground figure from a background. But for ultra light and minimalist shooting I still retain my 35 mm f1.8. So even if ever bought the 55mm f1.2 I would likely still keep my Zeiss 55mm.
-😢
I'm a videographer and I typically use a 50mm handheld with manual focus. My gimbal lenses are usually my 24mm, 35mm, or my 24-70mm. So I don't need a 50mm with amazing auto focus. However I have used the 55mm f1.8 on a gimbal and the autofocus was incredible. Terrific gimbal lens, fast and small.
I ended up buying the Sigma Art 50mm f1.4, but that was before the 50mm GM was released. I'm often tempted to upgrade to the GM, but the Sigma Art gives me everything I need. I haven't been able to justify the purpose (yet).
What I love about this video and I wished more creators took from you, is that during your ad read, you still gave us functional information about why we really clicked on the video. Its the first in video add that I haven't fast forwarded through. Very nice job using that time and keeping me engaged. Also, I wish the 55mm was f1.2 like it shows in the video but its still a super lens
i appreciate you integrating the ad into the actual video.
I appreciate you appreciating this!
I picked the 55 because the wait for the 50 was mental…..I love the 55,size,aperture and it has a picture quality all of it’s own…..aaannddd it’s half the price brand new.Love it.
I have the 55mm for about 8 years and I'm still very happy with.
50mm is my favorite focal ranges, and so for me it was well worth the extra investment for the extra flexibility and functionality. Boy is it heavy though!
Same, the buttons and aperture ring alone make it a valuable asset. Agreed on it being a big boy 😅
The reason why the cheaper 55mm has more micro-contrast, better contrast rendering and better color detail rendering is because it has way less glass elements. Usually the general rule with lenses is; More glass elements? Better sharpness! Less glass elements? Better micro-contrast and better contrast rendering!
By the way, micro-contrast is what gives images that alive feel aka. the ''3D pop!'' aka. ''Zeiss pop!'' (Which by the way, it wasn't Zeiss, it was Hasselblad who was first to make ''3D pop'' lenses!)
The GM is tempting (like many) but the Zeiss just delivers AND above all, the experience shooting with it (on long days) is why it’s best for me.
The 55 was the first lens I bought when I switched to Sony Mirrorless system and it was a great lens to have. I love it for street photography when I travel for pic quality and the size and weight. However recently I just purchased the 35 1.4 and that is now my go to lens when I travel. I prefer the 35mm focal length over 50 or 55.
Thanks, mate. Just moved to Sony myself and grabbed the 55. So you reckon the 35 1.4 is a goer, too? I gotta check it out. Thanks, mate.
Thanks for your tip and sharing some experience here. I am quite new to the Sony mirrorless world, I have the Sony 20mm f1.8 and the 55mm being now my latest aquisition and I love it for probably the same reasons most people do. Small and light, but feels like a good quality lens, smooth and fast in focusing with great picture results. I will consider some time to buy something in between, so you basically use the 55mm not much anymore?
Same for me. 55 was my first and now I shoot with the 35 gm. Absolutely love it.
@@johnd9357 Nice, mate. Enjoy.
I've had my 55mm for about 8 years and won't be getting rid of it any time soon. It has a charm all of its own. For close ups I attach a Nikon 4T using a 49-52 step-up ring. It's a high class two-element supplementary lens and there's very little degradation of image quality.
I do think at weddings you should focus on lighting vs relying on very low apertures. A well lit subject beats 1.2 any day
55/1.8 is an awesome lens but there it’s worth noting it does have quite a bit of CA. Especially waves/ocean shots. Not necessarily a deal breaker (I love mine) but it’s worth noting.
Great Video! I picked up the 50mm f1.2 and was super excited about it but...found it awfully big and the difference in blur wasn't enough for me for the extra weight and size. I'd never carry anywhere and only shoot in controlled, near my house shoots. So I returned it and stayed with my older 50mm.
I saw a video by the Northrups about the 55 1.8. They were quite dismissive of it and said that lens tech had marched forwards and upwards. I was quite disheartened as the 55 1.8 Zeiss was my first ever lens and I have grown to love it so much, especially the small size and unbelievable performance. Your review gave me hope again, as I could not see that much by way of tech improvement from the tests that were carried out. Thank you for a great review! I have subscribed!
I love my Zeiss 55 1.8, this tiny gem is super sharp and has a very fast AF. I even prefer this over the 85 1.8 and made a video about it.
Man I really appreciate your lens comparisons and creating updated content around lenses that aren’t brand new.
I really considered upgrading my 55mm to 50mm 1.2. Considering 55mm is highly regarded for its sharpness. After watching this, ill stick with my 55mm and save money for other lenses
Me too. But i kept the 55 and bought 85 instead
Thanks. That was a really useful comparison. I have the 55mm 1.8 and love it. I already have the Sigma 24-70 but wanted a prime for the extra low light performance and the low weight advantages. My only concern was that I might be missing out on some really next level sharpness and autofocus capabilities in GM, but after seeing this comparison I felt the Ziess really held up well, so can't really justify upgrading, for now anyway. For me it would be better to invest in other areas such as lighting.
This is the first lens review in hundreds of reviews that made me laugh while being informative and practical. Thank you!
thankyou :)
Unless you do side by sides the DoF difference will never be noticeable. In the dslr days we chose the 1.2s because the 1.8s just had poor image quality. These days like with the Z 1.8S, one of the best optically 50s ever, there is no reason to get the 1.2s, especially the gigantic Nikon version.
The 55 is basically a 1.4/1.2 lens in quality, but with a minimum aperture compromise to get to that size and handling. A perfect compromise IMO. 1.8 already gives a ton of blur on 55mm.
When I want to have excellent Bokeh, I take the Sigma 85/1.4 ART, or the Sony 135/1.8GM.
For the 50mm lense I prefer the light weight Sony-Zeiss 55/1.8.
I'm a big fan of the Zeiss lenses. I have the APS-C SEL24F18Z and the Full Frame 35mm F2.8 and looking to get the 25mm Batis F2 and that sweet 55mm F1.8. Also from experience I can tell the Zeiss lenses have less focus breathing when it comes to video in general compared to their Sony counterparts. That said, it's not a huge difference but the Batis 25mm F2 has quite less focus breathing compared to the 20mm F1/8 G. Also those Zeiss 3D pop and colours I can really describe but if you're a fan, well then you understand where I'm coming from.
All in all, the 55mm F1.8 is crazy value for money and given it's age it performs amazingly well.
I thnk the minimum focus distance is measured from the sensor, not the lens. Maybe that's why measuring didn't work :P
Yep that little circle with the line through it on the top of the camera body is where you want to measure from.
Now that it's available - just get the middle road - the 50 f/1.4. Done! Thanks for the comparison - very instructive.
The most intelligent commercial break because it’s not a break, it’s part of the video. Skip this part, is like skipping every other part of the video. Well done mate,
I shot a whole wedding with the 55 last year and it really surprised me. There were times I wished I had something wider but it definitely did the job and did it really well
The 55mm 1.8 is my favorite and always carry-on lens. For me a perfect combination of form factor, image quality and character.
Easy lens company
I use 55mm for small group photos and don’t need large aperture like 1.4 or 1.2.
after have 50gm all other lenses are tasteless( 28-75, 85 1.8, 24gm, 16-35f4), usually use it with my laowa 15 f2 on R4。it is ridiculously sharp on 1.2，nice color, great background, and fast focus, perfect range( good for indoor, outdoor after apsc it is 85 1.8 looking with 1.2 speed)
The 55 was the first lens i bought when i went to Sony and bought the A7r lll. I just always loved the look and feel of the lens how perfectly the size and weight was on a smaller mirrorless camera. And after buying it I was more than pleased with its image quality. I also have a couple of older 50 f1.4 lenses that i can adapt if i want. But never seem to use them. But i am tempted by the newest Sigma 50 f1.4 Art. Just because its f1.4. Even thought its allot heavier. And in my opinion GM lenses are over priced. But Sony is setting there GM prices similar to Canon and Nikons fast glass which is also over priced. But there will always be those people who think they will be a better photographer with a lens with a red ring on it or because its a GM. And for some people the money doesnt even enter into their buying decision. They just want what they concider to be the best. But what i find interesting and funny is that the people who buy Sigma, Tamron and Samyang or non GM Sony lenses. seem to be the more creative and better photographers then 3/4 of the lens snobs who will only buy GM glass and look down at any lens that is not a GM.
55mm close focus 0.5 meters 0.14x magnification, 50mm 1.2 close focus 0.4 meters 0.17x magnification, if close focus matters, use macro Lenses.
GM 50/1.2 - it is clearly portrait lens. 55/1.8 is great and best value for money, but 50/1.2 at wide open can create magic frames. 55/1.8 is must have lens for sonyboys, but truly piece of art from Sony - is 50/1.2. One thing you can say for shure: noone need 50/1.4 CZ lens :)
regarding low light the 55 punches a bit above it's class though: it actually also has a transmission of 1.8 - e.g. the ZA 50/1.4 has a transmission of 1.6, so the difference in light gathering is quite a bit less than expected. would actually be interresting to compare that in real life between the 55/1.8 and the 50/1.2.
55z is actually sharper on average across the frame than the 50 1.4, as well. People debated its price for years but in fact the 55z is a pro quality lens with a size compromise, hence 1.8. Wish more lenses were designed like that but there probably is more money in the pro photography audience.
You don't insist on the versatility which is much more important with the 50mm GM: it has replaced my 35 GM and 85 GM in most of the weddings I have covered since June.
What about the GM vs the Zeiss 50mm f1.4?
Looking at the skintone on your face and the white border of the window in the background, I think the 55mm za has more of a magenta tendency. (Or more contrasty?) I wonder if the 50mm GM has a cleaner image.
The 55 is a amazing lens that and the sony 85 1.8 offer fantastic value for money both super sharp and lightweight
The 55/1.8 vs 50/1.8 is a similar argument at the other end, except I picked up a minolta 50/1.7 (already had the LA-EA3) for a steal and manually focus... It is gorgeous. Yes the 55 would be similar in sharpness, but the saving helped me get the 16-35/f4 used.
Been using 55mm f1.8 for the last 3 years with no plans to change!
I also love my 55. The extra compression is awesome.
Hi. Liked your video, especially as I am a very fresh owner of the 55mm, just got it last week ;). The pros why I bought this one, after doing my share of work in research and days and nights of reflecting, have been mainly confirmed since using it. It's sharp, fast in focusing, smooth and quiet. From the built quality it's very light and small but still feels like a good Zeiss lens. With all this the GM was simply too big/heavy and expensive for me. The only thing I will probably miss in the 55mm which the GM has, could you please confirm me that, is the weather sealing :(. There are a lot of confusing and probably false reports out there stating the 55mm is weather proof, but a missing gasket I don't think so... Cheers, and I'll keep following you! :)
Fun fact, the 55mm is one of the (if not THE) only Sony lenses that can utilize the SLR Magic Anamorphot 1.33x adapter
The difference in shallowness of DOF between 1.2 and 1.8 became obvious when you stepped back from the camera a little further.
Thanks, you saved my money after viewing your video and I now know which one to get for travel. Thanks again sir.
I've owned the 55 mm F1.8 for around 3-4 years now. I bought this as my portrait lens for my Sony A6500. With the 1.5x crop factor it's equivalent to a 82.5 mm F2.7 lens. Regardless it's worked perfectly. About to upgrade to the Sony A7IV and plan on using this as my walk around "nifty fifty". I for one couldn't tell that much of a difference. Not for 3x the price anyways.
Great comparison. Is there a place your upload your wedding videos? Would enjoy seeing some of that work.
Not because I love your work, and your are a very good friend, but dude...you are killing it on youtube lately!!! Great video
You're took kind Emilio.
I own the 55 1.8 and love it! But there are things I want to point out in this review. Using a 1200mp camera to test lens sharpness is ridiculous, both these lens’s resolution power greatly exceeds the cmos resolution. You didn’t mention the chromatic aberration of 551.8 and the concentric bokeh, which the gm is much better at.
Great video Chris. Loved the back and forth format. Really made me smile. Thank you.
Glad to hear it!
Chris you’re a mad man, that’s the best ad read I’ve seen in a while 😂. Great video boss 👌
Haha cheers fella!
Literally the best lens review! Thank you so much for this!
Late to this one, but great video thank you! I was considering the 50 GM, but this helped alot. Size and weight are a bog deal for me. I can see I would much prefer the 55 and the IQ stands up to the GM. So I'm good.
I’m just getting into photography for a hobby. Should I get the 55mm 1.8 or 55mm 1.4?
Easiest way to see the worth of the GM is fringing/CA @1:10 mark you can see green CA in the bokeh of the playground in the back. Wouldn't want that.
yep i used my 55 the other day after not using it for a while and the fringing is really bad, then remembered why it never comes out the cabinet.
@@0action847 as much as I know it's a super sharp lens, I cannot come to terms at the fringing and it's why I never purchased one after using it for some shoots. Removing that in post isn't fun when there's more than 50-100 shots per event.
You sneaky bastard lol. Sneaking in a paid sponsor message into useful camera comparison. Well done, didn’t skip the ad because of it
Bills gotta be paid 😅
Great video. Thank you! One comment on the focus breathing section…. Maybe stack the images vertically so we can see left right edge to edge? Stacking horizontally we can only see top bottom breathing which is less.
1.8 does great we’ve always known it. But for professionals who shoot weddings in extreme low light, that’s the biggest reason for the 1.2. And ego I suppose lol. My wife doesn’t take the 50 1.2 off her camera now. Always stealing it from me.
I have the Sony Zeiss Sonnar 55mm 1.8 and I can highly recommend it, right NOW you can get it new from 649 Euro in Europe.
Informative and fun to watch!
I love the 55, used it for years. Light and compact, super sharp, but the chromatic aberration and purple fringing are pretty bad, kind of a known issue. You can see the CA around 4:16 , very noticeable purple at logo area and highlight area, which is quite annoying when shooting certain stuff. Besides that and the minimum focus distance, it's a really awesome lens.
The fact that it is a 55mm lens instead of 50mm KIND OF makes up for some of that... ?
Fairly new to your channel, but I must say your “out in the field” tests are always pretty clutch and well done 👏🏽
Cheers Mike!
I have been waiting so long for this exact matchup. I have the 55mm and really wanna see how it does against the "big boy"
youll be pleasantly surprised.
@@chrisbrockhurst wow! Very surprised! Its incredible that the 55mm still holds its own against, sony's flagship lense! I always knew the 55 was sharp, but still... this is very impressive!
Bonus info, I bought the 55mm because of you 😉
Thank you so much for this video my man, have a great one!
There's a lot of labelling mistakes in your video. I had to go back & remind myself the 50mm was F1.2 & the 55mm was F1.8. Eg. You often caption "55MM F1.2 @ F1.8".
Apart from that it was a good review.
I think the 55mm F1.8 has more focus breathing than the 50mm F1.2.
The autofocus of the 50mm F1.2 is faster & just as accurate considering the margin of error is smaller.
The sharpness tests could be done with atleast 3 focal lengths (eg. F1.2 vs F1.8, F1.8 vs F1.8, F4 vs F4, F8 vs F8). At F4 & smaller appatures they should both look very sharp.
The new lens has small improvements to chromatic aberrations.
It's a lot of small improvements that make the GM a significant achievement but it comes at great cost (money, size, weight). If you're an amateur, don't start with the GM lenses. If you're making money from Pro photography then you can judge the value for yourself.
Until I start doing more paid gigs, this GM just doesn’t do it for me. Thanks for the comparison!
I think the same will apply for a lot of others too
@@chrisbrockhurst agree
Anh quyết định mua lens nào vậy anh phúc
@@mr.nobody3098 chưa quyết định bro
GM 50mm is better for both photo and video. Zeiss 55mm is only great for photo but not for video which is why I never pick up the lens
I'm glad i bought 55mm F1.8 it's sharp and it's small. I'm not much of a lover for 55mm but sometimes having it is amazing. It's in that regard that this Sony is perfect solution, cause 281 gram is nothing, so i always have it with me.
Still i always like landscape sharpness, 35mm and i drooled at F1.2. So i choice the Sigma 35mm F1.2 Art over the Sony 35mm F1.4 GM. So glad i bought the big one there F1.2 is epic for full body portraits (my favorite style for people), epic for landscape, but also creative shots and dim light shots. I thought i would never use the aperture ring, and while shooting landscape i wouldn't small or no change in aperture, around F8, But, sometimes i switch between F1.2 and F8 (keeping the auto on F8 and manual on F1.2) wich is much faster in setting changing. As for image quality, the Sigma is epic.
And the Sigma costs only 1530€ I got it for 1180€ with a cheaper price that was further discounted. When i compare that to the 50mm GM's price, i know i did the right thing: better focal length for me cheaper, etc. I might even get the Sigma 35mm F2 as portable option and still be cheap out.
I love the choice in lenses at Sony E-mount, if you prepare your choice well, chance to be dissapointed is slim (just look at how much 35mm options we have, Canon and Nikon are jealous).
Hi again Chris, thank's for the video. Is it just me or do the colours from the 55 seem warmer (and perhaps more pleasing) ? Also i wanted to know if this lens is even usable on a gimbal in regards to it's weight and size. Again thank's for sharing everything.
Amazing how well the 55 compares!
I know, right?
another thing worth noting: the 55 will have stronger background blur at the same aparture, due to it's slightly longer length. i only realised this seeing your direct comparision, so again big thanks for that!!
I kept saying this over and over Sony took the 55mm and just revamped it in size but took the same technology and upgraded the mechanics and slapped a Sony badge on it. Yes 1.2 is amazing but for price size and quality image I’ll hands down grab the 55mm
At 2.29 there is a mistake
"Sony 55 1.2" :)
Hi from Italy!!!
Good catch. You’re attention to detail is clearly better than me ha
Thanks Chris. I almost had the intention of selling my 55 for the 50. Your video came across and i decided i am gonna keep my 55. Its versatility and dimension are what 50 doesnt have. Also keep me save $1000
it's like comparing a gucci bag with a plastic reusable bag at this point. Both holds well and people dont get the gucci just because it's "worth it". it's more like a show off when someone swings around with a big giant GM f1.2 lens compared to me holding a kit lens
GM stands for got money 😅
Love the 55mm... but I'm a sucker for an on lens aperture ring.
All the zeiss involved AF lens are really overlooked for Sony(except the f4 zooms). I would go as far as to say. I prefer the zeiss 1.4ZA 50 to 50GM any day of the week. In the past I have this love/hate relation with prime lens in sony because while the lenses are wondeful, the body are really dust magnets if you keep changing lens during the day. Now with both A1 and A7m4 having shutter protecting sensor I can main all my wonderful prime lenses.(only exception being the 100-400GM).
I have the 55 and its just a lovely overall lens 🔥🔥
Some of your text refer to 55 1,2 but it should be 1,8 right
Great video, mate. The only bit I found a little confusing was the sharpness comparison. Seems a like a moot point on a 12MP camera body. Both lenses punch well above that in terms of resolving power. Although, I'm not sure your conclusion would change on an A7RIV. I used to own that 55mm and I know how blisteringly sharp it can be.
Hi. In 1,37 there is mistake , and it's confusing a little bit. Both lenses are aperture 1.2 when we know this is comparison between 1.2 and 1.8 . Except that, I really like this content, because I know I don't need to sale my Zeiss lens, to buy Sony one. . 😁
The Zeiss 55 is my absolute favorite prime. Except the focus does make a little bit of noise. Not sure if that's just mine or worse, it's wearing out.
I had a copy like that and the focus wasn't as good as another copy I have that is much better a, quiet.
@@rattoh huh, my focus is pretty good.. it's just the apertures rings opening and closing that makes noise. If I have set to constant focus, there's no noise.
Best advertising ever... doing the test while talking...
can you do 50mm f1.2 vs third party f1.4 lenses like samyang?
Great content Chris. What are your thoughts on the 50 /1.4 Zeiss vs the 50 /1.2 Gm? Or even Zeiss 50 vs 55? Im a hybrid shooter.
I had the 55. But I gave it back. It has been a little to "nervous" hitting the right focus. It wasn't noticable in the object to be in focus, but in the background, the bokeh. You can see it here at 2:23 ff in the windowframing, but only slightly. I had that effect much worse. And it was unpredictable. All my other lenses did'nt do it (well, meanwhile I noticed my 85 has a tendency as well). I Guess it has to do with the older focusmotor. It occured on every lighting condition. Even here you can see at 2:23 ff the 50mm focuses more ... let's say camly, more smoothly. As I said, it's not to prominent here. I had it worse. I recorded examples, but did'nt come to upload them yet. - Nice video, btw. :-)
thanks for watching and the feedback, always good to share your experiences with others.
Fantastic video and two of my favorite lenses to shoot with.
One thing might be important for video is the manual focus feedback. I do not have 55mm. but I know from early days all sony lens has non linear manual focus feedback which is kind deal breaker for video shooter. I hope Sony come out a new midrange 50mm lens priced similar to their 35mm f1.8.
@chris Brockhurst how did the manual focus on the GM feel to you? I agree with Kai Liu Visual that the manual focus on the 55 is practically unusable in a run n gun situation because of the fly-by-wire focusing.
Great comparison like always I was also very surprised on how that 1.8 held up!
You and me both
Small mistake Chris. At the sponsor section test. Wrote 55mm f1.2 :)
good eye!
I’d love to see a smaller 50 1.4 from sigma. Similar form factor to the 85 dg dn would be nice. Until then, 55 it is….
Lol I was literally searching for a video about this and then your popped up in my subs 😂 the only other comparison I wish was in here is the 1.4 Zeus. That’s the only one I’ve used.. but I don’t know if all the features are worth the price difference against the 55! I think I’ll need to rent them to see. Thanks for the review man!
The Zeus one should be lightning fast. :D
Dustin Abbott uploaded a video with the Zeiss comparison yesterday 👌🏻
How does the Zeiss 50mm 1.4 perform for video AF for interviews/talking heads. Most reviews talk about photo performance and the comments I’ve found are conflicting
@Small Biz Digital Media the zeiss 50 1.4 is just about bolted to my a7siii and it is incredible for AF.
@@davidlongenecker9414 that is so helpful to know for my studio interview use case. Some people have said it’s noisy and unreliable but maybe they are using old bodies or the wrong settings. I would be using it with the A7Siii at medium responsiveness and the locked in subj. sensitivity setting. As an experienced user does that make sense?
I just bought a A74 yesterday and tried the 55mm on it. Booooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooy. I'm getting the 55! Don't really need the 1.2!
Hello! Just subscribed here, sorry for my bad English. May I ask what is the microphone that you used in 1:58 minute mark? Thank you 😊
I like my 55.8 very much, very light in weight, cheaper and depth of field is better than 50. However, the chromatic aberration of 55.8 is extremely serious even at F2.2 F2.5
1:41 (and others) - future Chris using a 55mm f1.2 ? 😄
Hi! I saw your review and was very surprised about the comparison between the zeiss 55 1.8 and sony 501.2
I have in 55mm 1.8 and I must say that it is a great lens but I use it very little and I wanted to ask you for advice but it is worth buying the sony 50mm 1.2 GM
The only lens that satisfies me in full is the Sigma 85 1.4 DG DN art and when I use it everything else and nothing my question and the Sony 50 1.2 would give me the same satisfaction.
I am a fan and could you give me some advice
Thank you
The 55mm 1.8 auto focus motor is held by a glob of glue. When the glue fails, the lens is rendered useless. I'd buy it at $500 but for $900 it's a no for me.