I had a chance to take the 50mm GM out for a day of shooting to compare it with my 55mm Zeiss, and the biggest practical difference I observed was the close focusing distance. With my 55mm Zeiss, I often feel like I can't get close enough for a detail shot - say a badge of a vehicle, or a small street sign - whereas with the GM I confidently stepped in as close as I liked while having rock solid auto focus. Thanks for the review Dustin!
Thanks Dustin, this was exactly the comparison I was looking for and so nice to see that you had covered it. As always, your reviews are spot on, addressing exactly what we want to know while trying to remain very objective. Your efforts are much appreciated.
For me the 50mm 1.2 has been game changing. I was not even a big 50mm shooter but now that lens just stays on my Sony A1. The photos are just so sharp, the bokeh is gorgeous and it just makes every photo look amazing!! Very well worthwhile IMHO.
i have to make the choice between the zeiss almost new for 950 and the sony new for 2200. while i have the feeling that my customers would like the sonys images more i also think that the zeiss would be better for my customers as it shows the zeiss logo. i hope that i will make the right decision
I personally found the 55mm to be a functionally good but overall bland lens. It doesn't really do anything special. Both of these lenses exceed the performance of the 55mm by a good margin, in my opinion, and if I were going to go cheap, I would choose the Samyang AF 45mm F1.8 instead.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I cant speak for the GM, but in my experience the 55mm is a much better video lens than the Planar. Stickier, faster, quieter auto focus and way less breathing.
I own both, at wider apertures the GM is much much better in terms of rendering and sharpness. I shot with an A7RIV where differences are magnified. The 55mm can have very busy or downright ugly rendering in some situations and beautiful in others. Wide open its a little soft and has quite a bit of CA. However stopped down this lens is plenty sharp and mine now is used for street work.
Dustin, I found this video invaluable and I am at the writing awaiting delivery of my Sony Zeiss 35mm f1.4 lens. I am keen amateur photo photographer, albeit with 40 years experience and therefore, I am confident that I shall be happy with my new lens. I have owned a number of Sony GM lenses and I found the focus breathing extremely irritating. I also think that for someone like me, a keen hobbyist, I really don’t need the extra few advantages offered by the GM lens. Thank you for the excellent advice. All the best. Alun
Fascinating. The most striking thing to me was how with both lenses wide open, the Zeiss gave that tiny bit of greenish-blue tint to the model’s skin tone, reminding me of my least favorite thing about the otherwise excellent Sony/Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 compact prime. If I’m going to carry a lens as big and heavy as either of these (as opposed to the excellent little 55mm) you bet I’m going to shoot it wide open. So, the new GM design would be worth the trade-in and additional cost to me.
Thanks! That 50 GM is one of the best lenses Ive used on any system, Leica included. One of the sharpest as well. Dustin, did you see how its sharpness compares to the 135 GM? Id be interested to see.
I'm still conflicted. I do like the GM better, but I don't dislike the Planar at all. By the time I sell the Planar and buy the GM, I estimate I'll be roughly $700 out of pocket, and I'm not sure it's worth it.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I think the Planar gives really pleasing picture quality, I like mine a lot. But GMs F1.2 and top AF is not a bad. I really enjoy the AF of the GM lenses, it makes them so usable in all sorts of scenarios.
@@DustinAbbottTWI it’s definitely worth it… I returned my Ziess lens because I though I would wear it out and scratch it to death.. So kept it in my bag in a micro fiber cloth with padding around it… lol .. I I swear I still chipped the side of it just by looking at… I returned it before resale value dropped like a new car on a used car sales lot… And I got the Sony 50mm F1.2… And when I got my hands on that I felt like I didn’t pay enough.. Hurry and purchase before people find out and prices go up… This lens is a beast you will not regret the purchase… Trust me!!!
This was really informative. I originally upgraded to the Planar from the 55mm 1.8 because of your videos on it. It was totally worth it for me. This however does not seem to be worth it. Thanks
I think that's probably true for most people. It's hard to argue the roughly $700 you would pay between selling and buying the GM. That's pretty much where I'm at.
I've wanted the 1.2 GM for a while but I found the Zeiss used but in excellent condition for $850. I think with that huge of a price difference I might just go with it.
As always Dustin, great comparison review. I purchased the planar a couple of years ago on the strength of your review. I also own an EOS R w/the Canon RF 50 F/1.2. Without a doubt to my eyes the Canon lens outclasses the Planar in every way - even on an inferior EOS R vs Sony A7RIV. I’ve been contemplating selling my both the Planar 50 and the Canon kit and buying the Sony GM 50, but man do I love that Canon RF. Would love your opinion on Canon RF 50 1.2 vs the Sony 50 gm. Btw like you I had previously been a Canon shooter for over 30 years…but am now deep into the Sony ecosystem…but still love the Canon colors and can’t seem to fully let go.
I reviewed the RF 50 before the EOS R5 was out, so it's a little hard to draw comparisons when I tested the GM on a camera with the extra 20MP. I liked the RF lens a lot, but I think I'd take the GM myself at the end of the day.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I just shot a wedding on New Year’s Eve, and as I review the files created with the gm 50; I am ready to let go of myCanon RF 50, along with the rest of my small Canon kit. The images from the gm 50 are simply stunning. I feel like I cheated lol!
Thank you for doing this comparison! It certainly seems that since I don't have any AF 50mm at this time that the 50mm 1.2 would be the best choice (if I can get a hold of one). I have been using an old Canon FD 55mm 1.2 (chrome version) which is a great classic lens. I have the Sony A73 and oddly enough only used classic lenses with it until I could start purchasing AF lenses. Because I have several nifty 50's, my first AF lens was the Batis 85mm 1.8. I followed that up with the G Master 24mm. I love both of the lenses and now know I really need a 50mm AF. Because I really love the Batis 85mm, I was really looking to see what you though about the 50mm 1.2. I knew from your review of the Zeiss 50mm 1.4 that the 50mm 1.2 would really have to be a performer for you to say it is the better lens. Thank you again for there review!
Here in the UK, since the GM released the Planar can be purchased used for around £800. That said, I still sold mine for the GM. You only really buy this lens to use wide open , and at that it is unbeatable, combined with super fast focus - the premium is worth it.
How do contrast and resolution of the SEL50F1.2GM and the SEL50F14Z compare at the horizontal lateral edges (not the corners) at F1.4? (Yes, if I carry a wide open lens, it got to be good wide open. My SEL85F14GM is okay at F1.4 and starts getting very good at F1.0) Secondly, how does the color rendering compare at F1.4? (I am asking since I saw a huge difference between the SEL24F14GM, the Batis 25 mm and the Loxia 25mm) Finally, as odd as it may sound, how do the manual focusing experiences compare at F1.4 between the two? (I have the SEL55F18Z and in MF it is the worst of all I have. I am alwo owning it with the Loxia 25 mm, the SEL85F1.4GM and the Batis 135 mm)
Really no surprises, right Dustin? I recall you really loved the 50 1.4 ZA awhile back, and I share your affection for the lens, though the question whether to sell it and go with the GM comes down to how often you are going to shoot wide open, and whether 50mm is your preferred focal length for doing portraiture instead of, say, 85mm. I do appreciate the GM's closer focusing and soft bokeh wide open, but I am not sure it is worth the $1000 difference to sell the ZA on eBay to spend on the $2000 GM. Thanks for another excellent review.
With really good used 50 mm Planars now available for between 600-700 dollars, I think for most non-professionals, a used Planar is easily the very best value for money 50 mm lens you can buy for the Sony e-mount system.
Nice review. I only wish you would've done some video tests...focus motor noise, breathing, flaring, etc. I've owned the Planar for a few years and frankly don't see a compelling reason to buy the GM. Now, if there were a newer 1.4 that was smaller and lighter than the Planar that'd be a different story, because it's a beast of a lens.
I'm more of a photography first and video distant second kind of reviewer. Neither lens has a lot of focus noise, though the GM is a bit quieter and is more confident in video AF. The GM has less flare. I don't think I saw a significant difference between the two in breathing.
The sony is definitely better in terms of micro contrast & tonality. Its also designed more in line with their high definition sensors & AF. And with better usability in the field. If one needs the fast aperture then the sony is worth the extra if one has neither. The Zeiss 2nd hand can sometimes be found for half the price. The way design is improving a 3rd party lens would probably come up with a smaller less expensive 1.4 lens - also with great optics.
I'm actually surprised we haven't seen a third party 50mm F1.4 or larger from Sigma or a newer one from Samyang (their 50mm F1.4 was before they had really nailed autofocus).
@@DustinAbbottTWI completely agree - perhaps because both have concentrated on a compact series. Am curious to see what lenses Samyang & Sigma bring out next year. Tamron seems to be more zoom focussed
Thanks for your review. What do you use besides the Godox flash to have it on the tripod and on the remote on the camera? And what small flashbox did you use? Thanks for your time!
I still like the Planar better. I get a smoother focus falloff for some reason. I think the 1.2 GM is probably a better lens, especially the AF and the coatings handle CA amazingly, but I prefer the Planar’s character.
Fair enough. The Planar is a much more compelling value option at the current price point. The AF is significantly better on the GM, but not every photographer needs sports ready AF speed.
Hi Dustin, thanks for the great video! I’m looking to supplement my prime collection with a manual lens - having reviewed both would you consider the 65mm apo-lanthar redundant with the 50 GM in terms of rendering and image quality? Is the GM’s microcontrast and CA control good enough that it’s not worth complementing with the Voigtlander?
The prices of the plannar have gone down a lot now, so I was wondering if it's time to buy it. I already have a distagon 35/1.4 and a sonnar 55/1.8 that I want to keep. I can see that if I want another 50mm lens, 1.4 won't get me anywhere. Although I admit having a pair of 35/1.4 distagon and 50/1.4 plannar would be tempting due to the nature of the zeiss lenses. Hard decision.
thansk for the comparison - my G.A.S made me think my ZA 1.4 might not be good enough - but i love the images it makes and now i know there's to few reasons to pay the price difference for less than a stop of light extra - buttons and closer AF distance are nice too have but i can't complain over the AF performace - eye af is fast and reliable! :)
In part about sharpness you set longer exposure for Planar but it looks brither than GM. Maybe the difference is not that big and the exposure should be set the same? I always thought my planar captures very bright frames and I usually set an exposure to -0.3
You are describing something related to your cameras metering, but when I've done side by side comparisons with the Planar (which I own) and other lenses, I've found that the Planar tends to have lower light transmission at equal settings compared with similar lenses.
Dustin I believe the difference between f1.4 and f1.2 is half a stop and not 1/3 based on the charts I have seen. So it is expected that the planar is at least 1/2 stops slower in light transmission. I have the planar by the way and I love it. It is quite sturdy. It fell from my waist down to a carpet floor, the filter broke but the lens works fine. I like the canon 50mm tilt shift even better than the planar but the range of applications are different of course.
That's correct, though it's a little tough because we typically measure aperture in one third rather than one half stops. Changing shutter speed happens in one third stops, for example. Either way, the math favors the GM for having a bit better light transmission.
"Better" is complicated when you are comparing across two systems. The GM does have better AF (noise and speed) and less CA. The Canon has beautiful rendering, but I don't think any better than the GM. I would probably marginally prefer the GM because of improved AF, lighter, and slightly cheaper.
Yes, technically, though most cameras select stops in one-third stops, which means there is only one "notch" between F1.2 and F1.4 though the aperture size difference is slightly larger.
Thank you Dustin for this great comparaison review. This 50gm looks fantastic. How do you place the thrue (not sony zeiss) Zeiss batis 40mm optical performance compare to this two 50mm?
The price of the Sony Zeiss 35 1.4 dropped a lot when the G master version came out. It went from 1.6k to under 1k in a hurry. The price of the 50mm version did not change at all (US). Maybe because the GM is 1.2 and came out at a much higher price point leaving room for the 1.4 to breathe between itself and the 55 zeiss. I lost a lot of money buying the zeiss 35 brand new. I hoped to get the zeiss 50 for the same low price my 35 is selling right now, not happening. :(
Wow, you have a mark from Ukraine, that is interesting, I'm from Kiev Ukraine. Thanks for review, I more preferer all the Zeiss lenses from the color prospective.
1.2 ensures accuracy and sharpness at 1.4. 1.4 ensures accuracy and sharpness at 2.0. It’s really that simple … it’s always been that way in photography.
@@earthlingtheaaron21 yes, I’m sure …. lens manufacturing and computational photography have come a long way since the ‘60s, when I first started “dabbling” in it. “Back in the day”, edge accuracy was all the rage. So in addressing your point, most (all?) of the old rules of thumb can be discarded. But I still believe if you stop-down one setting from maximum aperture, no lens I can think of will degrade in image quality.
There are a few modern lenses that actually are their sharpest (at least in the center) at wide open, but I would say you're rule of thumb is still basically true.
For me it was down to the 50GM and the 135GM, and I ultimately went with the 135 instead and that lens turned out to be magical. But for the moment if I want 50mm I either have to shoot with the 24-70 Sigma or my old 50 1.4 Takumar or Rokkor lenses with no AF. What I wish Sony would do is release a good mid-tier 50 f/1.8 in the vein of the 28 f2, 35 f1.8 and 85 f1.8. The little 50 1.8 nifty fifty is hot garbage, especially on a high megapixel sensor like the RIV/RIII and a1 and has s-l-o-w AF. I also never cared for the Zony 55. It's got purple fringing out the wazoo and the minimum focus distance is atrocious. I know they released the 50 2.5 G not long ago, but it's still a 2.5. Release an updated 50 1.8 with decently quick AF, price it in the $500 range +/- and I'd buy it in a nanosecond.
@@DustinAbbottTWI The heck with it. I watched a ton of reviews and the 50 2.5 started to grow on me, so I ordered one I found for $500. Hopefully the slightly slower aperture won't be too much of an issue on the a7RIV and it'll be a nice upgrade from the 50mm Super-Takumar f/1.4 I use currently. Fingers crossed.
I have the 50 mm 1.2 Sony and I love this lens this is a man’s hand lens I love the aperture ring I live for and breathe and use aperture ring all day long. I like something tangible and mechanical and it’s nice to have an aperture ring that I can always see visually and physically. I never take my hands off if it…. (I always hated those tinni tiny camera dials that feel like their going to break)……The Zeiss 50mm 1.4 is nice but a little bit too fancy for me and the image quality out of it just seems a little bit fuzzy in character compared to the GM lens. I feel like I will scratch the paint on the Zeiss just by looking at it. I had the 55 1.8 at one point but I returned it just because I felt it didn’t really offer anything new or better other than being too small for my hands…but when I got my hands on the 50 mm GM F1.2 it was like night and day love this lens I take it everywhere it is glued to my camera it’s worth every penny..this is a man’s hand lens with all the buttons and dials that I like. I especially like the Aperture ring, focus motor speed and power of this lens.. I feel like the motors on it are well driven and balance electrically and mechanically.. The damping factor on the auto focusing is perfect and as smooth as butter… I don’t really need to manually rack focus anything on it, I trust it, its just that good!!!! and I wouldn’t use it for video…And I don’t want to because this is a stills photography lens, I can definite tell this is where it shines..The weight and feel of it is very balanced and it’s integration with the Sony A7riv camera is very tight and quick compared to the 50 mm F1.4 Zeiss…. Thanks for your review … I’m inspired by all your hard work… Love all your videos …keep it up!!! I can’t wait to see how this lens performs on the new a7iv… I want to buy another 50mm f1.2 just for that camera alone when it comes out.. lol
Hmmm, I'm glad you like your new lens, but I think the shade you are throwing at the Planar is a little over the top. I've owned one for years and never seen a scratch on it.
@@DustinAbbottTWI My apologies, I was actually referring to the problem with ziess planar for Sony choosing to make the focus and Aperture ring out of metal with sharp edges without covering the rings with rubber material… I tend to use the rings a lot on lenses and thats probably my only gripe about planar lens for Sony!!!! And is why I switched to the GM lenses… The 50mm 1.2 in particular is the winner for me in that it is very sharp and usable wide open at F1.2…. Don’t get me wrong.. the zeiss planar 50 is sexier and is still amazing in performance and class; however, the Sony GM 50 1.2 wins my heart when used with Sony A7riv Body….. Cheers!!
@@DustinAbbottTWI In terms of quality/build/autofocus/etc. I realize technically a 35 vs 50 is a field of vision/zoom difference, but in terms of could have only one or carry only one but can move with your feet, which would be the better of the two. kind of like, id say the 85 1.8 is the superior over the 85 1.4 in terms of usability and end result, the 135gm is a absolute gem, but the 70-200 is the better all around pick. the 24gm is almost so good its a no brainer.
Whenever there is a big price difference between two lenses, it takes nuance for different buyers. Not everyone can automatically afford the more expensive lens, and they need to know if they can live with the flaws or shortcomings of the less expensive lens
![“อาร์ต พศุตม์” เกือบเอี่ยวทุกคดีดัง เอ๊ะไว้ก่อน ไม่มีอะไรได้มาง่ายๆ | แฉ 16 ต.ค. 67 [2/3] | GMM25](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/0Gx-0-kUBv8/mqdefault.jpg)
Once again a professional review that leaves nothing out. You are the best photography reviewer on TH-cam. Period.
Thanks a lot, Julian
I had a chance to take the 50mm GM out for a day of shooting to compare it with my 55mm Zeiss, and the biggest practical difference I observed was the close focusing distance. With my 55mm Zeiss, I often feel like I can't get close enough for a detail shot - say a badge of a vehicle, or a small street sign - whereas with the GM I confidently stepped in as close as I liked while having rock solid auto focus. Thanks for the review Dustin!
Having that extra bit of close focus ability does make a difference.
The GM 1.2 is an absolute beast! I liked the Planar but it’s not in the same league for rendering colour and fall off 🙌🏻
The GM is definitely the new king.
Just looking at the colors and contrast I think the GMaster is worth the extra money if you don’t already own the Zeiss.
Thanks Dustin, this was exactly the comparison I was looking for and so nice to see that you had covered it. As always, your reviews are spot on, addressing exactly what we want to know while trying to remain very objective. Your efforts are much appreciated.
Glad you enjoyed it!
For me the 50mm 1.2 has been game changing. I was not even a big 50mm shooter but now that lens just stays on my Sony A1. The photos are just so sharp, the bokeh is gorgeous and it just makes every photo look amazing!! Very well worthwhile IMHO.
You aren't the first person to tell me that. I'm not surprised at this feedback at all!
i have to make the choice between the zeiss almost new for 950 and the sony new for 2200. while i have the feeling that my customers would like the sonys images more i also think that the zeiss would be better for my customers as it shows the zeiss logo. i hope that i will make the right decision
How does the Sony Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 stack up against these 2?
I personally found the 55mm to be a functionally good but overall bland lens. It doesn't really do anything special. Both of these lenses exceed the performance of the 55mm by a good margin, in my opinion, and if I were going to go cheap, I would choose the Samyang AF 45mm F1.8 instead.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I totally agree!
@@DustinAbbottTWI Perfect, thanks for the explanation!
@@DustinAbbottTWI I cant speak for the GM, but in my experience the 55mm is a much better video lens than the Planar. Stickier, faster, quieter auto focus and way less breathing.
I own both, at wider apertures the GM is much much better in terms of rendering and sharpness. I shot with an A7RIV where differences are magnified.
The 55mm can have very busy or downright ugly rendering in some situations and beautiful in others. Wide open its a little soft and has quite a bit of CA. However stopped down this lens is plenty sharp and mine now is used for street work.
Dustin, I found this video invaluable and I am at the writing awaiting delivery of my Sony Zeiss 35mm f1.4 lens. I am keen amateur photo photographer, albeit with 40 years experience and therefore, I am confident that I shall be happy with my new lens. I have owned a number of Sony GM lenses and I found the focus breathing extremely irritating. I also think that for someone like me, a keen hobbyist, I really don’t need the extra few advantages offered by the GM lens. Thank you for the excellent advice. All the best. Alun
Fascinating. The most striking thing to me was how with both lenses wide open, the Zeiss gave that tiny bit of greenish-blue tint to the model’s skin tone, reminding me of my least favorite thing about the otherwise excellent Sony/Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 compact prime. If I’m going to carry a lens as big and heavy as either of these (as opposed to the excellent little 55mm) you bet I’m going to shoot it wide open. So, the new GM design would be worth the trade-in and additional cost to me.
Fair enough.
Thanks! That 50 GM is one of the best lenses Ive used on any system, Leica included. One of the sharpest as well. Dustin, did you see how its sharpness compares to the 135 GM? Id be interested to see.
It's not as absolutely sharp as the 135GM, but is a near perfect blend of sharpness and bokeh, though.
I have both, I rarely use my 135 gm anymore :(
Thanks for a good comparison. Have you decided wether or not to upgrade to the GM?
I'm still conflicted. I do like the GM better, but I don't dislike the Planar at all. By the time I sell the Planar and buy the GM, I estimate I'll be roughly $700 out of pocket, and I'm not sure it's worth it.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I think the Planar gives really pleasing picture quality, I like mine a lot. But GMs F1.2 and top AF is not a bad. I really enjoy the AF of the GM lenses, it makes them so usable in all sorts of scenarios.
@@DustinAbbottTWI it’s definitely worth it… I returned my Ziess lens because I though I would wear it out and scratch it to death.. So kept it in my bag in a micro fiber cloth with padding around it… lol .. I I swear I still chipped the side of it just by looking at… I returned it before resale value dropped like a new car on a used car sales lot… And I got the Sony 50mm F1.2… And when I got my hands on that I felt like I didn’t pay enough.. Hurry and purchase before people find out and prices go up… This lens is a beast you will not regret the purchase… Trust me!!!
Awesome comparison Dustin. I do appreciate all that you do for the photography community!
This was really informative. I originally upgraded to the Planar from the 55mm 1.8 because of your videos on it. It was totally worth it for me.
This however does not seem to be worth it.
Thanks
I think that's probably true for most people. It's hard to argue the roughly $700 you would pay between selling and buying the GM. That's pretty much where I'm at.
I've wanted the 1.2 GM for a while but I found the Zeiss used but in excellent condition for $850. I think with that huge of a price difference I might just go with it.
That's a hard price to ignore.
hi ive wanted the 1.2 GM also but i found zeiss 50 1.4 in market place 750 Cad and 1600Cad in 50 1.2 GM, is it worth if ill just go with zeiss?
As always Dustin, great comparison review. I purchased the planar a couple of years ago on the strength of your review. I also own an EOS R w/the Canon RF 50 F/1.2. Without a doubt to my eyes the Canon lens outclasses the Planar in every way - even on an inferior EOS R vs Sony A7RIV. I’ve been contemplating selling my both the Planar 50 and the Canon kit and buying the Sony GM 50, but man do I love that Canon RF. Would love your opinion on Canon RF 50 1.2 vs the Sony 50 gm. Btw like you I had previously been a Canon shooter for over 30 years…but am now deep into the Sony ecosystem…but still love the Canon colors and can’t seem to fully let go.
I reviewed the RF 50 before the EOS R5 was out, so it's a little hard to draw comparisons when I tested the GM on a camera with the extra 20MP. I liked the RF lens a lot, but I think I'd take the GM myself at the end of the day.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I just shot a wedding on New Year’s Eve, and as I review the files created with the gm 50; I am ready to let go of myCanon RF 50, along with the rest of my small Canon kit. The images from the gm 50 are simply stunning. I feel like I cheated lol!
Thank you for doing this comparison! It certainly seems that since I don't have any AF 50mm at this time that the 50mm 1.2 would be the best choice (if I can get a hold of one). I have been using an old Canon FD 55mm 1.2 (chrome version) which is a great classic lens. I have the Sony A73 and oddly enough only used classic lenses with it until I could start purchasing AF lenses. Because I have several nifty 50's, my first AF lens was the Batis 85mm 1.8. I followed that up with the G Master 24mm. I love both of the lenses and now know I really need a 50mm AF. Because I really love the Batis 85mm, I was really looking to see what you though about the 50mm 1.2. I knew from your review of the Zeiss 50mm 1.4 that the 50mm 1.2 would really have to be a performer for you to say it is the better lens. Thank you again for there review!
Sounds like you are a great candidate for this lens.
Here in the UK, since the GM released the Planar can be purchased used for around £800. That said, I still sold mine for the GM. You only really buy this lens to use wide open , and at that it is unbeatable, combined with super fast focus - the premium is worth it.
I wouldn't be surprised to see used prices on the Planar driven down somewhat.
how about the focus speed?
Thank you for the review, I also owned the Zeiss for few years now and I feel like it has more character than the GM. Photo wise
Fair enough!
That was a stellar comparison. It answers pretty much any question we might have.
I'm glad to hear that, as that was my goal.
How do contrast and resolution of the SEL50F1.2GM and the SEL50F14Z compare at the horizontal lateral edges (not the corners) at F1.4? (Yes, if I carry a wide open lens, it got to be good wide open. My SEL85F14GM is okay at F1.4 and starts getting very good at F1.0) Secondly, how does the color rendering compare at F1.4? (I am asking since I saw a huge difference between the SEL24F14GM, the Batis 25 mm and the Loxia 25mm) Finally, as odd as it may sound, how do the manual focusing experiences compare at F1.4 between the two? (I have the SEL55F18Z and in MF it is the worst of all I have. I am alwo owning it with the Loxia 25 mm, the SEL85F1.4GM and the Batis 135 mm)
Really no surprises, right Dustin? I recall you really loved the 50 1.4 ZA awhile back, and I share your affection for the lens, though the question whether to sell it and go with the GM comes down to how often you are going to shoot wide open, and whether 50mm is your preferred focal length for doing portraiture instead of, say, 85mm. I do appreciate the GM's closer focusing and soft bokeh wide open, but I am not sure it is worth the $1000 difference to sell the ZA on eBay to spend on the $2000 GM. Thanks for another excellent review.
That's a perfectly reasonable summation.
With really good used 50 mm Planars now available for between 600-700 dollars, I think for most non-professionals, a used Planar is easily the very best value for money 50 mm lens you can buy for the Sony e-mount system.
That's fair.
And this is exactly what I just did. Mint copy for $670
Nice review. I only wish you would've done some video tests...focus motor noise, breathing, flaring, etc. I've owned the Planar for a few years and frankly don't see a compelling reason to buy the GM. Now, if there were a newer 1.4 that was smaller and lighter than the Planar that'd be a different story, because it's a beast of a lens.
I'm more of a photography first and video distant second kind of reviewer. Neither lens has a lot of focus noise, though the GM is a bit quieter and is more confident in video AF. The GM has less flare. I don't think I saw a significant difference between the two in breathing.
This was exactly what i needed to go for 50.4z Thanks a lot 😄😄
Also, aesthetic, yes yes yes!!
Glad to help out.
Hi Dustin, does the zeiss 50mm 1.4 planar have the same elements as the zeiss milvus 50mm 1.4, or do they have different optics?
They are different optical formulas.
@@DustinAbbottTWIok thank you
YES, been waiting for this. Great review.
Glad you liked it!
Dustin is the best reviewer on YT
That’s very kind
Thanks I’m going to keep the 1.4, mostly because I’m waiting for them to update the 85gm to 1.2
Fair enough.
Another great review helping me to make an informed decision on a purchase. Thank you.
Glad I could help!
The sony is definitely better in terms of micro contrast & tonality. Its also designed more in line with their high definition sensors & AF. And with better usability in the field. If one needs the fast aperture then the sony is worth the extra if one has neither. The Zeiss 2nd hand can sometimes be found for half the price. The way design is improving a 3rd party lens would probably come up with a smaller less expensive 1.4 lens - also with great optics.
I'm actually surprised we haven't seen a third party 50mm F1.4 or larger from Sigma or a newer one from Samyang (their 50mm F1.4 was before they had really nailed autofocus).
@@DustinAbbottTWI completely agree - perhaps because both have concentrated on a compact series. Am curious to see what lenses Samyang & Sigma bring out next year. Tamron seems to be more zoom focussed
Ended up finding the Zeiss Planar for $650 now that the GM 1.2 and 1.4 have driven down prices. I think at that price point it’s hard to ignore.
Definitely. It's optically lovely
Thanks for your review. What do you use besides the Godox flash to have it on the tripod and on the remote on the camera? And what small flashbox did you use? Thanks for your time!
Hi there, I used this: th-cam.com/video/LOyj27eQojI/w-d-xo.html
I still like the Planar better. I get a smoother focus falloff for some reason. I think the 1.2 GM is probably a better lens, especially the AF and the coatings handle CA amazingly, but I prefer the Planar’s character.
Fair enough. The Planar is a much more compelling value option at the current price point. The AF is significantly better on the GM, but not every photographer needs sports ready AF speed.
Hi Dustin, thanks for the great video! I’m looking to supplement my prime collection with a manual lens - having reviewed both would you consider the 65mm apo-lanthar redundant with the 50 GM in terms of rendering and image quality? Is the GM’s microcontrast and CA control good enough that it’s not worth complementing with the Voigtlander?
There definitely isn’t a huge amount of focal length separation there. The Voight 110mm might work better
The prices of the plannar have gone down a lot now, so I was wondering if it's time to buy it. I already have a distagon 35/1.4 and a sonnar 55/1.8 that I want to keep. I can see that if I want another 50mm lens, 1.4 won't get me anywhere. Although I admit having a pair of 35/1.4 distagon and 50/1.4 plannar would be tempting due to the nature of the zeiss lenses. Hard decision.
It remains a lot of lens, particularly at that lower price point.
thansk for the comparison - my G.A.S made me think my ZA 1.4 might not be good enough - but i love the images it makes and now i know there's to few reasons to pay the price difference for less than a stop of light extra - buttons and closer AF distance are nice too have but i can't complain over the AF performace - eye af is fast and reliable! :)
It's tough when something new comes out, though the Planar remains a very nice lens.
i think the focus of 50za is still quick on 3rd generation cameras like r3
In part about sharpness you set longer exposure for Planar but it looks brither than GM. Maybe the difference is not that big and the exposure should be set the same? I always thought my planar captures very bright frames and I usually set an exposure to -0.3
You are describing something related to your cameras metering, but when I've done side by side comparisons with the Planar (which I own) and other lenses, I've found that the Planar tends to have lower light transmission at equal settings compared with similar lenses.
Been watching this channel for probably a decade
That makes you pretty unique, then!
Very well done. Thank you. This was super helpful.
You're welcome.
Dustin. Are you going to make video comparing new Sony 50mm f1.4 GM with Planar and GM f1.2 ? It would be awesome to watch it 🙂
I've got one comparing the new Sigma with the 50mm F1.4 GM. I will refer to both other lenses in my actual review.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Great. I've been using Planar for a few years but I'm thinking of switching to GM ;-)
I actually prefer the look and feel of the G master in every regard.
Fair enough. It's a matter of taste, anyway.
Dustin I believe the difference between f1.4 and f1.2 is half a stop and not 1/3 based on the charts I have seen. So it is expected that the planar is at least 1/2 stops slower in light transmission. I have the planar by the way and I love it. It is quite sturdy. It fell from my waist down to a carpet floor, the filter broke but the lens works fine. I like the canon 50mm tilt shift even better than the planar but the range of applications are different of course.
That's correct, though it's a little tough because we typically measure aperture in one third rather than one half stops. Changing shutter speed happens in one third stops, for example. Either way, the math favors the GM for having a bit better light transmission.
This is the one many people like me have been waiting for 😃
Hope it helps out!
Thanks for this comparison
My pleasure.
Is it better than the canon rf?
"Better" is complicated when you are comparing across two systems. The GM does have better AF (noise and speed) and less CA. The Canon has beautiful rendering, but I don't think any better than the GM. I would probably marginally prefer the GM because of improved AF, lighter, and slightly cheaper.
Wait.... is F1.2 1/3 stops faster than F1.4? I thought is it is a full half stop?
Yes, technically, though most cameras select stops in one-third stops, which means there is only one "notch" between F1.2 and F1.4 though the aperture size difference is slightly larger.
You are such a great "company". You should stream. :) Thanks for the comparison.
LOL - thanks!
Thank you Dustin for this great comparaison review.
This 50gm looks fantastic.
How do you place the thrue (not sony zeiss) Zeiss batis 40mm optical performance compare to this two 50mm?
The Batis has nice color rendition and good sharpness, but it isn't in the class of either of these lenses in overall sharpness and rendering.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you Dustin for your feedback, you know very well all those lenses so your answer is important to me.
The price of the Sony Zeiss 35 1.4 dropped a lot when the G master version came out. It went from 1.6k to under 1k in a hurry. The price of the 50mm version did not change at all (US). Maybe because the GM is 1.2 and came out at a much higher price point leaving room for the 1.4 to breathe between itself and the 55 zeiss. I lost a lot of money buying the zeiss 35 brand new. I hoped to get the zeiss 50 for the same low price my 35 is selling right now, not happening. :(
It's also because the 50mm is a much more competent lens than the 35mm, which had some issues.
@@DustinAbbottTWI yeah, good point. It is not a pixel peeper lens for sure. It takes fantastic images though.
Excellent video 👍🏽👍🏽👍🏽
Thank you 👍
Well I much prefer the look of the gm lenses. Design is purely subjective.
Dusstin your videos are fantastic
Thank you!
OMG Die Gute alte Deutsche Mark! Ich vermisse sie so sehr haha!
I hear from many Germans that they miss these Deutsche Marks.
As of 2023 trhe Ziess planar is priced at $999.99. This makes the Ziess even more attractive.
It definitely does.
The biggest reason to hold on to the Planar is to hold on to my wife.
LOL - fair enough.
Lol
Wow, you have a mark from Ukraine, that is interesting, I'm from Kiev Ukraine. Thanks for review, I more preferer all the Zeiss lenses from the color prospective.
Fair enough!
1.2 ensures accuracy and sharpness at 1.4. 1.4 ensures accuracy and sharpness at 2.0. It’s really that simple … it’s always been that way in photography.
Gm 1.2 is sharp and accurate at 1.2. I know because I own it.
@@earthlingtheaaron21 yes, I’m sure …. lens manufacturing and computational photography have come a long way since the ‘60s, when I first started “dabbling” in it. “Back in the day”, edge accuracy was all the rage.
So in addressing your point, most (all?) of the old rules of thumb can be discarded. But I still believe if you stop-down one setting from maximum aperture, no lens I can think of will degrade in image quality.
There are a few modern lenses that actually are their sharpest (at least in the center) at wide open, but I would say you're rule of thumb is still basically true.
Trust me this lens starts right out of the gate… it’s one of a kind!!!
For me it was down to the 50GM and the 135GM, and I ultimately went with the 135 instead and that lens turned out to be magical. But for the moment if I want 50mm I either have to shoot with the 24-70 Sigma or my old 50 1.4 Takumar or Rokkor lenses with no AF. What I wish Sony would do is release a good mid-tier 50 f/1.8 in the vein of the 28 f2, 35 f1.8 and 85 f1.8. The little 50 1.8 nifty fifty is hot garbage, especially on a high megapixel sensor like the RIV/RIII and a1 and has s-l-o-w AF. I also never cared for the Zony 55. It's got purple fringing out the wazoo and the minimum focus distance is atrocious. I know they released the 50 2.5 G not long ago, but it's still a 2.5. Release an updated 50 1.8 with decently quick AF, price it in the $500 range +/- and I'd buy it in a nanosecond.
That's fair. I know Viltrox has a 50mm F1.8 coming, but I haven't had a chance to test it yet.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Ooo now that may be worth a look!
@@DustinAbbottTWI The heck with it. I watched a ton of reviews and the 50 2.5 started to grow on me, so I ordered one I found for $500. Hopefully the slightly slower aperture won't be too much of an issue on the a7RIV and it'll be a nice upgrade from the 50mm Super-Takumar f/1.4 I use currently. Fingers crossed.
I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. It's not a "sexy choice", but it is a very good lens.
Nice job Bro
Tahnks!
Thanks alot
Happy to help
I prefer Sony Zeiss 😊
Fortunately it seems like that lens will continue to be sold for now.
@@DustinAbbottTWI ❤️
The Planar is great and the GM is slightly better. I will never get rid of my Planar.
Fair enough. I haven't sold mine yet, either.
That wallet advert 😂 wtf!
Made you pay attention ;)
Hello, great Chanel unfortunately, there is a glitch on TH-cam I did subscribe to your channel several times and it somehow, gets unsubscribed itself.
That's very strange. Not very encouraging for someone like me trying to build an audience!
@@DustinAbbottTWI yep I just one more time subscribed again in total I did about 6 times and I use google chrome.
Ngl, if I got the Planar bokah performance out of a cheap aliexpress chinese manual lens, I'd say I got scammed and it's in fact an f/2.
I have the 50 mm 1.2 Sony and I love this lens this is a man’s hand lens I love the aperture ring I live for and breathe and use aperture ring all day long. I like something tangible and mechanical and it’s nice to have an aperture ring that I can always see visually and physically. I never take my hands off if it…. (I always hated those tinni tiny camera dials that feel like their going to break)……The Zeiss 50mm 1.4 is nice but a little bit too fancy for me and the image quality out of it just seems a little bit fuzzy in character compared to the GM lens. I feel like I will scratch the paint on the Zeiss just by looking at it. I had the 55 1.8 at one point but I returned it just because I felt it didn’t really offer anything new or better other than being too small for my hands…but when I got my hands on the 50 mm GM F1.2 it was like night and day love this lens I take it everywhere it is glued to my camera it’s worth every penny..this is a man’s hand lens with all the buttons and dials that I like. I especially like the Aperture ring, focus motor speed and power of this lens.. I feel like the motors on it are well driven and balance electrically and mechanically.. The damping factor on the auto focusing is perfect and as smooth as butter… I don’t really need to manually rack focus anything on it, I trust it, its just that good!!!! and I wouldn’t use it for video…And I don’t want to because this is a stills photography lens, I can definite tell this is where it shines..The weight and feel of it is very balanced and it’s integration with the Sony A7riv camera is very tight and quick compared to the 50 mm F1.4 Zeiss….
Thanks for your review … I’m inspired by all your hard work… Love all your videos …keep it up!!!
I can’t wait to see how this lens performs on the new a7iv… I want to buy another 50mm f1.2 just for that camera alone when it comes out.. lol
Hmmm, I'm glad you like your new lens, but I think the shade you are throwing at the Planar is a little over the top. I've owned one for years and never seen a scratch on it.
@@DustinAbbottTWI My apologies, I was actually referring to the problem with ziess planar for Sony choosing to make the focus and Aperture ring out of metal with sharp edges without covering the rings with rubber material… I tend to use the rings a lot on lenses and thats probably my only gripe about planar lens for Sony!!!! And is why I switched to the GM lenses… The 50mm 1.2 in particular is the winner for me in that it is very sharp and usable wide open at F1.2…. Don’t get me wrong.. the zeiss planar 50 is sexier and is still amazing in performance and class; however, the Sony GM 50 1.2 wins my heart when used with Sony A7riv Body….. Cheers!!
Perhaps 50 gm VS 35 gm comparison?
🤦♂️
In what way? A 35mm is not a 50mm lens. I'm curious what angle you are suggesting.
@@DustinAbbottTWI In terms of quality/build/autofocus/etc. I realize technically a 35 vs 50 is a field of vision/zoom difference, but in terms of could have only one or carry only one but can move with your feet, which would be the better of the two.
kind of like, id say the 85 1.8 is the superior over the 85 1.4 in terms of usability and end result, the 135gm is a absolute gem, but the 70-200 is the better all around pick. the 24gm is almost so good its a no brainer.
❤
Nobody Needs Sony 50mm F1.2 GM 📷
That's probably true...though you could make that identical argument for just about every camera lens.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Haha!!!
Dustin, do you ever get that nagging feeling that your model is not so keen on being your model?!
She actually loves it. She loves having the images for Instagram
7:50 the video could have been 1 minute long. Worse focus so easy choice.
Whenever there is a big price difference between two lenses, it takes nuance for different buyers. Not everyone can automatically afford the more expensive lens, and they need to know if they can live with the flaws or shortcomings of the less expensive lens