Sony continues to crank out new lenses, and the release this summer of the new Zeiss branded FE 50mm f/1.4 ZA Planar T* came as a bit of a shock, considering there is already a Zeiss branded normal prime that is widely considered to be one of the best autofocus normal lenses ever made, but Sony and Zeiss think they’ve made the ultimate normal prime with this new lens. The existing FE 55mm f/1.8 is a lens I’ve owned for a while now, and it has never let me down. But can this new 50mm best its slower (but more compact) brother? Let’s find out.
The two lenses share the same Zeiss badge, and have a similar focal length, but physically they are two very different beasts. While both lenses feature a very robust all metal construction, the 55mm f/1.8 is a compact lens with a slim barrel and light weight. The 50mm f/1.4, on the other hand, is a beast of a lens: it’s longer, fatter and nearly three times heavier, and gains the aperture ring also present on the FE 35mm f/1.4 and the 85mm GM.
FE 55mm f/1.8 Sonnar
FE 50mm f/1.4 Planar
As you can see from above, that 2/3 stop of extra aperture comes at a hefty size and weight penalty, though there are two major considerations not accounted for in the size, weight and maximum aperture. The first concerns that faster aperture, and comes in two parts. One benefit of a faster aperture is the ability to blur the background more, providing more subject separation. However, the slightly longer focal length actually helps the 55mm f/1.8 a bit here, making the difference in background blur closer to a 1/3 stop advantage for the 50mm f/1.4 rather than a 2/3 stop that would be visible if they were the same focal length.
Also, I found during my testing that the 50mm f/1.4 Planar has fairly low light transmission, to the tune of nearly a half stop in light transmission at the same aperture. As such, the 50mm f/1.4 wide open passes very nearly the same amount of light as the 55mm f/1.8 does at f/1.8.
The second factor doesn’t consider the quality of the optics. While the FE 55mm f/1.8 is one of the finest normal lenses I’ve had the pleasure to use, but Sony has promoted the 50mm f/1.4 as something truly exceptional. Poor light transmission and large size aside: it may be very well worth it if the 50mm f/1.4 shows us something special optically. With that in mind, let’s get to the test:
I set up my typical test setup with a flat book to evaluate sharpness and a crystal decanter in the background, plus a crystal glass in the foreground to evaluate foreground and background bokeh. All shots were taken on a sturdy tripod with 2 second self timer to ensure maximum sharpness. I moved slightly closer for the FE 55mm shot to ensure the same framing. As I mentioned earlier, the FE 50mm f/1.4 has much lower light transmission, so while all shots were taken at the same shutter speed and aperture (aside from f/1.4), the FE 50mm f/1.4 shots had to be boosted by 0.45 stops in Lightroom to ensure the same brightness. The full scene is below (this is the FE 50mm f/1.4 at f/1.4):
First, I’m testing sharpness. Click on the image to open it, and be sure to enlarge to full size to view 100% crops taken from the center and corner from each lens from maximum aperture to f/8.
Well, that optical prowess certainly seems to be showing for the FE 50mm f/1.4. The 55mm f/1.8 is certainly very good: excellent even for a fast normal, but the 50mm f/1.4 is simply stunning here.
Straight from f/1.4, the 50mm f/1.4 shows exceptional sharpness in the center and even very good to excellent sharpness in the far corner: a truly remarkable result for an f/1.4 normal prime. The FE 55mm f/1.8 does a very good job in the center, but can’t match the f/1.4, and in the corner it’s no contest.
By f/2.8, the 55mm has gained quite a lot in corner sharpness, bringing results there to very good territory and the center is shining as well, but as sharp as the 55mm is, the 50mm is just absolutely razor-sharp throughout. At smaller apertures, there’s very little difference between them, save for vignetting, where the 55mm puts in a better performance all around, but one thing is certain: the 50mm f/1.4 is simply blisteringly sharp at all apertures, and is by far the sharpest 50mm lens I’ve ever used at f/1.4.
Fast lenses means background blur, and so I evaluated both foreground and background blur from these two great lenses. Click below to open the image in a new window and enlarge.
This comparison is far, far closer. Both lenses put in very good performances. As you can see, at the same aperture, the 55mm shows a bit more blur, but the 50mm f/1.4 can produce more wide open, as you’d expect. Looking at the quality of the blur, both lenses are quite good, though neither is perfect. They both produce quite creamy blur, with perhaps a slight edge to the 50mm f/1.4, and both have slight greenish rings around specular highlights that can crop up from time to time, though the 50mm controls this fringing slightly better.
In all, one thing is clear: the 50mm f/1.4 is an optical powerhouse. It’s exceptionally sharp while maintaining very good bokeh. Sony and Zeiss have done something truly special, managing to best their already outstanding 55mm f/1.8. That said, the question of which you should buy is much harder to answer. The 50mm f/1.4 is the choice for uncompromising optical quality, but the much smaller size and lower weight, combined with very similar light transmission at the widest apertures makes the 55mm f/1.8 still an outstanding choice for a lot of shooters. Whichever you choose, you’ll gain a great lens.
7 thoughts on “Zeiss FE 50mm f/1.4 Planar vs. Zeiss FE 55mm f/1.8 Sonnar”
I just has a gander at this review… the photos really said it all so well. The 50mm F1.4 Planar is amazing looking… it is too bad that it weighs so much more.
I have read on other websites (including Roger Cicala’s Lens Rentals blog) that earlier Sony FE lenses have suffered from inconsistent quality (lots of variation between individual lenses of the same type and model).
If I recall correctly, lenses such as the 50mm F1.4 are better in the regard (I believe Mr. C and company did a teardown of both lenses and concluded that Sony’s designs have evolved–and their reliability has improved–in response to field experience and critiques from the likes of Lens Rentals).
Er, what I meant to say was that the p-h-o-t-o-s taken with the 50mm F1.4 were amazing looking. Sorry about that.
I should also add that I meant to say that “I just had [not “has”] a gander at…” Sorry about that.
I had problem with my Laptop WiFi adapter and didn’t want to repair. So I searched for USB WiFi adapter with average price and good performance and found Tenda W311M on Amazon. I have been using this small piece of digital device since last 2 months and got stunned with it’s performance. It even captures the mobile hotspot on 2G with quality speed. Guys its the perfect wireless USB adapter for this price range.
This is a really cool printer. I did a fair bit of research prior to purchasing this. The reasons why I bought this are: 1. Excellent bang for the buck. This is highly affordable both in terms of running costs (price of cartridges) and upfront cost (price of printer) and works well for low volumes of printing. 2. Great in terms of features. Wireless, photo printing (not the high end variety), ePrint features, scanner (with send to identified computer on the network feature). 3. Convenient size and easy to setup. Was a complete breeze to get it up and running. It can also be located anywhere within the home because of the wireless feature. You needn’t have it right next to the comp/ router. There isn’t anything I don’t like about it yet. But that said, these are still early days. It replaces a 9 year old Canon Pixma printer for me where the cartridges are prohibitively expensive. The price difference for 3 cartridge replacements (black and color) covers the new printer price. So replacement for me was a no-brainer. However, if you are a photo buff and print a lot of your stuff, this isn’t your kinda thing. Then you need to look at serious photo printers in a totally different price range.
Well, I´m getting in Sony world (using Nikon) with the E-Mount.
The 55mm 1.8 apear to be the fair buy, but the problem is the very very weak construction over LEM motor (see Roger Ciccala at Lens Rentans), so, not even near of my pretentions.
After a lot of research, I read about some units Planar 50mm 1.4 have a fog problem, so is a consideration the serial number on the lens.
Sony haven´t a competent (in terms of no so big/ no so expensive / relatively durable / relatively fast af / almost good enought optically) fifty lens.
Then you may guess, the Sony 50 1.8 wich is very plastic and very very slow autofocusing,
The Macro Sony 50 f2.8 wich no suitable as fast aperture normal lens (and of course is very slow focusing too).
The Samyang 50 1.4 AF, wich is so big as the very big Sony Planar 50 1.4 and optically is very near of Sony 50mm f1.8 (nothing stellar), the Samyang of course is noisier at autofocus (not situable for video), and some people says that is not getting well with the flash system (reverse ingenering of a third manufacturer).
Then you have tons of very well made lenses, very good optical desings in manual focusing lenses, nothing wrong with that… is not for me with faster lenses.
After all (and my bad inglish), without options, I bought the Planar 1.4, correct serial for non issues with fog and it´s built like a tank, nice de-click suich for video and optically wonderful. Very nice manual aperture ring, would be nice to see in all Sony lenses.
Is just only one cons… is not the size, is the weigth.