Sum-up
The Sony FE 50mm f2.5 G is a covenant standard mature lens system that aims for portability merely also delivers along quality, even mounted on modern high-res bodies with the aperture wide-open. Details are sharp across the fles whether shooting closeups, portraits Beaver State landscape views, and the superior out-of-the-logic gate proves it's very practical to shoot at the maximum aperture. Focusing is quick, precise and tranquillize, and it's impressive to chance a focus keep button, declickable aperture and weather-waterproofing all crammed into such a small barrel. My only if complaints are focus breathing (which leave largely only bother some videographers) and background rendering that's inevitably busier and less velvety than higher-end models. Overall the Sony Atomic number 26 50 2.5 G stands call at a packed market of common primes by packing respectable timbre and decent features into a succinct barrel at a tempting mid-range price. Information technology out-performs budget 50s and is sufficiently good to parting the more expensive models to perfectionists and bokeh fiends. A solid general-purport prime for anyone who values portability without yielding quality.
Buy information technology now!
Check prices on the Sony FE 50mm f2.5 G at B&H, Adorama, WEX, or Calumet.de. Alternatively get yourself a copy of my In Camera book or treat Maine to a coffee! Thanks!
Sony FE 50mm f2.5 G review -
- Cursive aside
Presentation
The Sony FE 50mm f2.5 G is a compact received prime electron lens for awash-frame e-setting mirrorless cameras. Announced in March 2021 and costing $599, it delivers unprocessed-looking standardised coverage that's nonpareil for general-purpose use. Long enough for simple portraits and small group shots, but short enough for any natural and urban views, and a practical option for grabbing inside information around townspeople. Every bit one of the most common point lengths you cognise what to expect.
Interim the f2.5 aperture may be dimmer than just about rival 50s, merely can nonetheless deliver a fair degree of blurring on full-frame bodies, piece more importantly allowing a very compact and Inner Light design. In my telecasting reexamine under I'll show you everything you need to know, simply if you prefer a backhand interlingual rendition, hold bac scrolling for the highlights!
Above: The 50 2.5 was launched alongside a 24mm f2.8 and 40mm f2.5 as part of a clayey triplet. Every last three share the same external styling and dimensions, not to mention the same $599 price, and I've made reviews of each three. Which is your favourite? Personally tongued I'm delighted Sony has made some newfangled small lenses. It launched the pregnant-frame Alpha mirrorless organization with a compact 55 1.8 and 35 2.8 that really showcased the portability, then again turned its focus to high-performing but inevitably larger lenses. While I love the prize of the G Master series and appreciate some are small and light for their grade, I feeling Sony's compact bodies deserve more small options for times when portability or free will is nearly important.
Higher up: Third parties saw the opportunity and ran with it, most notably Sigma which forthwith has four compact primes available in the e-put on as part with of its Contemporary I series. Here's the Sigma 24, 35 and 45 models, with a 65 completing the set, and coincidentally the first trey all cost roughly the same as the new Sonys.
With soh many 50s available in the e-mount, from the budget 1.8 to the foreign 1.2 launched just one week sooner, it's horny to opt models to compare with the New 50 2.5. So I've distinct to go with a model that's nighest in size, weight and price, and even middling shut in historic period, albeit with a slimly shorter point length: the Sigma 45mm f2.8 DG DN, although I'm also going to interject some bonus comparisons against the Sony 40 2.5 likewise as the 50 1.2 for fun as I proved whol of them at the same time. In point of fact if you watch my reviews of those lenses, the results are all in real time comparable the ones I'm showing here.
Above: Before anything else, let's compare the coverage, starting with the Sony 50 2.5.
In a higher place: Now here's the Sigma 45 2.8 which is obviously a little wider only offer a suchlike proposition.
Supra: You power also be interested in the Sony 40 2.5 which is a little wider still, bringing a fresh perspective to a general-intent lens. We'atomic number 75 certainly not short of options.
At 68x45mm and weighing 174g, the Sony 50 2.5 can't personify described every bit a pancake lens, but stiff comfortably shorter than the old 50 1.8. Alongside, Sigma's 45 2.8 is fractionally narrower and yearner, and a trifle heavier at 215g, only you wouldn't pick out one o'er the other on size or weight as they essentially become undistinguishable once mounted along a camera.
Above: They do have rather different controls though. The Sony 50 2.5 has a tactile but very narrow aperture ring with a fast focusing ring positioned ethical alongside. Impressively Sony's too managed to squeeze in a bitty customisable direction hold button also as the chance to declick the aperture ring with a switch, features both missing from the Sigma not to mention most small lenses. The filter thread measures 49mm.
Above: Meanwhile the Sigma 45 2.8 positions its aperture ring further back out with wider knurling on either pull of the f-numbers. The hand-operated focusing anulus is similarly-damped to the Sony genus Lens, but again the Sigma lacks the rive hold button and Delaware-clickable options. It's less-faced, but less incommodious too. The Sigma takes big 55mm filters.
Above: Both lenses are described as being dust and splash-impervious with subtle rubber grommets at their mounts, although Sigma's sealing doesn't extend to the unanimous barrel.
Above: Both lenses are equipped very opposite hoods. For the 50 and 40 2.5, Sony's opted for a design that slopes inwards and can equal used with the cap on top without reach inside.
Supra: Here's the Sony cowling.
Above: While Sigma's is a more tralatitious cylinder that's clearly much more substantial. Some proved effective, just while Sony's occupies much less space, I personally prefer the look of the Sigma.
In terms of focusing in Solitary AFS modal value on the Alpha 1, the 50mm f2.5 G was blue-belly, silent and confident. The 40 2.5 launched alongside is essentially the same here. Switching to the Sigma 45 2.8, again on the Alpha 1 at the supreme aperture and you'll remark it's still jolly quick, just in that respect's a tiny wobble at the end of each focus-pull to confirm. I've detected this with Sigma lenses on Sony bodies before and it goes away in Continuous AFC mode, but in single AF there's a minor contrast hunt. Information technology doesn't have any impact on Day-to-day use though.
Switching to All-encompassing area and Unremitting AFC with hominid eye detective work enabled, the Explorative 1 drives the 50mm f2.5 G very confidently. The 50 focal distance may be shorter than a typical portrait lens but nonetheless works well for single or small group shots OR presenting to camera. Countenance's see how it measures up in a portrait test.
Preceding: Starting with the Sony 50 2.5 with its aperture unfastened, where it's practicable to accomplish a small amount of blurring in the background.
Above: Taking a closer look at the Sony portrayal shows pin-sharp details on my eyeball as driven by the Alpha 1's eye-sleuthing, and across duple portraiture tests every single eye was every bit sharp. Overall the Lens proved to be very sudden happening subject details even when connected with an unforgiveably high resolution consistency.
To a higher place: Moving crabwise for a look at the rendering shows a fair degree of subject legal separation and while it's obviously non as significant as faster lenses, the effect can still be attractive. Ilk the 40 2.5, the edges to bokeh blobs are more outlined than I'd like simply the slightly longer focal length makes the artefacts less apparent.
Preceding: Now for comparing, here's the Sony 40 2.5 from the same put on which obviously delivers a wider branch of knowledg-of-view.
Preceding: Taking a closer look shows some lenses can capture really sharp inside information, although the 40's shorter focal length means smaller bokeh blobs resulting in a slightly busier background.
Above: Forthwith for the Sigma 45 2.8 at f2.8 and again from the unchanged distance. The insurance coverage is more or less inbetween the Sony 40 and 50 atomic number 3 you'd expect, but I noticed a frown hit order using eye espial than with the Sony lenses. I withal got plenty of focused images, but not the 100% hit-rate of the Sony lenses.
Above: With both portraits side by side, you'll card my eye happening the Sony happening the leftover is visibly crisper than the Sigma on the right. It's not that the Sigma is bad or poorly focused, and viewed in isolation I'd be happy with it, it's just that the Sony 50 is sharper.
Above: That said, when you examine the blurred areas, the Sigma is visibly smoother with less-defined edges and a less busy-superficial event overall. Bokeh style is a rattling in the flesh thing though and some prefer one over another. So which genus Lens did you prefer for the portrayal test?
Above: Just before stimulating on, one last comparison strictly for fun. Then here's the flagship 50 1.2 G Master at f1.2 as I tested them all at the same meter. You may be wondering what you get away disbursement roughly tercet and a half times Thomas More and the answer is non just a much shallower depth-of-field, but sharper details and smoother interlingual rendition too.
Above: Obviously the 50 1.2 is in a antithetical class not just in price and quality but likewise size and free weight, just since I had a comparable with envision I thought it would make up merriment to see.
Above: Next for the rendering of bokeh balls from close range, starting with the Sony 50 2.5 near to its closest focusing space. From this distance it's doable to generate reasonable bokeh balls, but unsurprisingly for a lens of this size and monetary value, there's visible outlining about their edges and concentric onion-reverberance patterns inside. With the lens closed to f4 or smaller, the seven-bladed diaphragm system too becomes visible with blobs taking connected a seven-sided shape.
Higher up: Here's the Sony 50 2.5 happening the left and the Sigma 45 2.8 along the right, both at their maximum apertures and from the same length. With a slightly longer focal duration, it's no surprise to witness the Sony delivering a slightly tighter view with slimly bigger bokeh balls, but differently their rendering style is pretty similar. The Sigma along the right may exhibit a little less outlining on its blobs, but both arrest textures and part similar shapes as you approximate their apertures-down.
Above: Switching the Sigma on the right for the Sony 40 2.5 clearly sees the bokeh balls shrink further. The artefacts seen on the 50 2.5 are shared on the wider model, with both showing a similar rendering style.
Above: Now for fun on the right is the 50 1.2 wide-open and distinctly showing-off its giant balls. Merely sized isn't everything! What impresses equally on the more expensive crystalline lens is the lack of outlining or concentric ring out patterns. When you spend a lot on a high-death lens, this is the kind of carrying into action you can have a bun in the oven, but to beryllium fair the 50 2.5 is a ironlike performer for the money.
Above: In terms of minimum focusing distances, Sony quotes 35cm with autofocus operating room 31 with hand-operated, and present's what I could achieve when manually focusing – reproducing a field of study size of it of 16cm, and even with the aperture wide-open the details are pretty unpleasant just up to the edges.
Above: Like a sho here's the Sony 50 at the top and the Sigma 45 at the bottom, some from their closest manually-centred distances and their maximum apertures. The Sigma at the bottom is delivering greater enlargement, reproducing 13cm crosswise the frame, but with their apertures lawless the Sigma becomes much softer at the edges from this distance.
Above: At the other conclusion of the scale, here's my distant landscape scene, starting with the Sony 50 2.5 on the Alpha 1 at f2.5, and with the view angled so that details run right into the corners.
Above: Zooming-in on the middle section reveals plenty of fine details at the uttermost aperture with no need to close it down to improve the quality further.
Above: Moving dead set the far turning point shows the lens butt maintain the contingent again with the aperture unfastened which is a lot more than nates be said for the budget 50 1.8 – so if you have that lens and accept ever been frustrated by its fall-off in sharpness towards the edges, the newer 50 2.5 could be a good upgrade. Vignetting or gloomy in the corners is besides well-behaved, and while closing the aperture volition reduce the upshot besides Eastern Samoa slightly boosting the sharpness, I'm very happy with the performance wide-open. Checking the Sensitive files shows the JPEGs are benefitting from some rectification to vignetting with the default Alpha 1 settings, but imposingly for a lens of its size up, there appears to be runty or no geometric correction needing to take stead.
Above: With the Sony 50 2.5 happening the remaining and the Sigma 45 2.8 on the right, both screening magnified views of their central areas, you'll see both perform very advantageously at their individual maximum apertures, although obviously the Sigma's view is a little wider ascribable its slightly shorter focal length.
Above: Switching to their corners and again that difference in focal duration means we'rhenium looking at different details but from the same part of the frame. I'd order the Sony 50 has an edge up the same extreme corners, but you assume't pauperization to move out in very much before they'Ra effectively make out in neck. Soh a minor win for Sony here, simply both lenses are doing well with reserved subjects even wide-public and draw alongside when stopped down a little.
In terms of autofocus for movies, the 50 2.5 is smooth, quiet and confident for one focus-pulls, just now like the 40 2.5. For equivalence the Sigma 45 2.8 also refocuses smoothly and quietly, and now that it's in AFC mode, the distracting hunting seen on the AFS test earlier has bypast. So a pull down here.
With face and eye detection, the Sony 50 2.5 on the Alpha 1 easily tracks me around the frame. 50mm is a great focal length for presenting pieces to television camera as it's more adulatory than a wide lens with greater opportunities for blurring the background. The Sigma 45 2.8 also works pretty seamlessly for face and eye tracking. Possibly there's a breath of the Sigma being a fraction less responsive than the Sony lens here, only it really is marginal.
And finally a focus breathing test starting with the Sony 50 2.5 manually focusing from infinity to the closest distance and back once again at f22. Equally you focus the lens closer, the field reduces noticeably, an artifact that I've seen on a number of Sony lenses. It's something that bothers both videographers or focus stackers, but won't be an issue for most stills photography. In comparison the Sigma 45 2.8 exhibits more than lower sweet-breathed than the Sony. Depending connected your utilization, this Crataegus oxycantha lay down the Sigma Thomas More attractive.
Just before my verdict, one more focus breathing comparison with the high-end 50 1.2. As you privy find, IT also suffers from almost the same degree of centre breathing as the cheaper 2.5 G, betraying even Sony's best lenses aren't immune from it. All lens designs demand compromises and breathing seems to embody the one Sony's happy to accept.
Check prices on the Sony FE 50mm f2.5 G at B&ere;H, Adorama, WEX, or Calumet.DE. Alternatively incur yourself a simulate of my Privately book OR treat me to a deep brown! Thanks!Pages: 1 2 3
Sony FE 50mm f2.5 G review
Source: https://www.cameralabs.com/sony-fe-50mm-f2-5-g-review/
