SAL 85mm 2.8 vs Contax G 90mm 2.8

Started Mar 15, 2013 | Discussions
mx5002
Regular MemberPosts: 190
Like?
SAL 85mm 2.8 vs Contax G 90mm 2.8
Mar 15, 2013

i have the 85mm 2.8 from sony and i am pleased with it. however, i have heard that the 90mm contax G is superior in sharpness and micro contrast. i shoot mostly portraits and i am seeking the best image quality possible from my nex-7. would i notice an improvement in image quality from the contax 90mm g? other issues such as manual focusing, manually setting the aperture, etc. are not important to me. i just want to hear from experienced members of the forum if they believe that i will see an improvement in sharpness and micro contrast. thank you.

Sony Alpha NEX-7
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
nexturtle
New MemberPosts: 14Gear list
Like?
Re: SAL 85mm 2.8 vs Contax G 90mm 2.8
In reply to mx5002, Mar 16, 2013

Bump

i would like to know this as well, i hope someone can reply with a comparison...

 nexturtle's gear list:nexturtle's gear list
Sony SLT-A65 Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 DG OS Sony E 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 PZ OSS Sony E 35mm F1.8 OSS +11 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
seachicken2000
Senior MemberPosts: 2,635Gear list
Like?
Re: SAL 85mm 2.8 vs Contax G 90mm 2.8
In reply to mx5002, Mar 16, 2013

I have both, and the answer is yes, the Contax G seems sharper and more contrasty to me. But this is only my impression, and the difference is quite small. I believe the SAL85 is recording a similar amount of detail, but doesn't appear as sharp because it's a little less contrasty.

If I were to choose only one I'd pick the SAL 85 because:

  • AF can be handy at this focal length especially when the lenses are wide open and used at close range, the photographer or the subject can move
  • I prefer the rendering and bokeh of the SAL 85 for portraiture, the Contax G is a bit harsh

On the other hand, if you're looking for that sharp/contrasty Zeissy look, the Contax G is the one.

-- hide signature --

"The only thing that gets in the way of a really good photograph, is the camera"
Norman Parkinson

 seachicken2000's gear list:seachicken2000's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-R1 Fujifilm FinePix S2 Pro Sony Alpha NEX-5 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha 7R +17 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mx5002
Regular MemberPosts: 190
Like?
Re: SAL 85mm 2.8 vs Contax G 90mm 2.8
In reply to seachicken2000, Mar 16, 2013

thank you for that excellent answer.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
neonexxer
Regular MemberPosts: 131Gear list
Like?
Re: SAL 85mm 2.8 vs Contax G 90mm 2.8
In reply to seachicken2000, Mar 16, 2013

seachicken2000 wrote:

I have both, and the answer is yes, the Contax G seems sharper and more contrasty to me. But this is only my impression, and the difference is quite small. I believe the SAL85 is recording a similar amount of detail, but doesn't appear as sharp because it's a little less contrasty.

If I were to choose only one I'd pick the SAL 85 because:

  • AF can be handy at this focal length especially when the lenses are wide open and used at close range, the photographer or the subject can move
  • I prefer the rendering and bokeh of the SAL 85 for portraiture, the Contax G is a bit harsh

On the other hand, if you're looking for that sharp/contrasty Zeissy look, the Contax G is the one.

-- hide signature --

"The only thing that gets in the way of a really good photograph, is the camera"
Norman Parkinson

Great to know!  I'm on the edge of picking up an 85 prime too.  I have the FL covered in MF by a Canon FDn 85/1.8 at the moment, but as you said - I'm finding more and more that AF (and maybe OSS) would make life easier in quite a few situations!  More so than having a faster (ie. larger aperture) lens   Now just waiting a teensy bit longer to see how that rumored E-mount 85mm turns out, if at all!

 neonexxer's gear list:neonexxer's gear list
Sony RX100 Olympus Tough TG-2 Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony SLT-A37 Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nrcole
Regular MemberPosts: 411
Like?
Re: SAL 85mm 2.8 vs Contax G 90mm 2.8
In reply to mx5002, Mar 16, 2013

Can't compare to the SAL as I've never used one, but...

You say you don't care about manual focusing, but the Contax is really different because these were made to be AF only. It can be really tedious to try to get focus on spontaneous things like a portrait. If at all possible, try one first to make sure you know what you're getting in to. I'm speaking from experience, as I didn't really know what I was getting in to when I bought mine. 
You won't be disappointed with the output though. Punchy, razor sharp,  and with a lot of pop I don't see in any other lens I own (18-55, Sigma 30, 55-210, FD 50 1.4).

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
iceccream
Regular MemberPosts: 106
Like?
Re: SAL 85mm 2.8 vs Contax G 90mm 2.8
In reply to nrcole, Mar 16, 2013

nrcole wrote:

You won't be disappointed with the output though. Punchy, razor sharp, and with a lot of pop I don't see in any other lens I own (18-55, Sigma 30, 55-210, FD 50 1.4).

this.  i'd say just grab the contax 90mm off ebay.  it's arguably the best value lens on the market, and if you decide MF isn't working for you, just resell.  IQ wise, bokeh is subjective, but by all other measures it's about as good as it gets.

also, from my experience i'd recommend the metabones adaptor, as i've found it's focus action to be much smoother (though i've only used a kipon copy).

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
cptrios
Senior MemberPosts: 1,347
Like?
Re: SAL 85mm 2.8 vs Contax G 90mm 2.8
In reply to nrcole, Mar 16, 2013

Also, if portraiture is your main use for the lens, keep in mind that micro contrast isn't necessarily something you want. Too much local contrast can be very unflattering to a face!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mx5002
Regular MemberPosts: 190
Like?
Re: SAL 85mm 2.8 vs Contax G 90mm 2.8
In reply to cptrios, Mar 16, 2013

thank you to everyone who answered my call for assistance. you have all given me great advice!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Frytek
Junior MemberPosts: 36
Like?
Re: SAL 85mm 2.8 vs Contax G 90mm 2.8
In reply to iceccream, Mar 22, 2013

iceccream wrote:

nrcole wrote:

You won't be disappointed with the output though. Punchy, razor sharp, and with a lot of pop I don't see in any other lens I own (18-55, Sigma 30, 55-210, FD 50 1.4).

this. i'd say just grab the contax 90mm off ebay. it's arguably the best value lens on the market, and if you decide MF isn't working for you, just resell. IQ wise, bokeh is subjective, but by all other measures it's about as good as it gets.

also, from my experience i'd recommend the metabones adaptor, as i've found it's focus action to be much smoother (though i've only used a kipon copy).

what about AF speed with metabones adapter?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
iceccream
Regular MemberPosts: 106
Like?
Re: SAL 85mm 2.8 vs Contax G 90mm 2.8
In reply to Frytek, Mar 22, 2013

Frytek wrote:

what about AF speed with metabones adapter?

i'm talking about the manual focus metabones adaptor.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Murx
Regular MemberPosts: 162
Like?
Contax G 90mm 2.8 -- Metabones
In reply to iceccream, Mar 27, 2013

iceccream wrote:

nrcole wrote:

You won't be disappointed with the output though. Punchy, razor sharp, and with a lot of pop I don't see in any other lens I own (18-55, Sigma 30, 55-210, FD 50 1.4).

this.  i'd say just grab the contax 90mm off ebay.  it's arguably the best value lens on the market, and if you decide MF isn't working for you, just resell.  IQ wise, bokeh is subjective, but by all other measures it's about as good as it gets.

also, from my experience i'd recommend the metabones adaptor, as i've found it's focus action to be much smoother (though i've only used a kipon copy).

Well -

Focusing of metabones/contax G is  not too bad  - once you actually manage to attach the lens such that it fits. Which in fact - at least for my copy --  implies that you need to take the epoxy glue and glue the lens to the adapter. No joking. Otherwise the lens rattles left, right, front and back and the coupling mechanism for turning the lens is somewhere between "fully engaged" (if you point the lens to the sky) and "loose" (if you point the lens to the floor) .

The build quality of this adapter is a very sad story. Tolerances are way too high. Especially regarding the price i would say this adapter in fact stinks. However - if you do the epoxy thing (or if you happen to have an adapter with less tolerances) the focusing works fairly well.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
viking79
Forum ProPosts: 13,162Gear list
Like?
Re: SAL 85mm 2.8 vs Contax G 90mm 2.8
In reply to mx5002, Mar 27, 2013

mx5002 wrote:

thank you for that excellent answer.

And another point, if you use Lightroom or anything they have a "clarity" slider.  This slider will give you microcontrast you would normally get with expensive lenses.  I call it the Leica Slider, as it makes your Sigma image look like a Leica image.

Eric

-- hide signature --

I never saw an ugly thing in my life: for let the form of an object
be what it may - light, shade, and perspective will always make it
beautiful. - John Constable (quote)
See my Blog at: http://www.erphotoreview.com/ (bi-weekly)
Flickr Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/28177041@N03/ (updated daily)

 viking79's gear list:viking79's gear list
Sony Alpha 7R Samsung NX30 Samsung NX 30mm F2 Pancake Samsung NX 85mm F1.4 ED SSA Samsung NX 60mm F2.8 Macro ED OIS SSA +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads