Good 50mm Lens For Sony Nex ... on a Budget?

Started Mar 27, 2013 | Discussions
Louno
Junior MemberPosts: 40
Like?
Re: Good 50mm Lens For Sony Nex ... on a Budget?
In reply to Jonathan_Whiteman, Mar 27, 2013

Jonathan_Whiteman wrote:

There's plenty of great options.  This is from an old Minolta ROKKOR f1.4 (but it almost never gets used now that I have the SEL50f18 - it really is worth the money :))

Random dog, 50mm f1.4 ROKKOR

I really like the smooth bokeh this lens produce. I looked over at ebay and overall with shipping the lens would be roughly 100$, so it would be the same price as the AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D I can get for 100$. I guess the Nikkor would be better ?
Also, you say that it is worth the money to get the SEL50f18, why ? Its 300$+, is it because of autofocus ? how fast is it ?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Philip Corlis
Contributing MemberPosts: 810Gear list
Like?
Re: Good 50mm Lens For Sony Nex ... on a Budget?
In reply to Louno, Mar 27, 2013

There are plenty of great frugal fifties out there if you look a bit. Personally, I like early Tachumars, Minolta MC Rokkors, Konica Hexanons, and Olympus Zuiko OM glass. Unfortunately - mirrorless mania is driving the cost of vintage lenses through the roof.

Good luck and happy hunting.

-- hide signature --

Phil
www.PhilCorlis.com
www.FindingBritain.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
randyh360
Junior MemberPosts: 26
Like?
Re: Good 50mm Lens For Sony Nex ... on a Budget?
In reply to Louno, Mar 27, 2013

I have to agree that the SEL50F18 is worth the money. It is hands down my favorite lens. I have/had numerous 40-58mm fast manual focus primes, and in the year that I've had it I haven't used any of them more than a couple times, and each time I ended up switching back to the SEL50.

I honestly don't think you will find anything that will match the sharpness and bokeh of the SEL50 for the price, the autofocus (which is plenty fast) and OSS are just icing on the cake. As for the price, you should be able to easily find one for $250 used, $225 if you're patient. If you're worried about getting ripped off you can always pay a little more for a used one from Amazon Warehouse Deals knowing that you'll be able to return it if you have any problems.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
shaolin95
Contributing MemberPosts: 893Gear list
Like?
Re: Good 50mm Lens For Sony Nex ... on a Budget?
In reply to randyh360, Mar 27, 2013

Pentax 50mm 1.7 gets my vote as it is extremely sharp.
I dont see myself using it for video so I can pass on the SEL5018. I am moving from the Sigma 30 to the SEL35 though as I use that one a LOT.

 shaolin95's gear list:shaolin95's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-F3 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony E 16mm F2.8 Pancake Sony E 50mm F1.8 OSS Sony E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS +14 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
cptrios
Senior MemberPosts: 1,347
Like?
Re: Good 50mm Lens For Sony Nex ... on a Budget?
In reply to shaolin95, Mar 27, 2013

Well, plenty of suggestions have already been made and I don't have anything to add on that front...but Louno, might I ask why you want shallow depth of field? Picturing most food photography situations in my head, I imagine you're going to have the camera around 2-4ft away from your subject most of the time. At 4ft away, 50mm, and an aperture as narrow as f/8, you're going to have just enough DoF to cover an entire plate. F/1.4 would get you about one tater tot in focus. Therefore, if you're truly budget-minded, you can almost totally ignore any lens' max aperture (to a point). I'd therefore vote for the already-mentioned Olympus 50/1.8. Cheap, sharp, and very small!

One of the food blogs that pops to mind when I think of "food photography" is The Smitten Kitchen. Her photography is one of the things that's made her so popular...and 90% of what makes that photography so appealing is the light she uses. But if you check out each individual photo, they're almost all taken with a 5D2 at 50mm and f/5...which means on your NEX you'd need a lowly max aperture of something like f/3.5. Doable with pretty much any 50mm prime in history!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
KingCharles
Regular MemberPosts: 150
Like?
Re: Good 50mm Lens For Sony Nex ... on a Budget?
In reply to kuuan, Mar 28, 2013

I once made a sharpness shootout of over 30 'normal lenses' using my NEX5N including most of the above mentioned. There are sets by lenses, f stop, and of 100% center and corner crops: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections/72157632455712332/

So of those tested which did you like the best for sharpness? And which the best for color reproduction?

-- hide signature --

Charles

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
FuzzyQball
Senior MemberPosts: 1,328Gear list
Like?
Re: Good 50mm Lens For Sony Nex ... on a Budget?
In reply to Jefenator, Mar 28, 2013

The old Minolta lens are low cost, and plentiful.  No need for autofocus when shooting food.

-- hide signature --

Glenn

 FuzzyQball's gear list:FuzzyQball's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Sony E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS Sony E 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 PZ OSS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ChuckTa
Regular MemberPosts: 360Gear list
Like?
Re: Good 50mm Lens For Sony Nex ... on a Budget?
In reply to Michael Everett, Mar 28, 2013

Interesting, my opinion is completely different to yours, I also had the Canon new FD 50/1.4 and the Zeiss  planar 50/1.7, I find the FD output quite flat and I don't think it is sharper than the Zeiss Planar. The FD lens is my least like Japanese lens. I had a number of Canon FD lens and I sold them all.

Here is a couple of shots from the Pentacon 50/1.8 (note this is the non MC verison with a funny looking Tower marking in front which people say has better glass than the later MC version)

 ChuckTa's gear list:ChuckTa's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5 Fujifilm X-E1 Samsung NX300 Samsung NX 30mm F2 Pancake Samsung NX 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OIS +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jefenator
Senior MemberPosts: 1,352Gear list
Like?
Re: Good 50mm Lens For Sony Nex ... on a Budget?
In reply to cptrios, Mar 28, 2013

I would concur that extreme speed is not very appropriate for close-up work. At greater distances I sometimes yearn for a full-frame for more isolation, but close up, I have isolation and BOKEH to spare with my NEX-7. I rarely open up beyond f/5.6, even when I'm trying to go hand-held.

I did go through the obligatory DoF overcompensation phase when I got back with fast primes again. Thankfully I worked my way through that fairly quickly. 

Close-up with AF-Nikkor 35mm 1:2 shot wide open. Definitely too shallow!

 Jefenator's gear list:Jefenator's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Canon EOS M Sony Alpha 7 Nikon AF Nikkor 35mm f/2D Sigma 30mm F2.8 EX DN +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Louno
Junior MemberPosts: 40
Like?
Re: Good 50mm Lens For Sony Nex ... on a Budget?
In reply to KingCharles, Mar 28, 2013

KingCharles wrote:

I once made a sharpness shootout of over 30 'normal lenses' using my NEX5N including most of the above mentioned. There are sets by lenses, f stop, and of 100% center and corner crops: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections/72157632455712332/

So of those tested which did you like the best for sharpness? And which the best for color reproduction?

-- hide signature --

Charles

Yes, although this is really AWESOME work ( thank you ! )... its hard to judge quickly, i'll be sure to look at everything more closely but i'd love to know what you think? there might be a few lenses that are better overall even though they might have similar image quality, for exemple some might be better than other in terms of build quality / features / size etc...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
kuuan
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,388Gear list
Like?
Re: Good 50mm Lens For Sony Nex ... on a Budget?
In reply to Louno, Mar 28, 2013

Louno wrote:

KingCharles wrote:

I once made a sharpness shootout of over 30 'normal lenses' using my NEX5N including most of the above mentioned. There are sets by lenses, f stop, and of 100% center and corner crops: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections/72157632455712332/

So of those tested which did you like the best for sharpness? And which the best for color reproduction?

-- hide signature --

Charles

Yes, although this is really AWESOME work ( thank you ! )... its hard to judge quickly, i'll be sure to look at everything more closely but i'd love to know what you think? there might be a few lenses that are better overall even though they might have similar image quality, for exemple some might be better than other in terms of build quality / features / size etc...

there are reasons why I had not given any opinions at my test. Too easily they could become, if well presented absolute truth in the internet, not considering that there always is sample variation and test error at play. Most probably my test isn't done nor presented sufficiently well for that to happen, nevertheless I am very hesitant to put forward my own observations or opinions.

Instead I tried to organize the files in a way that it can be reviewed very easily to make it as simple as possibly for everyone to draw his conclusions. E.g. a good way to judge center sharpness could be to see the slide show of the center crops, here linked those taken @ f2: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632464816660/show/ don't forget to click on 'show info' on the right top corner to see which lens was used. ( there also sets of wide open crops and of each other f stop, I chose to link the one @f2 since 'wide open' doesn't yet include all lenses tested )

...........

nevertheless I do dare to forwards some observations. Many will be of Takumar and Pentax lenses, this is necessarily so because these are the lenses I have most experience with and also make for half of the lenses included in the test:

as expected, for sharpness there isn't all that much between most SLR lenses tested, specially if stopped down a bit. One also must consider that the test images have not been worked on at all, that is no sharpness, contrast had been added, doing that the differences will diminish even further

only the old CZJ and Jupiter 8 rangefinder lenses and the Takumar f2/58 fall  behind considerably, specially at wide apertures. Note that these have "Sonnar" lens schemes which make for very beautiful rendering nevertheless, the Takumar f2/58 is among my most loved lenses!

for center sharpness at open apertures Pentax A 1.7/50, M 1.7/50, M 1.4/50, S-M-C Takumar and first ( 8 element ) Super Takumar f1.4/50 seem to have the edge over most other tested, still visible @f2. Very well fare the 2 Yashinons, Rokkors and early f1.8 and f2/55 Takumars, possibly still having the edge over the OM 1.8/50, Nikkor f1.4/50, Topcor, Pancolar and Mamiya 1.8/50.

for corner sharpness the OM 1.8/50 is tops, almost stands out, very good the Mamiya, also Rokkors, Pentax and Takumars

for color reproduction I can't say from this test. Generally I like the colors of the Pentax/ Takumar and Rokkor lenses, natural and well saturated. Olympus, but my experience is more with the 'Pen-F' Zuikos then OM lenses, sometimes make for a 'lighter' appearance, personally I rather dislike the colors of the Pancolar.

Louno I am very happy you ask about build quality, size, features, I'd include handling:

Olympus made the smallest and lightest SLR lenses and therefore make a very good fit on a NEX! Pentax M and A lenses are also very compact. e.g. the Pentax M1.7/50 has pretty the same lengths as the OM 1.8/50 but weighs a tad ( 20 grms ) more. The earlier Pentax lenses, the Takumars are still rel. compact but heavier. The build quality of these full metal Takumars is absolute tops, also offer top handling, very smooth focus rings! Pentax M share the same great handling, later Pentax A have a more clunky aperture ring. Om lenses have the aperture ring in front, this feature is shared by the very early Takumars, I find that advantageous when used on a NEX with adapter. OM have great handling, their build is a bit more delicate and thus they are a bit more prone to mechanical failures. Compared with the above mentioned I find most of the early Nikkors, Rokkors, Canons asf. to be rather big, heavy, sometimes clunky in comparison, not the included Yashinons. If smallish size is if concern of these brands better looks for the later variants.

note: even though all 55mm Takumars tested have the same optical schemes, and all the 50mm Takumars respectively ( with the exception of the early 8 element Super Tak ), the Super Tak. f1.8/55 falls behind the earlier versions of 55mm Taks, and the SMC and second ver. Super Tak 1.4/50 fall behind the other 1.4/50 Taks tested. Partly this must be due to sample variation, and this must be considered for all the other lenses tested too, specially because there is only one copy of each. For this reason, as stated in the beginning, I am hesitant to forward thoughts on my test results. Since a variety of the 50 and 55mm Takumars and Pentax lenses included rather consistently proved to be top performers, offer top handling and build quality and what's not shown in the test, of course specially the later variants have very good coating, I'd say that it's safe to say that they actually are very good

-- hide signature --

photos mostly taken with manual lenses on Sony NEX5N, Pentax K-x and *istDs: http://flickr.com/photos/kuuan/

 kuuan's gear list:kuuan's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F31fd Konica Minolta DiMAGE A2 Pentax *ist DS Ricoh GXR Mount A12 Sony Alpha NEX-5N
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Kalabalik
Junior MemberPosts: 27Gear list
Like?
Re: Good 50mm Lens For Sony Nex ... on a Budget?
In reply to zink, Mar 28, 2013

zink wrote:

The Olympus OM 50/1.8 gets my vote. It is one of the most compact 50mm SLR lenses, it can be bought cheap and an OM adapter is very cheap. Just make sure you buy a made in Japan version. The later MC versions of this lens have better coatings.

How do you as a potential buyer identify one of those lenses as being "Made in Japan", say from an ebay listing?

 Kalabalik's gear list:Kalabalik's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony E 35mm F1.8 OSS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
kuuan
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,388Gear list
Like?
Re: Good 50mm Lens For Sony Nex ... on a Budget?
In reply to Kalabalik, Mar 28, 2013

Kalabalik wrote:

zink wrote:

The Olympus OM 50/1.8 gets my vote. It is one of the most compact 50mm SLR lenses, it can be bought cheap and an OM adapter is very cheap. Just make sure you buy a made in Japan version. The later MC versions of this lens have better coatings.

How do you as a potential buyer identify one of those lenses as being "Made in Japan", say from an ebay listing?

it says: "made in Japan" written on it's front 'name ring' ( serial number is on the side of the bayonet )

see the various versions at this excellent site about Olympus, in German though: http://www.olypedia.de/Zuiko_Auto-S_1:1,8/50_mm

-- hide signature --

photos mostly taken with manual lenses on Sony NEX5N, Pentax K-x and *istDs: http://flickr.com/photos/kuuan/

 kuuan's gear list:kuuan's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F31fd Konica Minolta DiMAGE A2 Pentax *ist DS Ricoh GXR Mount A12 Sony Alpha NEX-5N
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
paul1508
Regular MemberPosts: 362
Like?
Re: Good 50mm Lens For Sony Nex ... on a Budget?
In reply to Louno, Mar 28, 2013

Canon FDn 50 f/1.4

You can get it for 50$ when lucky and it is appropriate sharp even at f/1.4 without any sign of glow.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jokica
Contributing MemberPosts: 538Gear list
Like?
Re: Good 50mm Lens For Sony Nex ... on a Budget?
In reply to kuuan, Mar 28, 2013

kuuan wrote:

Louno wrote:

KingCharles wrote:

I once made a sharpness shootout of over 30 'normal lenses' using my NEX5N including most of the above mentioned. There are sets by lenses, f stop, and of 100% center and corner crops: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections/72157632455712332/

So of those tested which did you like the best for sharpness? And which the best for color reproduction?

-- hide signature --

Charles

Yes, although this is really AWESOME work ( thank you ! )... its hard to judge quickly, i'll be sure to look at everything more closely but i'd love to know what you think? there might be a few lenses that are better overall even though they might have similar image quality, for exemple some might be better than other in terms of build quality / features / size etc...

there are reasons why I had not given any opinions at my test. Too easily they could become, if well presented absolute truth in the internet, not considering that there always is sample variation and test error at play. Most probably my test isn't done nor presented sufficiently well for that to happen, nevertheless I am very hesitant to put forward my own observations or opinions.

Instead I tried to organize the files in a way that it can be reviewed very easily to make it as simple as possibly for everyone to draw his conclusions. E.g. a good way to judge center sharpness could be to see the slide show of the center crops, here linked those taken @ f2: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157632464816660/show/ don't forget to click on 'show info' on the right top corner to see which lens was used. ( there also sets of wide open crops and of each other f stop, I chose to link the one @f2 since 'wide open' doesn't yet include all lenses tested )

...........

nevertheless I do dare to forwards some observations. Many will be of Takumar and Pentax lenses, this is necessarily so because these are the lenses I have most experience with and also make for half of the lenses included in the test:

as expected, for sharpness there isn't all that much between most SLR lenses tested, specially if stopped down a bit. One also must consider that the test images have not been worked on at all, that is no sharpness, contrast had been added, doing that the differences will diminish even further

only the old CZJ and Jupiter 8 rangefinder lenses and the Takumar f2/58 fall  behind considerably, specially at wide apertures. Note that these have "Sonnar" lens schemes which make for very beautiful rendering nevertheless, the Takumar f2/58 is among my most loved lenses!

for center sharpness at open apertures Pentax A 1.7/50, M 1.7/50, M 1.4/50, S-M-C Takumar and first ( 8 element ) Super Takumar f1.4/50 seem to have the edge over most other tested, still visible @f2. Very well fare the 2 Yashinons, Rokkors and early f1.8 and f2/55 Takumars, possibly still having the edge over the OM 1.8/50, Nikkor f1.4/50, Topcor, Pancolar and Mamiya 1.8/50.

for corner sharpness the OM 1.8/50 is tops, almost stands out, very good the Mamiya, also Rokkors, Pentax and Takumars

for color reproduction I can't say from this test. Generally I like the colors of the Pentax/ Takumar and Rokkor lenses, natural and well saturated. Olympus, but my experience is more with the 'Pen-F' Zuikos then OM lenses, sometimes make for a 'lighter' appearance, personally I rather dislike the colors of the Pancolar.

Louno I am very happy you ask about build quality, size, features, I'd include handling:

Olympus made the smallest and lightest SLR lenses and therefore make a very good fit on a NEX! Pentax M and A lenses are also very compact. e.g. the Pentax M1.7/50 has pretty the same lengths as the OM 1.8/50 but weighs a tad ( 20 grms ) more. The earlier Pentax lenses, the Takumars are still rel. compact but heavier. The build quality of these full metal Takumars is absolute tops, also offer top handling, very smooth focus rings! Pentax M share the same great handling, later Pentax A have a more clunky aperture ring. Om lenses have the aperture ring in front, this feature is shared by the very early Takumars, I find that advantageous when used on a NEX with adapter. OM have great handling, their build is a bit more delicate and thus they are a bit more prone to mechanical failures. Compared with the above mentioned I find most of the early Nikkors, Rokkors, Canons asf. to be rather big, heavy, sometimes clunky in comparison, not the included Yashinons. If smallish size is if concern of these brands better looks for the later variants.

note: even though all 55mm Takumars tested have the same optical schemes, and all the 50mm Takumars respectively ( with the exception of the early 8 element Super Tak ), the Super Tak. f1.8/55 falls behind the earlier versions of 55mm Taks, and the SMC and second ver. Super Tak 1.4/50 fall behind the other 1.4/50 Taks tested. Partly this must be due to sample variation, and this must be considered for all the other lenses tested too, specially because there is only one copy of each. For this reason, as stated in the beginning, I am hesitant to forward thoughts on my test results. Since a variety of the 50 and 55mm Takumars and Pentax lenses included rather consistently proved to be top performers, offer top handling and build quality and what's not shown in the test, of course specially the later variants have very good coating, I'd say that it's safe to say that they actually are very good

-- hide signature --

photos mostly taken with manual lenses on Sony NEX5N, Pentax K-x and *istDs: http://flickr.com/photos/kuuan/

Great comparison, thanks for sharing.

My fav is Konica Hexanon 50mm 1.7 and I am really curious how would this lens compare against tested ones.

 Jokica's gear list:Jokica's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ProfHankD
Senior MemberPosts: 1,834Gear list
Like?
Canon FDn vs. others
In reply to Michael Everett, Mar 28, 2013

Michael Everett wrote:

I tried a few, including the OM 50 1.8 Japan version, the Zeiss Planar 1.7, the Canon Fd 50 1.4, and the Canon FDn 50 1.4.  The Canon FDn outperformed them all, including the Zeiss.  It's so sharp it's almost scary, and it is even sharp at 1.4.  FDn prices have gone up, and a good one is now around $100, but it's worth it IMO.

I've said this before, but based on the over 125 lenses I own and have tested, the Canon FDn adoration that often surfaces in this forum is not well grounded. (I don't have enough experience with Zeiss or OM glass to comment on those.) The Canon FDn line was produced in huge quantities, and they only work on mirrorless digitals, so many FDn lenses are widely available and not too expensive, but the FDn 50mm f/1.4 is somehow commonly selling for about twice what the IQ/build would justify relative to most competitors.

From what I've seen, Canon FDn lenses tend to have very good contrast, but other IQ attributes (color, bokeh, edge sharpness, etc.) are often poorer than for competitors. For the two Canon 50mm f/1.4 I've tested, I found the "silvernose" FD to be surprisingly different from, and significantly better in build and IQ overall than, the FDn.

Of the twenty-some-odd "fast 50s" I have.... The various Canon f/1.8 versions are clumped at the bottom overall, but are still quite good. The Canon f/1.4 versions are better than the f/1.8, but only contrast is outstanding compared to other f/1.4. My M42 SMC Takumar 50mm f/1.4 gives the smoothest bokeh, but it isn't as sharp as its 55mm f/1.8 brother (and is much worse if you haven't yet UV cleaned the radioactive yellowing). My Minolta MC Rokkors easily win on build quality (smoothness of operation of the focus ring is amazing on most Rokkors, only the Canon FL 55mm f/1.2 I have is in the same class) and are quite good in most IQ metrics, but the 50mm f/1.4 has a bit of a glow problem wide open. The 55mm f/1.4 Mamiya/Sekor I have is probably my best "fast 50" overall; ironically, it is not the best by any one IQ metric, but is near the best in every measure. Actually, my Helios 44 versions have IQ fairly similar to the M/S f/1.4 and f/1.8 versions, but they're f/2 and have notoriously crude Soviet build.

Anyway, the point is that just about every "fast 50" is pretty good and the best is mostly a function of how you weight different attributes. $50 can get you a really great fast 50.

If you get one be sure to pay the extra for one in good condition, because it was a pro lens in its time, and many have taken a lot of rough treatment.

The Canon FDn line makes an engineered optical performance gap between consumer and pro lenses. For Canon FDn (as for EF), pro lenses generally get the "L" designation, like the f/1.2 L. The f/1.8 and f/1.4 were the standard kit lens options. However, the FDn f/1.4 is an upgrade over their  f/1.8 in IQ as well as speed.

It is mechanically a very solid lens, however.

What? The FDn lens line is among the first to be nearly 100% plastic bodied, and the hacks needed to make a bayonet compatible with the technically-superior-but-awkward-to-use FL/FD breech lock mount produced one of the weakest bayonets ever made. There is also an issue involving the aperture defaulting to open rather than closed, making stuck-open apertures more common in Canon FD/FDn mount and requiring a pin in the NEX E-mount adapter. Something about the build/glass/coatings also seems to make old Canon lenses a tad more prone to fungus growth than most lenses. In summary, FDn build is still better than your average modern (plastic-bodied autofocus) lens, but totally outclassed by most manual lenses -- including the Canon FL line.

I will admit that the build quality usually is not a problem for FDn lenses, the lightweight plastic makes many FDn lenses balance well on a NEX, and the pin in the NEX adapters means all FDn lenses behave as presets (not just manuals). Still, "very solid" seems a very generous rating....

 ProfHankD's gear list:ProfHankD's gear list
Canon PowerShot A640 Canon PowerShot A720 IS Canon PowerShot S70 Canon PowerShot G1 Canon PowerShot G5 +19 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
kuuan
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,388Gear list
Like?
Re: Good 50mm Lens For Sony Nex ... on a Budget?
In reply to Jokica, Mar 28, 2013

Jokica wrote:

Great comparison, thanks for sharing.

My fav is Konica Hexanon 50mm 1.7 and I am really curious how would this lens compare against tested ones.

You are very welcome!

I am very certain that it would be a top performer! I have read very good things about the Hexanons of knowledgeable people, and most specially about the 1.7/50!

At the same time I would not expect it to clearly outperform the better ones in the test. Not that I am saying that you say so, please don't take that directed to you, but let me add that generally I am very suspicious of anyone claiming that this or that lens is 'better' than, or as sometimes it is said 'trashes' the rest. Konica, Olympus, Canon Pentax, Nikon, Topcor are all top Japanese lens manufacturers and for their e.g. 1.4/50 there won't be much in between, sample variation may be more decisive than brand.

Obviously I am heavy into Takumars / Pentax lenses and for me they have many favorable points going for them, their 50/55mm lenses are tops, but to NEX users I have been recommending rather Zuikos for their size, and Hexanons, Rokkors and Canon nFDs simply on the ground that they had not been adaptable to other cameras but the still rel. new mirrorless cameras and therefore, hopefully still , sell cheaper.

To choose a good 50mm availability, condition, personal liking of handling, size asf. imo should be at least as important, if not more important factors than nitpicking small performance differences.

-- hide signature --

photos mostly taken with manual lenses on Sony NEX5N, Pentax K-x and *istDs: http://flickr.com/photos/kuuan/

 kuuan's gear list:kuuan's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F31fd Konica Minolta DiMAGE A2 Pentax *ist DS Ricoh GXR Mount A12 Sony Alpha NEX-5N
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jokica
Contributing MemberPosts: 538Gear list
Like?
Re: Good 50mm Lens For Sony Nex ... on a Budget?
In reply to kuuan, Mar 28, 2013

kuuan wrote:

Jokica wrote:

Great comparison, thanks for sharing.

My fav is Konica Hexanon 50mm 1.7 and I am really curious how would this lens compare against tested ones.

You are very welcome!

I am very certain that it would be a top performer! I have read very good things about the Hexanons of knowledgeable people, and most specially about the 1.7/50!

At the same time I would not expect it to clearly outperform the better ones in the test. Not that I am saying that you say so, please don't take that directed to you, but let me add that generally I am very suspicious of anyone claiming that this or that lens is 'better' than, or as sometimes it is said 'trashes' the rest. Konica, Olympus, Canon Pentax, Nikon, Topcor are all top Japanese lens manufacturers and for their e.g. 1.4/50 there won't be much in between, sample variation may be more decisive than brand.

Obviously I am heavy into Takumars / Pentax lenses and for me they have many favorable points going for them, their 50/55mm lenses are tops, but to NEX users I have been recommending rather Hexanons, Rokkors and Canon nFDs simply on the ground that they had not been adaptable to other cameras but the still rel. new mirrorless cameras and therefore sell cheaper.

To choose a good 50mm availability, condition, personal liking of handling, size asf. imo should be at least as important, if not more important factors than nitpicking small performance differences.

-- hide signature --

photos mostly taken with manual lenses on Sony NEX5N, Pentax K-x and *istDs: http://flickr.com/photos/kuuan/

Thank you very much for your detailed answer.

All the best

Jovan

 Jokica's gear list:Jokica's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-5N
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Michael Everett
Senior MemberPosts: 1,666
Like?
Re: Good 50mm Lens For Sony Nex ... on a Budget?
In reply to ChuckTa, Mar 28, 2013

ChuckTa wrote:

Interesting, my opinion is completely different to yours, I also had the Canon new FD 50/1.4 and the Zeiss  planar 50/1.7, I find the FD output quite flat and I don't think it is sharper than the Zeiss Planar. The FD lens is my least like Japanese lens. I had a number of Canon FD lens and I sold them all.

I wonder about sample variation.  The first FD 50/1.4 I had was quite disappointing, and I sold it.  The second one I picked up was like a different lens entirely.  I have had similar experiences with other legacy lenses, so I wonder, maybe it's all a crap shoot, and maybe it doesn't matter what kind you get, as long as it's a decent type to begin with.

Michael

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
macsoft4
Forum MemberPosts: 85
Like?
Pentax Super Takkumar 50 1.4
In reply to Michael Everett, Mar 28, 2013

Pentax Super Takkumar 50 1.4

The best Lens I own.

Worked best on my NEX 5, because it had no magenta frindge wide open, like it has on the NEX 7.

When My NEX 5 and my super takkumar got stolen, and i bought my NEX 7, i went and bought another Pentax Super Takkumar 50 1.4

Very sharp stopped down, amazing bokeh, and simply perfect for low light.

They are becoming pretty hard to find, but if you find one, you wont regret it.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads