3 way informal shootout: 50S, Zony 55, Otus 55

JimKasson

Community Leader
Forum Moderator
Messages
52,274
Solutions
52
Reaction score
59,059
Location
Monterey, CA, US
A few weeks ago, I did an informal, no-numbers comparison of the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 S and the Sigma 50 mm f/1.4 ART with both lenses on the Nikon Z7. I had some reader and Z forum member interest in a similar comparison between the 50 mm S lens and the Zeiss Otus 55 mm f/1.4 and the Sony/Zeiss (Zony) 55 mm f/1.8. The Zony can’t be used on the Zx cameras, so I mounted it on a Sony a7RIII.

Here's the result:


Cliff notes: The 50S is very close to the Otus. The Zony 55's LoCA hurts it at wide apertures in comparison to the other two lenses. Stopped down to typical landscape f-stops, all three lenses are excellent. Except for LoCA, the lenses are mostly limited by the current sensors on axis at f/1.8.

The Zony 55 was once the reigning MILC price-performer in this focal length. No more, although it remains an excellent lens.

Jim
 
A few weeks ago, I did an informal, no-numbers comparison of the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 S and the Sigma 50 mm f/1.4 ART with both lenses on the Nikon Z7. I had some reader and Z forum member interest in a similar comparison between the 50 mm S lens and the Zeiss Otus 55 mm f/1.4 and the Sony/Zeiss (Zony) 55 mm f/1.8. The Zony can’t be used on the Zx cameras, so I mounted it on a Sony a7RIII.

Here's the result:

https://blog.kasson.com/nikon-z6-7/nikon-50-1-8-s-otus-55-on-z7-zony-55-on-a7riii/

Cliff notes: The 50S is very close to the Otus. The Zony 55's LoCA hurts it at wide apertures in comparison to the other two lenses. Stopped down to typical landscape f-stops, all three lenses are excellent. Except for LoCA, the lenses are mostly limited by the current sensors on axis at f/1.8.

The Zony 55 was once the reigning MILC price-performer in this focal length. No more, although it remains an excellent lens.

Jim
@JimKasson

Thanks Jim,

Really appreciate all the great efforts you put into all of your posts.

Very happy with the 50S and at a fraction of the OTUS, I am beside myself!
 
The Zony is quite a bit smaller than the 50S.



5eb5e53d0f2044baa1d136a1d83c68c2.jpg



--
Posted as a regular forum member.
 
Interesting to see.

Just as an aside, on my (calibrated) monitor, the Nikon and Otus images have a magenta cast. The Sony/Zeiss is more neutral. Not saying that's a problem with your testing. Just curious why this is happening. Something to do with color space?
 
Interesting to see.

Just as an aside, on my (calibrated) monitor, the Nikon and Otus images have a magenta cast. The Sony/Zeiss is more neutral. Not saying that's a problem with your testing. Just curious why this is happening. Something to do with color space?
I wouldn't read too much into that. For the Lr images, I used the Lr "Cloudy" WB, which isn't that accurate from camera to camera. I'd have to go back and see what the Raw Therapee Default and Neutral WB's are, but I didn't touch them.

Jim
 
Wow Wow Wow!

Thank you for doing this and sharing!!

I know what I'm ordering :)
 
Interesting to see.

Just as an aside, on my (calibrated) monitor, the Nikon and Otus images have a magenta cast. The Sony/Zeiss is more neutral. Not saying that's a problem with your testing. Just curious why this is happening. Something to do with color space?
I wouldn't read too much into that. For the Lr images, I used the Lr "Cloudy" WB, which isn't that accurate from camera to camera. I'd have to go back and see what the Raw Therapee Default and Neutral WB's are, but I didn't touch them.

Jim
No problem. Just curiosity. It did motivate me to update my display calibration, which was overdue anyway.
 
A few weeks ago, I did an informal, no-numbers comparison of the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 S and the Sigma 50 mm f/1.4 ART with both lenses on the Nikon Z7. I had some reader and Z forum member interest in a similar comparison between the 50 mm S lens and the Zeiss Otus 55 mm f/1.4 and the Sony/Zeiss (Zony) 55 mm f/1.8. The Zony can’t be used on the Zx cameras, so I mounted it on a Sony a7RIII.

Here's the result:

https://blog.kasson.com/nikon-z6-7/nikon-50-1-8-s-otus-55-on-z7-zony-55-on-a7riii/

Cliff notes: The 50S is very close to the Otus. The Zony 55's LoCA hurts it at wide apertures in comparison to the other two lenses. Stopped down to typical landscape f-stops, all three lenses are excellent. Except for LoCA, the lenses are mostly limited by the current sensors on axis at f/1.8.

The Zony 55 was once the reigning MILC price-performer in this focal length. No more, although it remains an excellent lens.

Jim
Thanks for working up this comparison. Many had been talking up that 35S but I had a feeling the 50S was going to show us something really exceptional. I'm enjoying the "Zony" portmanteau.

Comparing the 50S and Otus center crops @ f/1.8, is that astigmatism resulting in that diagonal-like "haze" in the Otus vs the 50S?
 
Last edited:
A few weeks ago, I did an informal, no-numbers comparison of the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 S and the Sigma 50 mm f/1.4 ART with both lenses on the Nikon Z7. I had some reader and Z forum member interest in a similar comparison between the 50 mm S lens and the Zeiss Otus 55 mm f/1.4 and the Sony/Zeiss (Zony) 55 mm f/1.8. The Zony can’t be used on the Zx cameras, so I mounted it on a Sony a7RIII.

Here's the result:

https://blog.kasson.com/nikon-z6-7/nikon-50-1-8-s-otus-55-on-z7-zony-55-on-a7riii/

Cliff notes: The 50S is very close to the Otus. The Zony 55's LoCA hurts it at wide apertures in comparison to the other two lenses. Stopped down to typical landscape f-stops, all three lenses are excellent. Except for LoCA, the lenses are mostly limited by the current sensors on axis at f/1.8.

The Zony 55 was once the reigning MILC price-performer in this focal length. No more, although it remains an excellent lens.

Jim
Thanks for working up this comparison. Many had been talking up that 35S but I had a feeling the 50S was going to show us something really exceptional. I'm enjoying the "Zony" portmanteau.
I certainly didn't invent it. Some consider it pejorative, but I don't use it with any such intent.
Comparing the 50S and Otus center crops @ f/1.8, is that astigmatism resulting in that diagonal-like "haze" in the Otus vs the 50S?
All the crops in the post are upper left corner crops, so I'm confused here. Could you identify a pair of images, and then make the point you're making again?

Jim
 
A few weeks ago, I did an informal, no-numbers comparison of the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 S and the Sigma 50 mm f/1.4 ART with both lenses on the Nikon Z7. I had some reader and Z forum member interest in a similar comparison between the 50 mm S lens and the Zeiss Otus 55 mm f/1.4 and the Sony/Zeiss (Zony) 55 mm f/1.8. The Zony can’t be used on the Zx cameras, so I mounted it on a Sony a7RIII.

Here's the result:

https://blog.kasson.com/nikon-z6-7/nikon-50-1-8-s-otus-55-on-z7-zony-55-on-a7riii/

Cliff notes: The 50S is very close to the Otus. The Zony 55's LoCA hurts it at wide apertures in comparison to the other two lenses. Stopped down to typical landscape f-stops, all three lenses are excellent. Except for LoCA, the lenses are mostly limited by the current sensors on axis at f/1.8.

The Zony 55 was once the reigning MILC price-performer in this focal length. No more, although it remains an excellent lens.

Jim
Thanks for working up this comparison. Many had been talking up that 35S but I had a feeling the 50S was going to show us something really exceptional. I'm enjoying the "Zony" portmanteau.
I certainly didn't invent it. Some consider it pejorative, but I don't use it with any such intent.
Comparing the 50S and Otus center crops @ f/1.8, is that astigmatism resulting in that diagonal-like "haze" in the Otus vs the 50S?
All the crops in the post are upper left corner crops, so I'm confused here. Could you identify a pair of images, and then make the point you're making again?

Jim
50S-1.8

55O-1.8

Otus has a lower-left-to-upper-right diagonal "smear" vs 50S (not really present in 2.8 or later crops). What is this aberration?
 
A few weeks ago, I did an informal, no-numbers comparison of the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 S and the Sigma 50 mm f/1.4 ART with both lenses on the Nikon Z7. I had some reader and Z forum member interest in a similar comparison between the 50 mm S lens and the Zeiss Otus 55 mm f/1.4 and the Sony/Zeiss (Zony) 55 mm f/1.8. The Zony can’t be used on the Zx cameras, so I mounted it on a Sony a7RIII.

Here's the result:

https://blog.kasson.com/nikon-z6-7/nikon-50-1-8-s-otus-55-on-z7-zony-55-on-a7riii/

Cliff notes: The 50S is very close to the Otus. The Zony 55's LoCA hurts it at wide apertures in comparison to the other two lenses. Stopped down to typical landscape f-stops, all three lenses are excellent. Except for LoCA, the lenses are mostly limited by the current sensors on axis at f/1.8.

The Zony 55 was once the reigning MILC price-performer in this focal length. No more, although it remains an excellent lens.

Jim
Thanks for working up this comparison. Many had been talking up that 35S but I had a feeling the 50S was going to show us something really exceptional. I'm enjoying the "Zony" portmanteau.
I certainly didn't invent it. Some consider it pejorative, but I don't use it with any such intent.
Comparing the 50S and Otus center crops @ f/1.8, is that astigmatism resulting in that diagonal-like "haze" in the Otus vs the 50S?
All the crops in the post are upper left corner crops, so I'm confused here. Could you identify a pair of images, and then make the point you're making again?

Jim
50S-1.8

55O-1.8

Otus has a lower-left-to-upper-right diagonal "smear" vs 50S (not really present in 2.8 or later crops). What is this aberration?
I'm not really seeing it. Maybe I should shoot a Siemens star with the Otus.

Jim
 
The Zony is quite a bit smaller than the 50S.

5eb5e53d0f2044baa1d136a1d83c68c2.jpg
I was a bit disappointed to see that the 50 S didn't brake new grounds in terms of vignetting for a 1.8 prime given its size, but never mind.

Thanks a lot for the comparison.

Apparently you re-focused the shots in the corners to eliminate field curvature. How is the field curvature on the 50 S ? Moving rearwards in the corners ?
 
The Zony is quite a bit smaller than the 50S.

5eb5e53d0f2044baa1d136a1d83c68c2.jpg
I was a bit disappointed to see that the 50 S didn't brake new grounds in terms of vignetting for a 1.8 prime given its size, but never mind.

Thanks a lot for the comparison.

Apparently you re-focused the shots in the corners to eliminate field curvature.
Yes.
How is the field curvature on the 50 S ? Moving rearwards in the corners ?
My copy of the 50S has very little field curvature between the center and the upper-left corner, but a bit between the center and the lower-left corner.

Jim

--
Posted as a regular forum member.
 
A more rigorous and complete test, to be sure, but the conclusions that overlap are similar.
Sorry to ask you - is it at all possible to do a coma test similar to that proposed by Marianne here: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/62050573 ? Understand if you can't. Would be nice to see Otus / and the 58mm f1.4 F included - seems you have all three :-)

Maybe someone will also be able to compare with the Canon RF 50mm f1.2 and the new Sigma 40mm f1.4 at some point.
 
I don't see the point of shooting a landscape scene wide open. I'd rather see wide open performance on a closer subject which also demonstrates OOF blur and transition. It's nice to see the Nikon 50mm 1.8 S render sharply wide open, but it doesn't tell the whole story of lens traits.
 
I like the way Sony is misspelled.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top