[Klaus]

Awesomeness ... reloaded ...

 

http://www.opticallimits.com/sonyalphaff/1033-sony85f18

[obican]

So this really is as sharp as Batis... Interesting. Certainly comes with a very attractive price tag too. Thanks for the review.

[Guest]

So why would someone spend 2x on the batis ?

[Guest]

Nice lens. This one has been tempting me for a while. Hard to justify, as I already have the Sony 90 macro. Like the weight of the 85mm more, but need the close up sharpness.

[MatjazO]

Indeed. Practically same resolution, less distortion and vignetting. As much as Batis is a nice lens, this one looks great one. Smaller, cheaper, better. What is not to like?

Honestly, I am somewhat baffled why there is no classic 24 mm lens their in lineup yet.

[Rover]

A 4,75 star lens for $600 and from Sony to boot... We live in strange and exciting times.

[davidmanze]

     Great little lens, sensible size and price and looks tack sharp!

 

    .....There has been so much fuss about the G masters, Sononians have become blinded to anything that isn't $2,000 a pop!

 

  85mm seems to be the overall sweet spot focal length for sharp lenses wide open.....doing better than the 50mm standard focal........... even my old AF 85mm F1.8D does a decent job.

 

         Very nice!

[Rover]

Not at all, I think the users there are as keen to save some cash as those in any other system... except probably Leica.

 

Now, it only remains to be seen what the 85/1.4 GM is like for performance... it'd be great fun if it turns out to be worse than the Sony 85/1.8. (not so fun for those who had bought the 1.4, 'fkorz)

 

Honestly I'd be only considering the Batis over the Sony if I had been using an IBIS-less Sony E camera... which incidentally I am.

[Klaus]

As mentioned, the Zeiss is sharper in close focus scenarios. Whether this is relevant to you ... well ...

[Guest]

Thanks for the review! A couple of proof-reading stuff (sorry, Rover ):

1. Under Chromatic Aberrations title: "The Zeiss lens produces a low amount of lateral CA" -- this is not about Zeiss, right?

2. Under Bokeh: "The circular shape remains intact at f/2.8. An edgy aperture shape starts to kick in at f/2.8." I guess the bold should read "f/2.2"?

3. The main page title should be bold -- isn't that a new review?

 

As for the review itself: you proved once again what was circulating around for some time: an unusually (for Sony) affordable stellar lens. Glad I bought it