My excitement over reviewing a new Samyang lens has grown by leaps and bounds over the past three years. In my DSLR days I had treated Samyang much like some of the budget manual focus lens players on the market today (7Artisans, TTArtisan, Brightin Star, etc…). They produced lenses that were sometimes optically interesting but not really at the same level as the big players in terms of build, features, and autofocus. They even sold their lenses under multiple brand names, of which only Samyang and Rokinon remain (yes, Rokinon lenses are the exact same save slightly different badging). But then Samyang started to experiment with autofocus, and, while early results were a little primitive, I saw rapid progress. About 3 ½ years ago I reviewed the first Samyang lens that I thought was truly competitive with the main brands, and it was the Samyang AF 85mm F1.4 FE. I subsequently reviewed the Canon RF mount version of the lens and found it even better (they added an AF/MF switch to the design). I added that lens to my own personal Canon kit and still regularly use it today. Today, however, I’m looking at the second generation of Samyang’s “big” prime lenses. I first looked at the Series II version of the AF 50mm F1.4, and found it a major improvement over the first generation lens. Today I’ll be examining the new Samyang AF 85mm F1.4 Series II. I will subsequently be looking at the new 35mm F1.4 Series II along with the impressive Samyang AF 135mm F1.8.
I’m excited about this Samyang lens as I’ve always appreciated the performance and value of the previous versions of the lens, and now we’ve gotten a more compact size along with new features as a part of the formula. The new version is slimmer and lighter along with some other significant improvements:
Smaller size:
MK 1 88 x 99.5 (D x L) | 568g weight | 77mm filter thread
MK 2 83.4 x 99.5 (D x L) | 509g weight | 72mm filter thread
Slightly improved MFD (0.85 vs 0.90 = 0.12 vs 0.11x)
AF Motor improved to Linear STM (Samyang claims improved performance for video. “Quieter, faster, and more accurate AF performance”
Improved weather sealing – from 3 seal points to 7 seal points
Added Focus Hold Button and Custom Switch
We’ll detail those features further, but clearly Samyang is upping its game in terms of providing lenses that are competitive with third party brands and even with first party options. For now, the AF 85II is only available on Sony FE, though here’s hoping that Canon and Nikon will wake up and allow their customers access to these excellent new lenses. The AF 85mm F1.4 Series II comes at a price point of right under $800 USD, which places it only $200 more than the Sony F1.8 version (my review here) and about $400 cheaper than the lens I consider to be the chief competitor to this lens – the Sigma 85mm F1.4 DN ART (my review here).
So is the new Samyang AF 85mm F1.4 Series II worthy of your consideration if you’re in the market for a new lens? Is it worth the upgrade if you own the previous generation lens? I do my best to answer those questions in my video review or in my text review…or you can just enjoy the photos below.
I want to thank Samyang for sending me a test retail copy of the lens for review. As always, this is a completely independent review. The opinions here are completely my own. *The tests and most of the photos that I share as a part of my review cycle have been done with the new Sony Alpha 1 which will serve as my benchmark camera for the foreseeable future (my review here) and the Sony a7IV
Photos of the Samyang 85mm F1.4 Series II
Photos Taken with the Samyang AF 85mm F1.4 Series II
Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.
Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.
Receive a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!
Keywords: Samyang 85 II, Samyang 85 1.4, Samyang 85mm, II, Series II, MK II, AF, Samyang, Rokinon, Samyang AF 85mm F1.4 II, F1.4II, Samyang AF, Samyang AF 85mm F1.4 II Review, Review, Dustin Abbott, FE, Sigma 85mm F1.4 DN, FE, Sony 85mm F1.4 GM, Sony 85mm F1.8, Portrait, Sony a7IV, Sony a7III, Sony Alpha 1, Sony a7C, Bokeh, Sharpness, Resolution, Video Test, Sample Images, Real World, let the light in, #letthelightin, DA
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
I was somewhat surprised when Sigma released the Sigma 28-70mm F2.8 DG DN (my review here). It had only been 13 months since they had released the Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 DN, a lens I felt was a strong alternative in both performance and price ($1099 USD) to the much more expensive Sony G Master version ($2198 USD). I had given the 24-70mm a positive review, and wondered if there was room for two similar lenses in Sigma’s lineup for Sony. Over time, however, I have begun to realize a couple of things about Sigma’s strategy on mirrorless. The first is that while I tend to focus on the Sony side of things, Sigma is also actively developing for the Leica L mount, which their own Sigma branded cameras now use. Some of those L-mount bodies are more compact, whereas a lot of the Sigma ART and Sport branded lenses have actually been some of the largest and heaviest in their class. Sigma’s strategy (which makes sense!) has been to develop two separate lines on mirrorless. They have, for example, three DN 35mm lenses already (F1.2, F1.4, and F2). All DN lenses – new, purpose designed lenses for mirrorless cameras and their unique focus systems. The large aperture lenses are designed for those who want ultimate image quality (and don’t mind paying for it and carrying it!), while the smaller aperture lenses (called the “i-Series”) are designed for those who want good image quality but aren’t willing to carry around a massive, heavy lens to achieve it. Sigma has started to bifurcate their zoom lineup in the same way, with the 28-70mm DN being the first of those designs. Enter the new Sigma 16-28mm F2.8 DG DN, a wide angle companion to the “normal” zoom range of the 28-70mm. The 16-28DN (as we’ll call it for brevity) follows a lot of the same principles of the 28-70mm (compact and lightweight) while also allowing you to go quite wide (16mm):
…and frame in a little tighter on the 28mm side:
This lens is a little less surprising, obviously, as it is an obvious compliment in focal length to an existing lens. Like the 28-70mm DN, however, the new 16-28DN comes up against an established competitor in the Sony space (where I’m reviewing it) in the form of the Tamron 17-28mm F2.8 RXD (my review here). The Sigma has an obvious advantage in focal length, going considerably wider (here’s what 16mm vs 17mm looks like):
Interestingly, it also zooms in to a bit tighter a framing despite both lenses supposedly ending at 28mm:
That’s a serious advantage, though the Tamron also has a few compelling factors in its favor, including lower distortion and vignette, and, due to market forces, a cheaper price. There are some of you who just prefer Sigma, period, and I’m always in favor of more competition on the market. It is the proliferation of lenses like this that make Sony such a compelling platform right now. There are so many quality choices at a variety of price points…and I love it!
The big question is whether or not this particular lens is worthy of your consideration. Sigma’s 14-24mm F2.8 DN lens is an excellent lens (my review here), but it is also 43% larger by volume, 76% heavier, and hundreds of dollars more expensive. Is the superior performance of that lens worth the extra size, weight, and expense…or would you rather travel light? Sigma is clearly betting that there are those of you who will check the latter box, and, if so, the Sigma 16-28mm F2.8 DN might just be the lens for you. So join me as we explore the highs and lows of this compact standard zoom for Sony or Leica. If you prefer to watch reviews, you can watch my video review below…or just keep reading.
I want to thank Sigma Canada (and Gentec) for the loaner of this lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. The opinions here are completely my own. *The tests and most of the photos that I share as a part of my review cycle have been done with three cameras – the Sony Alpha 1, Sony a7IV, and Sony a6400.
Sigma 16-28DN Build, Design and Handling
Whereas the 28-70mm DN offered a slightly reduced focal length relative to its main competitor (the Tamron 28-75mm), Sigma flips the script here and offers up a slightly larger zoom range instead (a solid move, in my opinion). That does translate into slightly more size and weight relative to the Tamron 17-28mm RXD, the two lenses are close enough in size that I don’t think that will be a factor for many people. Here’s a look at how the 16-28DN compares to some competing options (I’ve manually added the information for the 16-28mm since it isn’t available to retailers yet).
Here’s a visual comparison to the Tamron (as I happen to own that lens):
The new Sigma 16-28DN is 77.2mm in diameter and right over 100mm long. You can see from the photo above that the Sigma is marginally wider and longer, but the basic footprint of the two lenses is roughly the same. There’s only one exception to this, and that is in the nature of the lens hoods (both lenses include a lens hood). The Sigma lens hood flares out a fair bit and thus doesn’t store as compactly.
The Sigma is slightly heavier at 450g (vs 420g), though that is significantly lighter than the Sony 16-35mm GM (680g) or the Sigma 14-24mm ART (795g).
Up front we have a 72mm filter thread, which is fairly common but not as ubiquitous as either the 67mm or 77mm standards. The ability to use traditional screw-in filters is always welcome in a wide angle lens.
Like the 28-70mm DN (and i-Series primes), Sigma has chosen to position the 16-28DN under the Global Vision division of “Contemporary”. Typically the lenses branded Contemporary carry Sigma’s lowest level of build, with Sport lenses given the most robust while Art lenses land in the middle. The build here is actually pretty decent, though, and is competitive with the Tamron’s build save the fact that the Sigma has only a gasket at the lens mount while the Tamron has some internal weather sealing points as well. The Sigma feels ever-so-slightly nicer in the hand, however, due to slightly more upscale materials on the barrel, and (always welcome!) includes an AF/MF switch (something the Tamron 17-28mm lacks). That may or may not be a big deal to you, but I still find it the fastest and most logical way to switch in between these two methods of focus.
The more upscale Sigma 14-24mm DN has a more thorough weather sealing and also includes a focus hold button – both of which this lens lacks.
This is an internally zooming lens, so it doesn’t change shape at all during zooming or focusing – the length is constant. This helps with the weather sealing and also means that a zoom lock is unnecessary.
The zoom ring is closest to the lens mount and moves with that smoothness you only see in internally zooming lenses. Sigma persists in the zoom action being from left go right rather than from right to left like Sony (and Tamron, and Samyang) lenses on the Sony platform. Unfortunate, really, as you may find yourself instinctively zooming the wrong direction if you’re accustomed to lenses from any of the other brands on Sony.
The manual focus ring is closest to the front of the lens and also moves nicely. The focus ring is a “by-wire” system, meaning that input on the focus ring is electronically communicated rather than through a direct mechanical coupling. This means that input on the focus ring will not create any physical changes unless the lens is attached to a camera and powered on. The focus ring has a fairly nice feel to it, and Sigma has done a good job emulating traditional manual focus.
The aperture iris has 9 rounded aperture blades, and this helps keep the aperture shape fairly circular when stopped down, though there are only so many opportunities to see circular bokeh highlights on a wide angle lens once stopped down.
The geometry of the bokeh looks quite good across the frame at 28mm, F2.8, however:
This is helped by having a fairly close minimum focus distance (25cm) and a resulting maximum magnification of 0.178x.
That’s just very slightly behind the magnification of the GM and Tamron 17-28mm lenses (0.19x) and betters the 0.14x of the Sigma 14-24mm.
Unlike the 28-70mm DN, however, we don’t get a higher magnification on the wider end. This lens behaves more traditionally where the MFD at both ends of the zoom range are the same. Up close performance at 28mm looked very good to my eye, however.
Like the 28-70 DN, I would have liked a more thorough weather sealing on the lens, but overall I quite like the build and handling of the 16-28DN. I think it strikes a nice balance between size, weight, and build quality. It is marginally bigger than the Tamron that it will compete with, but also gives a bigger zoom range, which I suspect many will find a reasonable tradeoff.
Sigma 16-28mm F2.8 DN Autofocus Performance
The Sigma 16-28DN utilizes a stepping focus motor (STM) that makes fast, quiet focus changes. Video focus pulls are fast, accurate, and smooth, and there is little to no hunting or settling. I saw minimal focus breathing during my tests, too.
A lens with a maximum aperture of F2.8 is fairly good in low light, though obviously not as good as lenses with even larger maximum apertures. In many cases, cameras will focus with the lens aperture wide open and then close it down to the preset aperture choice at the moment of capture. A lens with a smaller maximum aperture is going to be at a disadvantage in low light conditions because the physical aperture is smaller than alternative lenses, meaning that less light can reach the sensor. F2.8 is what I would call a “medium” maximum aperture, but it is wide enough that one should be able to shoot weddings or events with the lens and get solid results.
Under normal lighting conditions I had no problems. I was able to nail focus indoors without any problems at all.
Eye AF works well, with good detection of the eye and “stickiness” in tracking it.
In my video test where I track my face, I found the lens did a good job of quickly and smoothly returning to focus on the eyes when I moved my hand out of the way.
I also had no problems nailing focus on this shallow subject (lock) on the chain link fence.
Though it is hard to see at this magnification level, the focus on the golfer in this wide shot is accurate:
In general I feel like Sigma had really hit their stride in the focus accuracy and quality on their Sony DN lenses. While their telephotos are not quite as fast as the native Sony lenses (that typically employ multiple focus motors), their general purpose lenses are pretty much as good as native Sony competitors. Autofocus here was fast, quiet, and accurate whether shooting stills or video. Focus was solid in all the situations I shot with the lens…and that’s all you can ask for.
Sigma 16-28DN Image Quality
The optical formula is made up of 16 elements in 11 groups, which is slightly more complex than the Tamron (13 elements in 11 groups). That’s to be expected, however, since the Sigma lens does go wider. It is capable of delivering crisp result even on my high resolution cameras.
Longitudinal chromatic aberrations (LoCA) seem well controlled and I see little to no fringing on the white edges of the letters or transition zone on the mirror behind.
If we look up into the bare branches on this golf course image, we find little evidence of lateral chromatic aberrations near the edge of the frame, too.
That’s a solid start, though things go downhill a bit after this. I’ve complained about some previous Sigma lenses and the complexity of the distortion that I found hard to manually fix, so Sigma made sure to send a correction profile along with the 16-28DN for me.
It’s a good thing, as it was needed. I found a strong amount of barrel distortion that unfortunately is a bit complex and difficult to smoothly correct manually. There’s some mustache pattern left over.
I dialed in a +21 to correct the barrel distortion and needed to max out the sliders (+100) to correct for the vignette, which is very strong at 16mm.
That vignette will be very obvious at F2.8 if you don’t correct for it:
The profile does a better job of correction the complexities of the distortion and deals with the vignette fairly well. It is worth noting that aberrations that heavy can cause a bit of damage to image quality in the correction process, though (particularly near the edges). There’s no free ride, so to speak.
The distortion flips to a more mild pincushion distortion (-4) near the middle of the range and the vignette, while still heavy (+64), is milder than what we saw at 16mm. The pincushion distortion worsens at 28mm (-10 to correct) but the vignette gets a bit lighter (+50). That correction profile is going to be necessary with this lens, though JPEGs and video will get corrected in camera. Tamron took the safer route by producing a lens with a smaller zoom range (and which didn’t go as wide) and the byproduct is that it has less vignette and distortion. Sigma gambled on photographers preferring the wider angle of view even if it comes with a bit more optical challenges.
So how about sharpness and contrast? All chart tests done with a Sony Alpha 1 (50 MP) using a tripod and a two second timer.
Here’s a look at my test chart:
A close look at the 16mm, F2.8 results (this is 200% magnification) shows exceptionally good results in the center of the frame and very good results in the midframe and corner:
There’s some minor give and take in comparison to the Tamron (at 17mm), but the two lenses are largely similar on the wide end (which is to say very good!).
Stopping down to smaller apertures (like F5.6) provides only minimal improvement in the center of the frame (already near perfect) but the mid-frame and corners improve to excellent levels.
Take that in the real world and you can get nicely detailed results all across the frame:
Minimum aperture throughout the zoom range is F22, though I typically avoid anything smaller than F11 because of the effects of diffraction that rob the images of contrast and resolution at those very small apertures.
This is a constant aperture zoom, so the maximum aperture of F2.8 applies equally to all focal lengths. 16mm proved the sharpest focal length on my test copy, with a mild regression at 18-20mm most obviously seen in the mid-frame and corners. You’ll want to stop down to F5.6 or so if you want sharp corners, as there is an obvious improvement when stopped down (here at 20mm):
At 24mm I found a more even performance, though I felt the corners were relatively stronger than the center performance here. Stopping down sharpens them up to excellent levels.
28mm is similar, with good results wide open and better results available when stopped down.
I thought that my real world 28mm landscape results looked nice.
Here’s another that I like, though I wasn’t quite as wowed by real world results as what I saw on the 14-24DN.
A lens like this is rarely going to be a “go-to” lens for bokeh, and this lens is no exception. I didn’t really see any images where I loved the bokeh quality. Images like this show fairly busy backgrounds.
Likewise this monochrome along the fence never really shows the “creaminess” that I associate with quality bokeh.
To be fair, however, I buy a lens like this more for having everything IN focus rather than out of focus!
Flare resistance was mostly good, but also somewhat mixed. You can see from these images that having the sun right at the edge of the frame does end up with some reduced contrast, and, if stopped down (like the second image), so very long sun rays.
This second batch of images is mostly better, which shows that being careful in your composition can make a big difference in the flare performance with this lens (and many others).
I’m often very pleased with the colors from Sigma wide angle lenses, and that’s true here as well. Color seems both rich and accurate.
It won’t be hard to get images you can be proud of out of this lens, though you’ll want to correct that vignette and distortion. You can see more images by checking out the lens image gallery here.
Conclusion
It’s a little hard for me to predict the market reaction for the new Sigma 16-28mm F2.8 DG DN. It is an obvious compliment to the 28-70mm F2.8 DN, giving potential owners a smaller, lighter, cheaper kit than the 14-24mm and 24-70mm F2.8 ART DN lenses. But like with the 28-70mm (vs the Tamron 28-75mm F2.8), Tamron has had a chance to really beat Sigma to the market with their 17-28mm F2.8 RXD lens – a lens that was introduced nearly three years and was well-received both critically and commercially. Will the slightly wider focal length of the Sigma attract future buyers on Sony over the Tamron…despite the Sigma being more expensive?
As always, though, it is important to remember that Sigma is also developing for the Leica L-mount. The market is less crowded there and also competing lenses are often more expensive than some of Sigma’s competition on the Sony platform. The 16-28DN may excel there.
Outside of the high distortion and vignette, this is a solid lens. Nice build, relatively compact, great focal range, great autofocus, and a solid optical performance. There’s no question you can make beautiful images with it, and it is light enough to come along easily. You can use traditional screw on filters (not the case for the 14-24mm F2.8 DN), so that also makes it a more accessible lens. I think the 14-24mm F2.8 DN is the more exceptional lens optically, but it is also bigger, heavier, and more expensive. If you are a Sigma fan and want to travel lighter with your wide angle kit, then the new Sigma 16-28mm F2.8 DN may just be the lens for you.
Pros:
Compact, lightweight lens with nice construction
Includes some weather sealing at mount and is internally zooming
Broader zoom range than competing Tamron lens
Fast, quiet autofocus
Smooth and quiet video AF work
Good up close performance
Excellent flare resistance
CA is well controlled
Excellent sharpness and contrast across the frame even wide open
Weight under 500g
Cons:
Strong vignette (particularly at 16mm)
Fairly complex barrel distortion on the wide end
Strong pincushion distortion at 28mm
Sigma persists in the zoom direction being opposite to other lenses on Sony
Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.
Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!
Keywords: Sigma 16-28 DN, Sigma 16-28 F2.8, Sigma 16-28mm F2.8 DG DN, 16-28 DN Review, Review, Sigma 28-70 DN, DN, DG, 16-28mm, F2.8, Review, Tamron 17-28mm F2.8, Tamron 17-28, Review, Sony Alpha 1, Sony a7IV, Review, Hands On, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Sharpness, Bokeh, Flare Resistance, Autofocus, Image Quality, Sample Images, Video, Photography, Sony a9, sony a7III, sony a7RIII, a7R3, Leica L
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
I was somewhat surprised when Sigma released the Sigma 28-70mm F2.8 DG DN (my review here). It had only been 13 months since they had released the Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 DN, a lens I felt was a strong alternative in both performance and price ($1099 USD) to the much more expensive Sony G Master version ($2198 USD). I had given the 24-70mm a positive review, and wondered if there was room for two similar lenses in Sigma’s lineup for Sony. Over time, however, I have begun to realize a couple of things about Sigma’s strategy on mirrorless. The first is that while I tend to focus on the Sony side of things, Sigma is also actively developing for the Leica L mount, which their own Sigma branded cameras now use. Some of those L-mount bodies are more compact, whereas a lot of the Sigma ART and Sport branded lenses have actually been some of the largest and heaviest in their class. Sigma’s strategy (which makes sense!) has been to develop two separate lines on mirrorless. They have, for example, three DN 35mm lenses already (F1.2, F1.4, and F2). All DN lenses – new, purpose designed lenses for mirrorless cameras and their unique focus systems. The large aperture lenses are designed for those who want ultimate image quality (and don’t mind paying for it and carrying it!), while the smaller aperture lenses (called the “i-Series”) are designed for those who want good image quality but aren’t willing to carry around a massive, heavy lens to achieve it. Sigma has started to bifurcate their zoom lineup in the same way, with the 28-70mm DN being the first of those designs. Enter the new Sigma 16-28mm F2.8 DG DN, a wide angle companion to the “normal” zoom range of the 28-70mm. The 16-28mm DN follows a lot of the same principles of the 28-70mm (compact and lightweight) while also allowing you to go quite wide (16mm):
…and frame in a little tighter on the 28mm side:
This lens is a little less surprising, obviously, as it is an obvious compliment in focal length to an existing lens. Like the 28-70mm DN, however, the new 16-28DN comes up against an established competitor in the Sony space (where I’m reviewing it) in the form of the Tamron 17-28mm F2.8 RXD (my review here). The Sigma has an obvious advantage in focal length, going considerably wider (here’s what 16mm vs 17mm looks like):
Interestingly, it also zooms in to a bit tighter a framing despite both lenses supposedly ending at 28mm:
That’s a serious advantage, though the Tamron also has a few compelling factors in its favor, including lower distortion and vignette, and, due to market forces, a cheaper price. There are some of you who just prefer Sigma, period, and I’m always in favor of more competition on the market. It is the proliferation of lenses like this that make Sony such a compelling platform right now. There are so many quality choices at a variety of price points…and I love it!
The big question is whether or not this particular lens is worthy of your consideration. Sigma’s 14-24mm F2.8 DN lens is an excellent lens (my review here), but it is also 43% larger by volume, 76% heavier, and hundreds of dollars more expensive. Is the superior performance of that lens worth the extra size, weight, and expense…or would you rather travel light? Sigma is clearly betting that there are those of you who will check the latter box, and, if so, the Sigma 16-28mm F2.8 DN might just be the lens for you. If you want more information, you can watch my video review or read my text review…or just enjoy the photos below.
I want to thank Sigma Canada (and Gentec) for the loaner of this lens. As always, this is a completely independent review. The opinions here are completely my own. *The tests and most of the photos that I share as a part of my review cycle have been done with three cameras – the Sony Alpha 1, Sony a7IV, and Sony a6400.
Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.
Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!
Keywords: Sigma 16-28 DN, Sigma 16-28 F2.8, Sigma 16-28mm F2.8 DG DN, 16-28 DN Review, Review, Sigma 28-70 DN, DN, DG, 16-28mm, F2.8, Review, Tamron 17-28mm F2.8, Tamron 17-28, Review, Sony Alpha 1, Sony a7IV, Review, Hands On, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Sharpness, Bokeh, Flare Resistance, Autofocus, Image Quality, Sample Images, Video, Photography, Sony a9, sony a7III, sony a7RIII, a7R3, Leica L
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
My first encounter with the company NiSi was actually to review their first lens. NiSi has historically been a company that has made filters for other people’s lenses, and a search of their products shows a lot of filters with very high reviews. But at some point they clearly decided that their optical glass expertise could just as easily go into the construction of lenses themselves, which has produced the very intriguing NiSi 15mm F4 ASPH lens. That positive experience made me open to checking out NiSi’s main event – filters and filter systems. I’ve been testing their new V7 Filter System over the past few months in a variety of environments; from the Arctic temperature of Canada in deep winter:
…to the sun-kissed beaches of South Carolina:
The V7 Filter System proved to be a great companion in both environments, and I’ll quickly break down why in mini-review. If you want a deeper dive into the review, I would recommend watching my video review. It’s easier to visually demonstrate some things rather than just describing them.
The NiSi V7 Filter System is not designed around adding filters to certain lenses that cannot use traditional screw-in filters. One of the earliest such systems that I reviewed was for adding filters to the Samyang 14mm F2.8 manual focus lens. That system was basically a huge pain. It was large and clunky, difficult to mount, and the filters were not of the highest quality. I’ve reviewed other such systems for other lenses along the way, and, while the quality was frequently better, they still ended up being rather large and cumbersome. The V7 Filter system is not designed around adapting a specific lens for filter use, but rather for giving versatility for using filters for any lens with traditional filter threads in sizes up to 82mm. The byproduct of this is that the basic kit is nicely compact and comes with a really nice case to store it all in:
That kit comes with several step-up rings in the most popular sizes (67mm, 72mm, 77mm), though you may need to purchase an additional step up ring if your lens doesn’t have one of those filter thread sizes. Fortunately step up rings are inexpensive.
There are two primary reasons to invest in a square filter system like this (this is considered a 100mm square system): the first is that stacking circular filters with a wide angle lens often leads to vignetting. The angle of view is so wide that the filters start to cause darkness along the edges of the frame. A square filter system is wider than the lens diameter and helps avoid this even when using multiple filters. In this case you can add up to 3 square filters along with the included circular polarizing filter without fear of vignette. The circular polarizer is a good one; optically sound and well made. A clever part of the design gives you an external dial that will allow you to rotate the filter even when it is covered by the filter system. You can use just the circular polarizer portion of the filter system without attaching the square holder, so that could give you a secondary value by just using that filter if all you want is polarizing, like this:
The second big reason to use square filter systems is for the advantage of being able to use graduated filters. Grad filters don’t have a solid neutral density effect but have the effect only on a part of the filter with either a hard transition or a gradual transition. The NiSi graduated filters come in a 100 x 150mm size to allow you to slide them up and down. This can really boost your images by balancing exposure. In this scene, for example, the bright sky and buildings made for a darker foreground.
By using a medium graduated ND filter on the sky portion of the image, I was able to balance the exposure, and, as a bonus, give a little more character to a somewhat boring sky.
I flipped it around for a different shot. The underside of a pier on the Atlantic was in shadow, while the waves crashing in were bright and well lit. I used the grad-ND on the water to bring down the highlights there and thus allowing the pier supports (in shadow) to be properly lit in this shot.
The square filter holder is easy to add onto the circular section (which mounts first via the filter threads of the lens) by using a unique locking screw that allows you to pull it back first (allowing the square filter system to be attached) and then by tightening it down so you have no fear of the filter holder coming off.
A secondary feature that I really like is that filters are held in place by a passive tension system that does a great job of exerting consistent pressure on the filters to hold them in place but gives enough freedom to slide them into the proper position. There’s nothing that you have to remember to tighten down, which is great, as I’ve been in the situation where I was desperately grabbing at an expensive filter that started to slide out of a filter holder when I went to move the tripod to a new position.
The square 100mm filters have a foam surround that keeps stray light from penetrating (and offers some protection). All of NiSi’s filters have nano-coatings on both sides to make them resistant to scratching, oils, etc… I love using ND filters for getting long exposures in a variety of lighting conditions. Here, for example, I was able to smooth out the movement of the waves crashing in under that same pier and get a nicely moody shot.
Performance of the filters was good. NiSi boasts that their filters are “True-Color”, and I can attest that I didn’t see a color cast introduced into my images. Here’s a shot of the same scene shown earlier, save this time with a 10 stop ND filter along with the CP-L filter attached:
You can see that the color balance is very close to the original scene. I didn’t feel like I had to do work in post to “fix” white balance with any of the image I took with the system.
I also felt like my resolution results held up with the filters attached. Here’s a long exposure image taken with the ND1000 (ten stop) and CP-L filters. You can see from the crop that there is still perfect detail in the scene even on the fairly demanding sensor of the Canon EOS R5 (45MP) that I used for the shot.
I was very impressed with the packaging and presentation of everything that I tested. Everything comes with some kind of carrying sleeve or pouch to help protect it, and included booklets give you tips, instructions, and charts for getting the most out of your filters (and the right exposure!)
So let’s talk pricing. Filter systems like the V7 tend to be expensive, and that’s true to some degree here, though NiSi undercuts a lot of other brands by a fair bit. You have a number of options of kit sizes essentially depending on what all you need.
The basic filter holder and circular polarizing filter setup runs about $250 USD, but if you step up to something like the “Starter Kit”, you get essentially what I’ve used in this review – a system that includes both a ND1000 filter and the graduated medium-ND filter. That kit will run you right over $500, and is obviously very popular, as it is already backordered.
Larger kits come with even more filter options and the price climbs relative to what all is included.
The advantage of buying kits is that the price of individual items drops relative to buying them separately, but you also need to be sure that you get what you need for your work and not just get extra pieces that are going to sit in the bag. I will note for those of you that like to IR work that these filters are design with IR in mind.
I have no significant complaints about the NiSi V7. I did my review in winter, which is not really the best time of year for me in terms of getting great long exposure images (everything is frozen over!!), but I was happy with both the handling of the system and the results I was able to get. I was able to pack the filter system along with 5 filters in two pouches small enough to fit into the front pocket of my backpack for travel, so it was easy to bring along with me. This system isn’t cheap, but it is also isn’t lens specific, which means that you can purchase one time and use it for pretty much the rest of your photography career as long as you take care of everything. So get out there and make some magic!
The best way to get a deeper look at and demonstration of this system is by checking out my video below…or you can just enjoy the photos I’ve had a chance to take with V7 Filter system below.
Thank you to NiSi for sending me the V7 system for review. As always, this is a completely independent review. The opinions here are completely my own.
Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.
Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!
Keywords: NiSi V7, NiSi, V7, Filter System, NiSi V7 Filter System Review, Demonstration, Myrtle Beach, Ocean, Snow, NiSi 15mm F4 review, NiSi 15 F4, F/4, Wide Angle, Hands On, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Sharpness, Bokeh, Flare Resistance, Autofocus, Image Quality, Sample Images, Video, Photography, Sony a9, sony a7III, sony a7RIV, a7R3, Sony Alpha 1, Sony A1, Canon RF, Nikon Z, Fuji X, Landscape Photography, Filters
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Perhaps no Sony camera series has benefitted as much from the “trickle-down” effect as the a7 series. The a7III set a new benchmark for the “full frame affordable(ish)” category by being basically good at everything. It inherited an amazing focus system from the Sony a9 that actually gave it better focus capabilities than the more expensive a7RIII, which itself had been a huge step forward. The a7III also benefited from a lot of a7S video capabilities, which resulted in it being a better video body than either the a9 or the a7RIII. It got the new battery, the new control layout, and a host of other improvements. Fast forward a few years and we’ve seen Sony release the truly incredible Alpha 1 (my review here), which advanced Sony design on almost every level. The downside? It cost $6500 USD! The new Sony a7IV (technically the ILCE-7M4) is not necessarily an Alpha 1 clone (it has a much lower burst rate, lesser video capabilities, lower resolution, etc…) but I do see a lot of Alpha 1 DNA in this camera. The Alpha 1 is my most used camera these days, so I’m very familiar with its performance and handling, and I can say that you’re getting a lot of Alpha 1 for the $2500 price point of the Sony a7IV. I’ll detail why in this review.
The Sony a7IV is designed around a brand new 33MP Full-Frame Exmor R CMOS Sensor. This ups the resolution from the 24MP seen on previous a7 bodies and brings us to what I consider a sweet spot for performance. It always felt like there was too much of a gap between the a7 series (24MP) and the a7R series (typically 42-61MP). This new 33MP sensor feels like a series step up, but it also sits in a sweet spot for today’s performance. As we’ll see in this review, this new sensor is among Sony’s best in dynamic range, high ISO performance, and seems to have improved color handling. Images are highly detailed, and I don’t feel a huge chasm between these images and my 50MP Alpha 1 images like I did with the a7III. Image resolution is 7008 x 4672 pixels, which is probably as many pixels as most people will ever need. Images from the a7IV look great:
Also useful is the fact that you still get 16MP in APS-C crop mode, which is a much more useful figure than the roughly 11MP figure on the a7III and other 24MP bodies. I found the 33MP resolution point and the new sensor helped make the a7IV feel more upscale than the a7III, which is appropriate, as it has moved upscale in terms of pricing. The a7III debuted at a bargain price point of around $2000, but the a7IV has jumped to $2500. This does create a little more room for Sony to release a budget full frame model under $2000 (a space occupied at the moment by the a7III and a7C cameras). The a7III will probably get phased out as current supply is sold off. Does the Sony a7IV justify this price increase?
Before we dive into the details, here’s a quick look at the major specs and features that stood out to me during my review:
33MP Full-Frame Exmor R CMOS Sensor
Up to 10 fps Shooting, ISO 100-51200
Much deeper buffer depth (up to 828 uncompressed RAW + JPEG)
4K 60p Video in 10-Bit, S-Cinetone
No recording limit
3.68m-Dot EVF with 120 fps Refresh Rate
3″ 1.03m-Dot Vari-Angle Touchscreen LCD
759-Pt. Fast Hybrid AF
Real-time Eye AF (including bird AF in stills and video tracking)
Focus Breathing Compensation
5-Axis SteadyShot Image Stabilization
4K 15p UVC/UAC Streaming via USB Type-C
Like the Alpha 1, I feel like the Sony a7IV has “enough” of everything that I don’t feel like I’m missing much. That in itself adds up to a very compelling camera. But is it the camera for you? Find out by reading on or watching my long format definitive or quick video review below:
Thanks to Sony Canada for getting me a loaner of Sony a7RIV. As always, this is a completely independent review.
Sony a7IV Build, Handling, and Features
The body of the a7IV is largely familiar [131.3mm (W) x 96.4mm (H) x 79.8mm (D)], but with a deeper grip depth that improves the feel of the camera in the hand. The a7IV manages to only be 8g heavier than the a7III at 658g (with memory and batter). In many ways the control layout feels like the Alpha 1 (without the extra dial on the left of the viewfinder), though the a7IV has a welcome articulating touchscreen with a 1.037 million dot resolution that is a slight gain over the 922K dot resolution on the a7III’s tilting screen. The responsiveness of the screen is fairly good, though I do find the font size a little too small for touch precision at times and wish the menu layout was more like Canons. Being able to front monitor and use the screen in nearly infinite positions is very welcome, as is being able to position the screen for proper vertical shooting.
I love the way that Sony has designed the ports so that they fit next to the hinges of the screen in a very logical way (something Canon typically doesn’t do). The doors over the ports open precisely and don’t just “hang” like they used to on the a7III. I really like the small separate port for the microphone jack, as that assures you’ll never miss recorded audio because you accidently plugged into the headphone jack (which is in the port beneath). You’ll find a Micro-USB multi-control port along with a USB-C port used for both data transfer and charging, though like other new Sony cameras the charging requires a power source with Power Send capability.
Also improved is the resolution of the viewfinder, which has been upgraded from the 2.359 million dot resolution on the a7III to a new 3.68 million dots resolution. It’s worth noting that the viewfinder and LCD screen resolution figures are just the bare minimum for competitiveness, so don’t get too excited!
The top plate shows a few minor tweaks to the dials along with a swapping of the C1 button to the back and the video record button to the top plate. For some reason there is no longer a label on the exposure compensation dial, which I find odd. The mode dial now has a lever underneath it that allows you to switch on the fly between Stills, Video, and S&Q, and you can set up your control scheme independently for these (buttons can have different function for video mode than in stills, for example).
Most of the buttons can be programed to the function of your choice. Sony cameras have always excelled in customization, and that remains true here. The feel of the buttons is much like the Alpha 1, a7SIII, or other recent Sony cameras.
The right side of the camera holds the memory cards, and you now have the option to use a CFExpress Type A card in the #1 slot or a UHS-II SD card in either slot. There’s a slight redesign to the latch on the memory card door on the right which has you pull down and slide the door open. As noted, the #1 slot can use both UHS-II SD cards and CF Express Type A cards. The latter offers some speed advantages but at a much higher price point. I prefer the Sony Tough cards in either format right now, as I have found them to be highly performing and extremely durable).
The burst rate is the familiar 10FPS, but the buffer depth has been dramatically improved, now allowing over 1000 frames of Lossless compressed RAW or JPEGs and even 828 full size uncompressed RAW + JPEG. Long gone are the delays while the camera empties the buffer, too.
There’s probably no reason other than market separation that the a7IV does not have a faster burst rate. If it were up to 15FPS or similar there would probably be many who would see little reason to go for the a9II, as the a7IV has just as good a focus system (if not better), deep buffers, and very good tracking capabilities. This doesn’t seem too cheap on Sony’s part, however, as the a7IV’s role is really as a jack of all trades, while the higher speed bodies like the a9 series and Alpha 1 are more specialist tools.
The shutter mechanism is better damped and quieter than the a7III, which hopefully points towards more durability over the long haul. There are front and rear dials on the top plate, with the front dial slightly cantilevered up to make it fall to hand (finger?) easily.
The main menu is the updated version that was first seen in the a7SIII and then on the Alpha 1. It is color coded and side tab oriented rather than top tab oriented like the older Sony menus. I’m yet undecided as to whether I prefer the newer menu. There’s still a lot of complexity there, and there are a LOT of options in these menus. Don’t get me wrong; I love the wealth of customization and features you have access to, but the sheer number of options will be slightly overwhelming for a while until you develop familiarity with them. I didn’t love the previous Sony menu structure, though, unlike some reviewers, I didn’t despite it either. But after years of use, I was at least familiar with it and knew pretty much where everything was. I’m having to relearn that somewhat, though Sony’s basic organization of features remains similar.
The battery door is on the bottom, as per usual, and the battery is the typical NP-FZ100 that we’ve seen since the original a9. It’s rated for about 520 shots, though real world use varies depending on what you are doing. If you shoot hybrid style and have some video clips in there, expect to charge the battery more often. If you are shooting bursts or consistent portraits, you will get far more shots than the rating. Getting an extra battery or two is never a bad idea, though. I typically feel like I have to charge my Sony batteries quicker than I expected.
Sony was an early pioneer in IBIS (In Body Image Stabilization), though over the past few years their advantage here seems to have shrunk. On paper, the 5 1/2 stops of stabilization is the same as we’ve seen for years, though in practical applications the quality of the stabilization has subtly improved over the past few years. I’ve definitely noticed that more recent Sony models have better stabilization, and that’s true here, too. One new addition for the video side is a mode called “Active” (as seen on the a7SIII) which has a slight crop but utilizes electronic aids to further stabilize active movements (like walking). I did a series of tests and found that the the active mode definitely gave smoother results when walking or moving. The crop wasn’t particularly noticeable to me, but I did feel like footage was slightly less crisp, so I would utilize the Standard IBIS setting when shooting static handheld footage and save Active for the appropriate moments. I added the option to the custom menu so that I could quickly sort between the settings.
I’ve seen ratings on IBIS and Lens IS/OSS going up and up, but it seems to me like the law of diminishing returns, as it seems like the same limitations that I’ve seen with image stabilization for the past decade still apply. I did a test at 50mm and 1/5th second shutter speed (about 3 1/2 stops) and got about a 25% keeper rate.
Still, I love having IBIS in the camera as it means that all lenses get at least some stabilization. You can manually set the focal length to stabilize even if you are using old vintage lenses. It’s possible to get good results at very low shutter speeds in many situations, but it is important to have realistic expectations about what IBIS can and cannot do. Sony needs to continue to innovate on this front because the competition has more than caught up at this point.
So while the Sony a7IV may look very familiar, there are a lot of key upgrades that seriously improve the ergonomics and performance of the camera. I find a lot of the Alpha 1 DNA here…in a camera that is about a third of the price!
Sony a7IV Autofocus Performance
One again the Sony a7IV has really benefitted from the trickle-down effect, as like the a7III received most of the AF system of the a9, the a7IV has received most of the focus system from the even better Alpha 1. Sony has upped the ante on the total number of phase detect points from 693 on the a7III cameras to 759 on the a7IV, with about 94% coverage of the sensor. That’s only up a percentage point or two, but it does suggest that the AF points on the a7IV are slightly smaller and more precise, which can help when you are trying to nail focus on a very narrow subject (like when shooting macro). As is typical with Sony cameras, the PDAF is backed up by 425 contrast points (which is why it is called a Hybrid-AF system).
The improvement in AF is more than AF points or spread, however, as the a7IV has also inherited the BIONZ-XR processor from the Alpha 1. The Sony a9 was capable of 60 focus and exposure calculations per second; the Alpha 1 (and thus the a7IV) doubles that to 120. Here’s what Sony says, “At an astonishing calculation speed of up to 120 AF/AE per second, the Alpha 1 can maintain focus with high accuracy even for fast moving subjects. It can automatically adjust exposure, even with sudden changes in brightness, with an AE response latency as low as 0.033 seconds“. While the lower frame rate of the a7IV means that you won’t push the limits of the processor the same way, it does indicate that we have a very, very robust autofocus system.
Also improved is AF sensitivity, which can now focus down to -4 EV and up to +20 EV. This doesn’t quite match the numbers that Canon is throwing out, but I was definitely able to focus effectively in low light situations. I took this shot, for example, at ISO 25,600 inside my very dark Ruggard Dry Cabinet.
Sony has also ported over the refined Eye AF capabilities of the Alpha 1, including the new Bird Eye detect mode. Part of that improvement is that they state that eye detection is now effective from more angles, and that I believe to be true. You can see that I shot this low shot of Loki at an odd angle and eye detect still nailed everything perfectly at F1.4 (using the new Samyang AF 50mm F1.4 II – my review here).
This shows how much better Sony’s eye detection has gotten, as you are much more likely to get precision in a wider range of situations.
Sony has now enabled all three types of Eye tracking for video purposes as well. Even the Alpha 1 didn’t have real-time bird tracking in video (though expect that to get added via firmware).
My two week loaner period coincided with a severe cold snap in January where the temperature hovered between -20 and -40C…and public spaces like gyms were in COVID lockdown Not much was moving out there for tracking, so I didn’t get a chance to really torture test the a7IV’s tracking abilities. Still, I was very impressed even with the tracking of the a7C (an inferior focus system), and I think the focus system in the Alpha 1 is amazing (which is where most of the tech in the a7IV is borrowed from), so I fully expect the a7IV to be a very capable camera for tracking…as far as the focus system goes. The real story is a little more complicated, though.
What you don’t have relative to the a9 series or the Alpha 1 is the blackout free viewfinder. In fact, at 10 FPS (H+), you get something like a storybook where the last image shows for a split second and you don’t get a real-time view at all. At High (H) speed you get only 8 FPS, but you do get a real time viewfinder experience, though one interrupted 8 times per second with black as the shutter closes. You can switch to an electronic shutter, but the burst rate seems to drop to about 6FPS and you still get blackout. The illustration below shows the difference between the blackout free readout of the a9/Alpha 1 vs the blackout view you’ll see on the a7IV.
This is clearly not as sports oriented as the a9 and Alpha 1 models that are built around an electronic shutter. You have the autofocus capabilities to track action effectively, but the architecture of the camera means that the process will be more difficult. If you want to purely do sports or fast action, then you need to look at one of Sony’s serious sports bodies. In some ways those deep buffers go to waste, as the burst rate and viewfinder experience don’t really lend themselves to dedicated action tracking. The upside, though, is that you’ll probably never have to worry about missing a shot because the camera was trying to empty the buffer!
Where the Sony a7IV does shine is as a general purpose or portrait camera. I put the Sony a7IV in my assistant’s hands for a quick portrait shoot (it was so cold that I needed to be the subject – no other volunteers for portraits at -25!). He used a camera he had never previously touched and a lens (aforementioned Samyang AF 50mm F1.4 II) he had never used and shot in very cold conditions…and yet when I reviewed the images, I found that they were all focused very well.
I had him shoot strongly backlit shots, though trees, and at various distances, and there wasn’t a missed shot in the bunch.
This quick shot of Loki also shows great focus and accuracy even at F1.4:
So while this may not be a pro sports camera, it will do all of the ordinary things that photographers do exceptionally well.
Sony a7IV Video Performance
The Sony a7III was a very popular hybrid camera for video work for several reasons. It had very good video quality even though it was capped at 4K30. The high ISO performance was very good, as was the autofocus quality. It had things like SLOG and other picture profiles. Expectations are of course higher still for the a7IV, and in many ways I think it delivers.
Here’s some of the video highlights of the a7IV courtesy of B&H Photo’s listing:
Making full use of the high-resolution 33MP sensor and fast processing capabilities, UHD 4K 30p XAVC HS 10-bit recording is possible using the full width of the sensor, offering 7K oversampling for impressive sharpness and realism.
There is also oversampled 4K recording, via a 4.6K capture area, with a Super 35 crop, that offers UHD 4K output up to 60p in 10-bit.
No recording time limit allows for unlimited clip lengths and the camera’s physical design features an improved heat-dissipating structure to promote longer possible recording times; longer than one hour of continuous 4K 60p 10-bit 4:2:2 recording, for example.
The a7 IV employs a pair of codecs to suit different workflows: XAVC HS, which uses HEVC/H.265 encoding to retain more detail at smaller bitrates and XAVC S-I, which is an intraframe codec for consistent performance and quality at bitrates up to 600 Mb/s.
S-Cinetone can be used to deliver distinct colors and healthy-looking skin tone rendering that matches the FX9 and FX6 cameras, along with the a1 and a7S III, and is based on technology from the professional Cinema Line cameras, such as the VENICE. This color profile offers natural mid-tones, soft colors, and especially well-controlled highlights.
HLG (Hybrid Log-Gamma) support permits recording within a wide color gamut for producing HDR-ready content directly from the camera.
S-Log3 is also available for producing a 15+-stop dynamic range with increased grading control in the shadow to mid-tone regions of the image.
That’s obviously a lot of great video options there, and my only critique is having to deal with the crop factor to get 4K30. The biggest challenge there is if you want to get wide shots, so having a decent APS-C wide angle lens might be a good idea for shooting 4K60 and keeping a wide perspective. Other standouts to me are the lack of any recording limit, improved heat dissipation (getting more than an hour of 4K60 without overheating issues is great news!), and of course the practical advantages of the articulating LCD screen for front or side monitoring along with all of the autofocus tracking options.
We’ve also got a few new features to help with video capture. One is the focus breathing correction that helps certain lenses get a better result during focus changes. For more information and a list of lenses covered, check out this page. I tested it with my Sony 35mm F1.4 G Master lens (one of the supported lenses) and noticed a few things. First of all, there is a slight crop factor involved with the process. Secondly, I noticed a subtle improvement with focus breathing, but no magic cure at all. The concept is interesting, but thus far software seems no match for actual optical engineering in the lens for this video issue.
Another new feature is called “Focus Map”, which uses an overlay of brightly colored boxes to highlight what is before and after the plane of focus with only the in focus area being naturally colored. It’s a more visually pronounced way of seeing what is in focus relative to typical focus peaking color overlays, and I can see it being useful, though some might find the sheer brightness of the color distracts them from the actual process of engaging with whatever subject is onscreen.
There’s a wealth of professional video options here in terms of codecs, color profiles, and HLG. The footage looks great, with great detail and a good deal of versatility for low light performance and dynamic range. I also do like the look of the S-Cinetone profile that’s included. I’m not a serious videographer or cinematographer (I mostly shoot for my YouTube channel), so I’ll leave the detailed analysis to those more professional than myself.
I suspect that things are good enough here that some people may decide that spending the extra money on the a7SIII is unnecessary.
Sony a7IV Sensor Performance
Put simply, I’m loving the new 33MP sensor from Sony. I’ve petitioned for a camera at this resolution point for a while. Image resolution is 7008 x 4672 pixels, which is probably as many pixels as most people will ever need. It gives you reasonably high resolution but without any of the complications that extremely high resolution brings.
I also love having the Lossless Compressed RAW options, as most of the ARW (RAW) files are around 40MB, which is plenty for editing but not too onerous to store. There’s enough resolution there for a usable 16MP APS-C mode, too. Photos look great from the camera, with nice resolution, great dynamic range, and good color rendition. Look at the great detail even in the deep crop from the main image.
As this is a new sensor, I’ll take a deep dive into various aspects of its performance.
ISO
The challenge when you raise resolution is that low light performance can suffer. Camera makers have gotten increasingly good at mitigating that, however, and that’s definitely true here. The a7IV has a native ISO range from 100-51,200, with an expanded range of ISO 50-204,800 available. Yes, ISO 204,800, which is certainly getting into silly territory. I’m not going to be recommending that you take any shots there, but the native range is another story. It wasn’t that long ago that I found ISO 51,200 to be joke range, but that’s far from true now. It’s still not my preference to shoot that high, but I’ll definitely say that even ISO 25,600 is very usable here. Let’s start by taking a look at our base ISO image, which looks excellent with great contrast, good color accuracy, and fine detail.
At ISO 1600 the result is scarcely distinguishable from base ISO (100) even at a pixel level:
At ISO 6400, there is the tiniest amount of noise in some of the shadows, but color saturation levels, color fidelity, and contrast are pretty much indistinguishable from base ISO:
Things are mostly similar at ISO 12,800, with black levels still quite inky. By ISO 25,600, you can start to see some uneven pixels in the black area (some white specs) and the “grain” is heavier, but things are still quite usable.
Often I see cameras fall apart in the last stop (say, from 25,600 to 51,200), and that’s somewhat true here, but ISO 51,200 is only slightly further deteriorated. I see a tiny green shift in the basic tone of the image (a Sony sensor hallmark), but the image still looks pretty good at a global level.
It doesn’t even look too bad at a pixel level. ISO 102,400 and 204,800 are mostly there for marketing (more green shift, less contrast, more rough noise…), but I do think that in a pinch ISO 51,200 could be used for certain applications. That’s as good a performance as I’ve seen from any camera. The a7IV is one of the best cameras I’ve used for high ISO performance, and the fact that it does it while moving up to a higher resolution point is impressive.
Dynamic Range
Dynamic range has become one those topics debated ad nauseum on photography forums and harped on by certain reviewers to the place where some perspective has been lost on the topic. It has become one of the key “stats” where brand fanboys either push their brand or bash another, causing many people to become disgusted with the term in general. That being said, there is no question that there are a number of situations where improved dynamic range gives the photographer (and particularly the post-processor) more latitude to fulfill their vision. This could be in the ability to recover a blown-out sky or shadowed area as a landscape photographer or the ability to balance a foreground subject with a background or sky for portrait photographers. I’ve also been able to save images where I captured something special but a flash didn’t fire.
Sony claims up to 15 stops of dynamic range for the a7IV, though they are not specific as to where one could expect this performance (S-Log video?) Many recent Sony cameras have been close in this metric (as you can see from Photons to Photos chart here). They show a slightly better performance from the a7IV than the a7III or Alpha 1, but it is by a few fractions of a percent. I felt like my experience with a7IV was that I saw the best dynamic range that I’ve personally seen from a full frame camera (only better with medium format bodies).
There are different aspects of shadow and highlight recovery, and I find it best to try to visually demonstrate my findings. In this comparisons I will intentionally under or overexpose by the correct number of stops and then try to recover the lost information by adding it back in post (either increasing or reducing exposure).
First of all, shadow recovery. Bottom line is that the Alpha 1 is simply fantastic at recovering shadows. At a global level you simply can’t tell a difference between a perfectly exposed image and an image underexposed by 5 stops and then recovered.
Even when I look at the image at a pixel level I am hard pressed to find any ill effects of shadow recovery. Everything looks clean.
Some people compare dynamic range by showing how much the highlight and shadow recovery sliders can open up shadows and recover highlights. I find that there is a LOT of latitude in images for recovering shadows in the sliders. Here’s a look at an original image with deep shadows and then the result after using Lightroom’s shadow recovery slider at 100%.
That’s obviously a lot of flexibility for whether you want to conceal or reveal details from the shadows.
Recovering highlights is something that cameras struggle more with, as when highlights are “blown out” there is often unrecoverable information loss. The a7IV does particularly well here, though, proving able to successfully recover 3 stops of overexposure with minimal loss of information and good color saturation levels…slightly better than what I’ve previously seen.
So far the practical limit has always been four stops of overexposure, and that’s true here.
There’s just information lost that isn’t recoverable, and the recovered image has a very unnatural quality to it. Some of the colors in the color swatches have been lost, and others have bled in odd ways. Somewhere between three and four stops is where the limit is, but that limit is definitely a little bit higher than anything I’ve seen before.
I find that recovering sky information seems to be particularly good with the a7IV. This shot was taken into extremely bright morning sun, and I was very pleasantly surprised when I could recover all the sky information.
That’s awesome! That kind of dynamic range is very useful, as it used to be that I had to bracket exposures for HDR to get that level of performance. There’s a good chance that I would never use HDR with the a7IV; I just wouldn’t see the need.
Colors and Gallery
I first started testing Sony mirrorless cameras at the a7RII stage, and I’ve watched Sony’s color science evolve along the way. At this stage, I find Sony’s color science to be quite good, and the Sony a7IV seems quite similar to my Alpha 1 in performance. This has happened for two reasons, I think. The first is that Sony has carefully tweaked their color science, and over the past three generations of new Sony product I’ve seen steady improvement. Colors are a little more balanced and less prone to becoming garish when “pushed” a bit. The second reason is that as Sony’s market share has increased, I think that major software makers like Adobe have invested more attention on properly “translating” their colors for RAW images. I’ve steadily found Sony’s colors easier to process and have been increasingly happy with the results. Here are a few images taken with different lenses that demonstrate that nice color.
In summation, I think that Sony has done a great job with this new sensor. It hits a sweet spot for me in terms of resolution, detail, contrast, color, dynamic range, and ISO performance. I suspect this sensor will get used in several other cameras, and it is definitely worthy of some regular use by Sony. Check out more images than I can share in this review by visiting the image galleries here.
Conclusion
Sony has moved the a7 series upmarket with the Sony a7M4, and I think the series is better for it. I think that Sony has positioned itself for a cleaner market separation, as I found the release of the a7C muddied the waters a bit. The a7III and the a7C were too similar in terms of performance, and it was somewhat hard to choose between the two. The a7IV is a superior camera to the a7III and has a corresponding price at the $2500 mark. An a7C successor (or some other budget full frame model) can now slot into the $1500-1700 range and have very nice market separation.
As I noted in my Alpha 1 review, I was a little underwhelmed by Sony’s previous generation of updates. I passed on both the a7RIV and the a9II without upgrading my a7RIII or a9 because I didn’t see a compelling reason to make the move. It’s been a different story with both the Alpha 1 and now the a7IV. Sony has made some significant strides in improving some of their areas of weakness, and I find that there is little lacking on the a7IV. Sure, I would like to see 4K60 without a crop factor, and I certainly wouldn’t mind a tracking/viewfinder experience more like the Canon R6, but it would also be a mistake to expect this camera to be an a9 or the Alpha 1. I think the best way to look at this camera is to view it as a budget Alpha 1 but without the specialized sports capabilities. It has less resolution, less video capabilities, less sports capabilities, but also does a lot of the same things that the Alpha 1 can do…and at a much, much more affordable price.
The most compelling upgrade here is the great new 33MP sensor. It ups the resolution ante while not compromising on any facet of ISO performance or dynamic range. The Sony a7IV feels like a great compliment to my Alpha 1, as it handles very similarly and produces images that a nice match. I am strongly considering picking up the a7IV as my second/backup Sony full frame body, particularly since the articulating LCD screen is a great help to someone like myself who spends a lot of time in front of the camera…and without someone behind the camera to run it! I have found a lot of reasons to praise the a7IV during my time with it, and frankly very little to criticize. It comes with my wholehearted recommendation.
Pros:
A lot of Alpha 1 DNA
Does basically everything well
Incredibly deep buffers
33MP resolution should be a sweet spot for many photographers
Upgraded autofocus system – more points, better sensitivity, more tracking options
Up to 4K60 recording (in Super 35)
No record limits (no 29:59 limitations)
No significant overheat issues
Lossless compressed RAW capture
Touchscreen menus (finally!)
Articulating LCD screen
Excellent dynamic range
Excellent high ISO performance
Webcam ready
Good layout of ports
Good dynamic range and ISO performance
Cons:
Small font sizes make navigating menus by touch imprecise
LCD resolution still very low
4K60 requires Super 35 crop
Viewfinder experience limits the potential of the great autofocus and deep buffers
Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.
Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!
Keywords: Sony Alpha 7IV, Sony A7IV, Sony Alpha 7IV Review, Sony A7IV Review, ILCE-7IV, ILCE-7M4, Sony, a7IV, A74, Review, Hands On, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Sharpness, Sensor Performance, ISO, Dynamic Range, Autofocus, Image Quality, Sample Images, Video, Photography, Sony a7III, Sony a7C
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Perhaps no Sony camera series has benefitted as much from the “trickle-down” effect as the a7 series. The a7III set a new benchmark for the “full frame affordable(ish)” category by being basically good at everything. It inherited an amazing focus system from the Sony a9 that actually gave it better focus capabilities than the more expensive a7RIII, which itself had been a huge step forward. The a7III also benefited from a lot of a7S video capabilities, which resulted in it being a better video body than either the a9 or the a7RIII. It got the new battery, the new control layout, and a host of other improvements. Fast forward a few years and we’ve seen Sony release the truly incredible Alpha 1 (my review here), which advanced Sony design on almost every level. The downside? It cost $6500 USD! The new Sony a7IV (technically the ILCE-7M4) is not necessarily an Alpha 1 clone (it has a much lower burst rate, lesser video capabilities, lower resolution, etc…) but I do see a lot of Alpha 1 DNA in this camera. The Alpha 1 is my most used camera these days, so I’m very familiar with its performance and handling, and I can say that you’re getting a lot of Alpha 1 for the $2500 price point of the Sony a7IV.
The Sony a7IV is designed around a brand new 33MP Full-Frame Exmor R CMOS Sensor. This ups the resolution from the 24MP seen on previous a7 bodies and brings us to what I consider a sweet spot for performance. It always felt like there was too much of a gap between the a7 series (24MP) and the a7R series (typically 42-61MP). This new 33MP sensor feels like a series step up, but it also sits in a sweet spot for today’s performance. As we’ll see in this review, this new sensor is among Sony’s best in dynamic range, high ISO performance, and seems to have improved color handling. Images are highly detailed, and I don’t feel a huge chasm between these images and my 50MP Alpha 1 images like I did with the a7III. Image resolution is 7008 x 4672 pixels, which is probably as many pixels as most people will ever need. Images from the a7IV look great:
Also useful is the fact that you still get 15MP in APS-C crop mode, which is a much more useful figure than the roughly 11MP figure on the a7III and other 24MP bodies. I found the 33MP resolution point and the new sensor helped make the a7IV feel more upscale than the a7III, which is appropriate, as it has moved upscale in terms of pricing. The a7III debuted at a bargain price point of around $2000, but the a7IV has jumped to $2500. This does create a little more room for Sony to release a budget full frame model under $2000 (a space occupied at the moment by the a7III and a7C cameras). The a7III will probably get phased out as current supply is sold off. Does the Sony a7IV justify this price increase?
Here’s a quick look at the major specs and features.
33MP Full-Frame Exmor R CMOS Sensor
Up to 10 fps Shooting, ISO 100-51200
Much deeper buffer depth (up to 828 uncompressed RAW + JPEG)
4K 60p Video in 10-Bit, S-Cinetone
No recording limit
3.68m-Dot EVF with 120 fps Refresh Rate
3″ 1.03m-Dot Vari-Angle Touchscreen LCD
759-Pt. Fast Hybrid AF
Real-time Eye AF (including bird AF in stills and video tracking)
Focus Breathing Compensation
5-Axis SteadyShot Image Stabilization
4K 15p UVC/UAC Streaming via USB Type-C
Like the Alpha 1, I feel like the Sony a7IV has “enough” of everything that I don’t feel like I’m missing much. That in itself adds up to a very compelling camera. But is it the camera for you? Find out by reading my text review or watching my definitive video review…or just enjoy the photos from the gallery below.
Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.
Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!
Keywords: Sony Alpha 7IV, Sony A7IV, Sony Alpha 7IV Review, Sony A7IV Review, ILCE-7IV, ILCE-7M4, Sony, a7IV, A74, Review, Hands On, Dustin Abbott, Real World, Comparison, Sharpness, Sensor Performance, ISO, Dynamic Range, Autofocus, Image Quality, Sample Images, Video, Photography, Sony a7III, Sony a7C
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
When I first started reviewing Samyang (also sold as Rokinon – the products are identical), their products fell into one specific category. They produced inexpensive manual everything lenses that often had fairly good optics housed in “cheap” bodies. I was still a fan of some of their lenses because of the price-to-performance value, and owned several. In 2016 they began to release their first autofocus lenses, including a couple of lenses for the traditional DSLR mounts (Canon EF and Nikon F) and then subsequent lenses for the then new Sony FE full frame mirrorless mount. I spent my first time with an autofocusing Samyang lens in early 2018, and, ironically, it was a 50mm F1.4 lens for Sony FE. That lens was the predecessor of the Samyang AF 50mm F1.4 II which I’m reviewing today (a lens I’ll refer to as the AF 50II here for brevity).
I finished my review of the first Samyang AF 50mm F1.4 with mixed feelings. On the strength side, I felt like the lens had very nice bokeh and great light transmission [it was brighter than the two other 50mm options I compared it to – the Sony Zeiss Planar 50mm F1.4 (my review here) and Sony Zeiss Sonnar 55mm F1.8 (my review here)]. It also had the best price tag of the trio. But I wasn’t convinced by the autofocus, which felt a little primitive compared to the Sony options, and the lenses didn’t have great sharpness or contrast at wide apertures. It also lacked any kind of features when compared to the Sony options. No switches or dials, no weather sealing, etc… I was left feeling rather ambivalent towards the lens, and when I invested my own hard-earned cash, I went with the much more expensive Sony Zeiss Planar 50mm F1.4.
Since that point, however, I’ve reviewed a LOT of Samyang autofocusing lenses (about eleven), and my excitement for the direction of the company has steadily grown. I’ve witnessed a growing maturation in both autofocus and lens design. Samyang’s development on full frame has split between two tracks – the compact “Tiny” series (compact lenses with a maximum aperture of F1.8 or less) and the larger “pro series” lenses (the F1.4 type options). I was excited when I heard that Samyang was developing a Mark II version of the 50mm F1.4, as I knew that they were capable of making a much more compelling option than the one that I’d previously reviewed.
And the AF 50II is that. It’s better optically, has much better autofocus, and now has more modern features like a focus hold button, custom switch to give more physical control on the lens, and weather sealing. All of this in a lens that at roughly $700 USD retails for about half what the Sony Zeiss Planar lens costs, and closer to a third of what the new high end (and amazing!) Sony 50mm F1.2 GM costs (my review here). This is now a much more compelling alternative to the first-party Sony options, and I’ll detail how it compares in this review. You can get all the details by watching my deep dive definitive video review or get the highlights in my quick video review…or just keep reading…
I want to thank Samyang for sending me a test retail copy of the lens for review. As always, this is a completely independent review. The opinions here are completely my own. *The tests and most of the photos that I share as a part of my review cycle have been done with the new Sony Alpha 1 which will serve as my benchmark camera for the foreseeable future (my review here) and have supplemented with photos taken with the new Sony a7IV which I’m concurrently testing.
Samyang AF 50II Build, Design and Handling
As noted, the AF 50II is a reflection of Samyang’s growing design evolution. It actually takes most of its design clues from their most recent APS-C lens – the AF 12mm F2 (my review here). That lens was the first to highlight the new diamond pattern texture of the focus ring and to transition Samyang’s red ring to the new “hidden ring” design where the red is only visible from the front of the lens as it is somewhat hidden in the front fascia of the lens barrel. The resulting lens design is clean and modern, and scales up nicely to a slightly larger lens like this one.
But that’s only slightly larger, as this is a surprisingly compact and light lens for a high performing 50mm F1.4 optic. The AF 50II is 80.1mm (3.2″) in diameter and 88.9mm (3.5″) in length and weighs a very light 420g. That’s a full 20mm shorter than either Sony option, and about 360g lighter. I was surprised to find that it is actually shorter even than the Sony FE 35mm F1.4 GM.
As of the time of this review, Sigma has yet to release a DN version of a 50mm F1.4 (specific mirrorless design), so the FE mount 50mm F1.4 ART is actually a modified version of the Canon EF version (and has some limitations as such which are detailed in my review). That lens is the heaviest of the bunch at right over 900g in FE version (according to my personal scale) and is about 35mm longer than the Samyang. The Sigma is the closest in price to the Samyang, but that’s more than twice the weight and about 40% longer. Samyang has even managed to produce a smaller lens relative to the MK 1 Samyang lens, which is 73.5 x 97.7 mm and weighs 585g. That’s impressive when you consider the MK II lens is better optically, has weather sealing and actual features, and sports a superior autofocus system.
Speaking of those features… I’ve watched Samyang grow in their lens design over the past 3-4 years as they steadily debuted new features. This started with weather sealing as a part of the design with the AF 85mm F1.4 (my review here) and continues here. I count six seal points from this diagram, including at various transition points in the lens (front and rear element, either side of the focus ring, and at the switches).
I consider weather sealing to be a must if you want to market your lens as a premium or professional lens, and Samyang has smartly recognized that many photographers feel the same. They’ve definitely embraced weather sealing as a part of lens design, which does help inspire confidence when the weather turns during a photo shoot.
We’ve also got a couple of newer features for Samyang which have debuted over the past two years. One is a custom switch that gives you some options for how the focus ring will be used. You can tweak the options via the Samyang Lens Station (a $60 purchase I definitely recommend as it also allows you to quickly update the firmware. This might help with some improvement to performance and also will keep your investment “future-proofed”). My preferred setup is that the M1 position has the ring focus as an aperture ring and the M2 position automatically enables manual focus. This gives you the functionality of an aperture ring and an AF/MF switch in one. There’s also now a focus hold button which can be programmed to a variety of functions from within the camera just like on a Sony lens.
The manual focus ring is nice and wide and has that new textured surface (with a rubberized finish). I like the tactile feel of the “micro pattern” (as Samyang calls it) and feel like it offers good grip. The damping of the focus ring is fairly heavy, though it moves smoothly overall. The focus action appears to be linear (non-speed dependent), which is good for repeatability, though the focus throw is too long for major video focus throws. You need about 5 normal focus rotations to travel the extremes of the focus range, and I estimate the whole focus throw at somewhere near 380°. So, while the feel of the focus action isn’t bad, I feel like it could be more precise and easier to make focus changes on. On a positive note, the automatic magnification of the active focus area is engaged with the lens, which helps make the manual focus process more intuitive and accurate.
A petal-shaped lens hood is included. It’s plastic and pretty basic. It bayonets into place smoothly but lacks a locking mechanism (if that matters to you).
The body materials here are typical engineered plastics, and the build feels solid but not exceptional. That’s the tradeoff of getting such a lightweight lens, though I’ve been using a number of Samyang lenses for years and they have held up fine for me.
Up front we have a clean front fascia and a 72mm filter thread size (shared with both Sony options).
If you look inside, you’ll find an aperture iris with 9 rounded blades, though the shape of the aperture blades will start to show up by F2.8 in a mild way.
Here’s a look at the shape of the bokeh circles at F1.4, F2, and F2.8.
The geometric shape is pretty nice, and the bokeh circles are nice and soft. There’s no busyness in the bokeh circles, though you can see a light green fringing around the edges. Not enough to be distracting, but not completely neutral, either. I would call this a pretty nice “Christmas light” kind of lens (shoot at F2 to get the optimal round shape across the frame).
Early Samyang AF lenses didn’t excel when it came to minimum focus distance and magnification, but recent ones have been better. Here we have a minimum focus distance of 40cm (same as the Sony GM lens) and a magnification figure of 0.16x. This splits the difference between the Planar (0.15x) and the GM (0.17x). Here’s what the magnification looks like:
The GM lens employs floating elements to help eliminate focus breathing, and the Samyang obviously doesn’t, as the GM lens has a slighter higher figure at the same minimum focus distance. The AF 50II also can’t match the GM’s performance up close. The GM has better contrast, a bit more detail, but also has a much flatter plane of focus whereas the Samyang shows more field curvature. There’s only a small pocket of area that is in focus. Real world shots are often less dependent on that flat plane of focus though, and I thought that shots near minimum focus distances looked fair good.
This is a really nicely executed lens if you value the “smaller and lighter” ethos. It manages to pack a nice feature set and good handling into a noticeably smaller and lighter package. I own a lot of great lenses at various sizes and weights, but I’ll freely confess that there are often situations where I reach for the lighter lens even though I have a better lens (that also happens to be larger and heavier) in my kit. The smaller size and weight of the AF 50II might be the difference between it getting brought along or left behind.
Samyang AF 50II Autofocus Performance
The Samyang AF 50mm F1.4 II employs a Linear STM focus motor. This is a much smoother and quieter focus motor than what I encountered in the first generation lens.
I was pleasantly surprised by how stable the lens was when tracking my face during the 3-4 video episodes I filmed with it during my review. I saw no hunting or loss of focus; it stayed solidly locked onto my eye/face without any pulsing. I was also very pleased with my focus accuracy when shooting stills, where even very narrow depth of field situations returned very consistently good focus results on my Sony Alpha 1.
The focus motor is not completely silent; you will hear some faint whirring and clicking, though it is neither loud nor obvious. Typical focus changes are near instantaneous, though if you shift between a close and distant subject you will experience a brief lag. The torque of this single Linear STM focus motor isn’t as good as Samyang’s DLSM (Dual Linear Sonic Motor) focus system (found in a lens like the AF 85mm F1.4 FE). That shows in the slight lag in longer focus changes and also shows up in the more gradual focus transitions during video focus racks. I’m not sure why Samyang didn’t use the higher end focus system here (this is the same focus system they use in their smaller F1.8 lenses), but this is one area where the Sony GM lens takes the win. It actually employs four(!!) linear motors that give it effortless focus speed. I’m not sure that many people use a wide aperture 50mm lens for sports use, but if you happen to be one of them, know that the GM is going to be the better choice for that specific application.
Focus speed was generally fast enough that I didn’t really think about it when shooting stills. I noticed the slower transition speed more when shooting video. Focus results were generally confident, however, and there was no settling before focus lock was achieved.
That larger maximum aperture (F1.4) does help the AF 50II focus in low light compared to lenses with a smaller maximum aperture. I did a number of low light tests of my pets and got good eye detect and well focused results even in very gloomy conditions (1/50th second, F1.4, ISO 3200). There’s a lot of gloom to be found on a January evening!
Eye AF works very well whether a human or animal is the subject. Here’s a shot of Loki at F1.4, and the crop shows great focus precision.
Likewise this casual shot of my daughter on a Zoom meeting shows great precision on her eyelashes even though her head was down and she wasn’t looking at the camera at all.
I had my assistant, Craig, do a portrait session at a variety of focus distances and through a variety of foreground objects to test autofocus accuracy. I gave my daughter a break because it it was so cold (about -25C) outside, and I took one for the team instead. He was using the new Sony a7IV for the very first time, but Eye AF makes it all pretty easy these days. I went through all the results with a careful eye and didn’t find any misfocused results. There were some discards for eyes being closed and my generally looking stupid sometimes, but none that were discarded for technical reasons. Out of about 45 results, all were well focused. Here’s one at F1.4:
You can see from other samples that my results from the portrait session were consistently good, and I feel like this is going to be a very nice 50mm portrait option for those whose budget doesn’t extend to the spectacular GM lens.
So, other than the lens lacking a bit of torque in some situations, I felt like the autofocus performance was generally very good. This is a huge improvement over the first generation lens. I shot with both the high end Sony Alpha 1 and the more moderately priced a7IV with good results on both.
Samyang AF 50mm F1.4 II Image Quality
The first generation Samyang AF 50mm F1.4 employed an optical formula with 9 elements in 8 groups. This included three aspherical elements. We’ve got a new optical formula here with 11 elements in 8 groups, which includes more special elements like 2 Ultra-precision Aspherical elements, 3 High Refractive optic elements, and 1 Extra Low Dispersion element. Bottom line is that we’ve got twice as many exotic elements that result in a better looking MTF (and real world) performance. If we compare the MK 1 MTF (#1) to the MK 2 MTF (#2) to the Sony Zeiss Planar (#3), we find that the AF 50II is about 15% better across the frame compared to the MK 1 lens but lags behind the Planar by roughly 10%.
If you don’t understand how to read MTF charts, you can check out my video on the subject here. The MTF charts show that the MK II lens is much more consistent across the frame (see the big dip on the right side of the MK I chart?) and also that the MK II has a much higher capacity for peak performance when stopped down (the F8 chart is near flawless). I’ve had the good fortune to spend quality time with all the major players in this class, so I’ll give you a more real world look at how the AF 50II stacks up.
All chart tests done with a Sony Alpha 1 (50MP) using a tripod and a two second timer.
We’ll work through the chart results by first looking at distortion and vignette. As of yet there isn’t a correction profile available in Lightroom, and so out of curiosity I tested the MK 1 profile with the lens. The profile actually made the distortion worse on the lens, so I would avoid using that. I’ll show you my manually corrected results instead.
There’s only a tiny bit of pincushion distortion (a -3 to correct) but a fairly heavy amount of vignette that required a +80 to correct for, so around 3 stops stops in the corners. A pleasant surprise was that Lightroom already had a standard profile in place and my RAW images were automatically corrected on import. The vignette is fairly linear, though, so in some situations it will produce a flattering look to images that draws your eye to the subject (like this shot of Loki).
Surprisingly I didn’t find the vignette very obvious in real world shots in the snow, either. You can see from this snowy shot of some dried remnants of last fall sticking up that the corners don’t look particularly dark. I’m not sure if some kind of correction is being embedded in the RAW file or if the vignette is gradual enough that it doesn’t look obvious, but either way I didn’t see much that needed correction in my real world shots.
While I keep monitoring the status of in-camera corrections for Samyang lenses, it still doesn’t seem that lenses aren’t receiving correction in camera for JPEGs or video. I mostly shoot RAW images, so I don’t think about it much, but those of you who typically rely on in-camera corrections and shoot JPEG are going to be disappointed here. My hope that is Sony will afford Samyang the courtesy that third party lens makers like Tamron and Sigma get lenses get in terms of these corrections, but that day has not yet arrived. Fortunately Samyang has been making lenses in the past couple of years that don’t seem to need a great deal of correcting, so that certainly helps.
So how about chromatic aberrations? I found only small traces of lateral chromatic aberrations along the edge of the frame, and some mild longitudinal chromatic aberrations (LoCA) can be seen as purple and green fringing before and after the plane of focus at wide apertures.
We noted a bit of that fringing around bokeh balls earlier, but though I did a lot of shooting in the snow (mandatory in January!), I didn’t really feel like I saw enough fringing to ever be objectionable. I’ve long noted that a slight bit of uncorrected CA often produces slightly softer bokeh.
So how about resolution and contrast? Here’s a look at my test chart:
And here are the crops (at roughly 170% magnification) from the center, mid-frame, and extreme corner at F1.4:
That’s a pretty awesome result. Everywhere looks nice and crisp save the final few percentage points of the extreme corner even at high magnification of a 50MP image. The image looks pretty flawless at 100% magnification.
So what if we somewhat unfairly compare it to the far more expensive Planar lens? The MTF suggests a win for that lens, but is that what we find?
The center performance (surprisingly) favored the Samyang in my tests. The mid-frame results also slightly favored the Samyang (not shown here), while I felt the Sony’s corners were a little better.
The Samyang also delivered a brighter result with equal settings, showing that it continues to have good light transmission despite the additional elements in the optical design. I will note that I don’t consider light transmission to be a strength for the Planar, though I otherwise love the optical performance.
Stopping the lenses down to F2 left the Samyang still a bit better in the center, but the Sony showed more gains in the periphery and is very slightly stronger in the midframe and the corner. By F2.8 both lenses are intensely sharp across the frame, with the Samyang holding a slight lead in the middle and Sony in the corner with the midframe about the same. I find it hard to call a winner even after careful scrutiny at 200% on a 4K monitor. The only thing I can saw is that I do favor the slightly brighter image from the Samyang as shown in this midframe 200% crop.
So what happens if we ratchet up the unfairness and compare it to the $2000 Sony F1.2 GM lens? First of all, the Samyang holds its own in the center of the frame:
The further you move out, however, the more that the GM’s advantage grows. It’s the rare F1.2 lens that is nearly as sharp in the corners as it is in the center.
If you stop the lenses down, the GM sharpens up even more relative to Samyang in the midframe and corners. You can see that the GM (on the right) is resolving more highly here in the midframe at F2.
The GM is still the master class for Sony 50mm primes, but the Samyang certainly doesn’t embarrass itself here…and it costs $1300 less. Not too shabby!
Real world images are nice and crisp even at F1.4, as you can see from this shot.
By F2.8 the lens is extremely sharp across the frame. By F4 it is pretty close to flawless, with excellent performance everywhere you look.
That means you’ll get great results for landscape images like this one at F5.6:
A 50mm F1.4 at closer focus distances has the ability to really obliterate backgrounds at wide apertures, and that’s certain true here. Look at how this decoration quickly disappears to complete blur.
I’m also partial to this “snow-bokeh” image where the snow crystals stand out in the plane of focus while everything else melts away.
I’ve yet to see a bad situation for the bokeh rendering here, which handles everything quite effectively. Here’s a few more bokeh shots to show off the lens’ chops.
I was also pleasantly surprised by the AF 50II’s ability to handle flare. This is normally not a strength for wide aperture prime lenses, but this seems to be the exception. In the first shot in this series, I took the image at F1.4, and even then contrast holds up with very little ghosting. The second shot in the series shots the same scene at F11, and things have not gotten worse. Shot #3 was a real world shot in extremely bright (Arctic bright!) conditions (the temperature was nearly -30C with the wind chill). The sun was right in the frame and I wanted got the bright light coming through the cattails. I expected some flare issues, but, as you can see, got basically nothing.
Let’s return to the idea of portraiture again, as this will be a major application for the lens. I wanted to field test the flare resistance and to see if this would be a good 50mm option for those that like golden hour sun (or strobes) as backlights. I had my assistant use a single inexpensive Godox TT685 II flash (I was testing it at the same time) off camera to help fill my face. The bright sun caught my breath, but the images were nicely free of ghosting artifacts.
You can see some localized veiling here at the epicenter of the sun coming through the trees, but the effect is more flattering than negative.
While this lens isn’t quite as magical as the 50mm F1.2 GM, this is a beautiful portrait lens, combining excellent sharpness with good color and rendering. Few people have the budget for a $2000 50mm lens, but far more can afford a $700 quality portrait lens.
Samyang’s formula with lenses like these is to give 85-90% of GM performance at less than 40% of the price. I recognize that not everyone is comfortable with a third party lens, much less a Samyang. But this is a serious lens with a serious performance, and I saw no fatal flaws optically at all. You can see more images by checking out the lens image gallery here.
Conclusion
I was delighted to see Samyang revisit the 50mm F1.4 formula and give us a new and updated lens, as frankly there still aren’t a lot of 50mm F1.4 options on Sony FE. The closest lens to this price point is the Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG ART in Sony FE form, but that is not a dedicated Sony design, and it shows in a number of ways. It’s a good lens optically, but it also weighs more than twice as much and is 40% longer. The compact and lightweight design of the Samyang AF 50mm F1.4 II while also providing a nice build and a good list of features is a winning combination in my mind.
The list of negatives is pretty brief. I do wish they had thrown the dual motor AF system into this lens, as there were a few situations where I felt I could use a bit more torque (mostly in video applications). I also find the focus throw a little long for my tastes, but frankly these are mostly nitpicks. I had good autofocus performance, loved the physical design and presence of the lens, and found the optical performance to be pretty competitive with some of the best 50mm options I’ve ever tested.
At $700 USD this is an unquestionable value, and I see no reason why this lens should not become a favorite among many users. Samyang is rumored to be following this lens up with a 135mm F1.8, and if they manage to do something similar to this lens and keep the price under $1000, I suspect they’ll have enough winner among portrait photographers. I feel like Samyang has really hit their stride as a lens designer, and I look forward to future releases. And now I have a personal conundrum – keep the excellent Sony Zeiss Planar 50mm F1.4 that I already own, or add the Samyang instead? Choices, choices…
Pros:
Nice construction complete with weather sealing
Well executed, smooth manual focus ring
Custom switch and focus hold button adds functionality
Smaller and lighter than competing lenses
Quiet, effective autofocus
Good center sharpness wide open
Excellent sharpness across the frame when stopped down
Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.
Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!
Keywords: Samyang 50 II, Samyang 50 1.4, Samyang 50mm, II, AF, Samyang, Rokinon, Samyang AF 50mm F1.4 II, F1.4II, Samyang AF, Samyang AF 50mm F1.4 II Review, Review, Dustin Abbott, FE, Sony 50mm F1.4, FE, Sony Zeiss, Planar, G Master, F1.2, GM, , Portrait, Sony a7IV, Sony a7III, Sony Alpha 1, Sony a7C, Bokeh, Sharpness, Resolution, Video Test, Sample Images, Real World
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
When I first started reviewing Samyang (also sold as Rokinon – the products are identical), their products fell into one specific category. They produced inexpensive manual everything lenses that often had fairly good optics housed in “cheap” bodies. I was still a fan of some of their lenses because of the price-to-performance value, and owned several. In 2016 they began to release their first autofocus lenses, including a couple of lenses for the traditional DSLR mounts (Canon EF and Nikon F) and then subsequent lenses for the then new Sony FE full frame mirrorless mount. I spent my first time with an autofocusing Samyang lens in early 2018, and, ironically, it was a 50mm F1.4 lens for Sony FE. That lens was the predecessor of the Samyang AF 50mm F1.4 II that is the subject of this image gallery.
I finished my review of the first Samyang AF 50mm F1.4 with mixed feelings. On the strength side, I felt like the lens had very nice bokeh and great light transmission [it was brighter than the two other 50mm options I compared it to – the Sony Zeiss Planar 50mm F1.4 (my review here) and Sony Zeiss Sonnar 55mm F1.8 (my review here)]. It also had the best price tag of the trio. But I wasn’t convinced by the autofocus, which felt a little primitive compared to the Sony options, and the lenses didn’t have great sharpness or contrast at wide apertures. It also lacked any kind of features when compared to the Sony options. No switches or dials, no weather sealing, etc… I was left feeling rather ambivalent towards the lens, and when I invested my own hard-earned cash, I went with the much more expensive Sony Zeiss Planar 50mm F1.4.
Since that point, however, I’ve reviewed a LOT of Samyang autofocusing lenses (about eleven), and my excitement for the direction of the company has steadily grown. I’ve witnessed a growing maturation in both autofocus and lens design. Samyang’s development on full frame has split between two tracks – the compact “Tiny” series (compact lenses with a maximum aperture of F1.8 or less) and the larger “pro series” lenses (the F1.4 type options). I was excited when I heard that Samyang was developing a Mark II version of the 50mm F1.4, as I knew that they were capable of making a much more compelling option than the one that I’d previously reviewed.
And the Samyang AF 50mm F1.4 II is that. It’s better optically, has much better autofocus, and now has more modern features like a focus hold button, custom switch to give more physical control on the lens, and weather sealing. All of this in a lens that at roughly $700 USD retails for about half what the Sony Zeiss Planar lens costs, and closer to a third of what the new high end (and amazing!) Sony 50mm F1.2 GM costs (my review here). This is now a much more compelling alternative to the first-party Sony options, and I’ll detail how it compares in this review. You can get all the details by watching my deep dive definitive video review or by reading my text review…or you can just enjoy the photos in the galleries below!
I want to thank Samyang for sending me a test retail copy of the lens for review. As always, this is a completely independent review. The opinions here are completely my own. *The tests and most of the photos that I share as a part of my review cycle have been done with the new Sony Alpha 1 which will serve as my benchmark camera for the foreseeable future (my review here) and have supplemented with photos taken with the new Sony a7IV which I’m concurrently testing.
Purchasing your gear through B&H and these links helps fund this website and keeps the articles coming. You can also make a donation here if you would like. Visit my Amazon page for some of my gear of choice! Thank you for your support.
Great News! I can now offer a 5% discount on all purchases at Amplis Foto, Canada’s Leading Photographic Supplier. Please enter discount code: AMPLIS52018DA in your cart. It is good for everything in your cart, and is stackable with other coupons, too! It will take 5% off your entire order! Proceeds go towards keeping this site going and providing you with new reviews!
Keywords: Samyang 50 II, Samyang 50 1.4, Samyang 50mm, II, AF, Samyang, Rokinon, Samyang AF 50mm F1.4 II, F1.4II, Samyang AF, Samyang AF 50mm F1.4 II Review, Review, Dustin Abbott, FE, Sony 50mm F1.4, FE, Sony Zeiss, Planar, G Master, F1.2, GM, , Portrait, Sony a7IV, Sony a7III, Sony Alpha 1, Sony a7C, Bokeh, Sharpness, Resolution, Video Test, Sample Images, Real World
DISCLAIMER: This article and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Sony FE 50-150mm F2 GM Gallery 
Sony FE 50-150mm F2 G Master Review 
Viltrox AF 35mm F1.2 LAB FE Gallery 
Viltrox AF 35mm F1.2 LAB FE Review 
