1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

'Steve Huff Reviews The NEX 50mm ƒ1.8'

Discussion in 'Other Systems' started by RT_Panther, Dec 11, 2011.

  1. stratokaster

    stratokaster Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 4, 2011
    Kyiv, Ukraine
    Pavel
    This is a fine lens, but it seems the 24 MP sensor in the NEX-7 is stretching its capabilities a little, especially wide open. I don't like its focal length though: 75 mm (equiv.) is neither long enough nor short enough for me. Still, if Sony keeps releasing lenses like this, I may buy into the NEX system... eventually.
     
  2. Mellow

    Mellow Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 27, 2010
    Florida or Idaho
    Tom
    Looks good for NEX shooters, but, like all NEX lenses, it's big: 62mm long and 170g. For comparison, the Oly 45mm f/1.8 (very similar focal length given the crop)is 46mm long and 116g. In other words, the Sony is about 35% longer and 50% heavier than the Oly.
     
  3. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Apr 10, 2009
    Boston, MA (USA)
    It looks to be a good performer. Some prominent longitudinal (axial) CA in a couple of his samples, but I suppose that is to be expected. It's a pet peeve of mine, though, and something the Oly 45/1.8 has very little of.
     
  4. WT21

    WT21 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 19, 2010
    Boston
  5. WT21

    WT21 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 19, 2010
    Boston
    And, IMO, the Oly gives a better fov -- akin to 90mm eq. vs. 75.
     
  6. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    As I said elsewhere:

    From the looks of it the Olympus 45mm 1.8 is sharper, has better bokeh and way smaller!
     
  7. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Texas
    And I don't even own a NEX....:smile:
     
  8. WT21

    WT21 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 19, 2010
    Boston
    You do carry the "alt gear torch" to keep us all honest! :)
     
  9. phigmov

    phigmov Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Apr 4, 2010
    Yeah but the NEX7 has those 24 mega-doodles !

    [I kid, I kid . . .]
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    Yeah, but if you take into account pixel density the 16mp GH2/G3/GX1 can actually render more detail. :wink: Plus M43 glass seems to do just fine rendering the detail, which makes me believe M43 glass is incredibly sharp.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Art

    Art Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 13, 2011
    San Francisco, CA
    The lens looks ridiculous on nex body for walkaround, unbalanced and even bigger than the kit zoom. Way to draw attention. It is much bigger and heavier than Oly 45. It will be interesting to compare optical performance and AF speed and accuracy
     
  12. Promit

    Promit Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 6, 2011
    Baltimore, MD
    Promit Roy
    Has Steve Huff ever written a negative review of anything in his life?
     
  13. I know, and I had to move it to the "Other Systems" forums just like all the others, lol

    Ah, I need to get out more...
     
  14. phrenic

    phrenic Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 13, 2010
    Nope, it would hurt his sponsorship far too much I'm sure.
     
  15. tanngrisnir3

    tanngrisnir3 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    594
    Oct 18, 2011
    Quite possibly. While he's no hack, after having looked around this website (and drying myself off after this endless Leica gushing), I just don't see him as offering anything of interest or having anything new to say.
     
  16. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Texas
    Well then let's see....Huff has given great reviews and good praise for Olympus Micro Four Thirds..:wink:..So you're correct, he should be honest about Olympus MFT short comings and forget about his Olympus sponsorship...:wink::wink::wink:
     
  17. LisaO

    LisaO Mu-43 Top Veteran

    798
    Mar 18, 2010
    New York Metro Area
    Lisa
    megadoodles! Lol
     
  18. robertro

    robertro Mu-43 Veteran

    223
    Apr 22, 2010
  19. shnitz

    shnitz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    989
    Aug 25, 2011
    Austin, TX
    This kind of unfair post comes up often enough that I think I should clear something up, because it's unfair to people like Steve Huff, Michael Reichmann, and others who take time to post reviews.
    FTC Publishes Final Guides Governing Endorsements, Testimonials
    Advertising - F.T.C. to Rule Blogs Must Disclose Gifts or Pay for Reviews - NYTimes.com
    Quick summary: FTC requires bloggers to disclose any relationship with a sponsor.

    From Steve's "About me" page:
    "I have to say that while I get lenses and cameras sent to me for review by a couple of camera companies, none of them pay me or give me free cameras/lenses. I get nothing. I write exactly what I feel about any lens of camera and if a manufacturer doesn’t like it, then oh well. Again, I get absolutely NOTHING from these camera companies. Just the opportunities to review their gear."
    So Who Am I? | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS

    He further goes on to say, "The only way I can fund this site is through my sponsor ads. B&H Photo and Amazon are this sites sponsors. They do not pay me to advertise but rather they pay me a tiny commission when someone follows a link on my site and makes a purchase with them. For example, lets say you are reading my site and use my Amazon search box at the upper right of any page. You buy a CD, a DVD and some film. I would make about $1.50. Over a period of a month my goal is to get that # to at least $400 to pay the web host. Anything after that goes to gas for my photo testing trips, postage for sending lenses and cameras back and if I am lucky I can grab a burger or two for myself."

    He's also clearly stated somewhere on his site that if he doesn't like a product, he simply won't waste his time reviewing it.

    If you're going to slander, at least make it juicy. Involve sex, drugs, and other fun stuff. Who wants to read about something as mundane as sponsorship?