Carl Zeiss Sonnar FE 1,8 / 55 ZA T * (Sony FE 1,8 / 55). Review from the reader Radozhiva

Review Carl Zeiss Sonnar FE 1,8 / 55 ZA T * (Sony FE 1,8 / 55) specifically for Radozhiva, prepared Alexey Ovoshchnikov.

Hello everyone! My name is Alexey Ovoshchnikov. Here I am my equipment. Today I will present you with a brief overview on the Carl Zeiss Sonnar T * FE 55 mm f / 1.8 ZA lens.

Carl Zeiss Sonnar FE 1,8 / 55 ZA T * (Sony FE 1,8 / 55)

Carl Zeiss Sonnar FE 1,8 / 55 ZA T * (Sony FE 1,8 / 55)

This lens is, in fact, the flagship and the best fifty dollars with aperture 1.8 for full-frame Sony mirrorless (55 mm in practice almost fifty dollars). This is the lens, having bought, the user is supposed to get the best and most modern lens of its kind for his Sony camera with E mount. I wanted to give a good assessment of this acquisition and only then write something here on the Radozhiv website.

Carl Zeiss Sonnar FE 1,8 / 55 ZA T * (Sony FE 1,8 / 55)

Carl Zeiss Sonnar FE 1,8 / 55 ZA T * (Sony FE 1,8 / 55)

I must say right away that I am not a fan of Sony mirrorless cameras because of the system itself and the implementation of camera controls. However, I am interested in this rather new system, and I am pleased to use manual lenses with MD, FD mounts, etc. on my Sony A7 camera. Most often I shoot on Nikon and Canon, and the impartiality and neutrality of the review and evaluation of our Carl Zeiss is based on the foregoing.

Carl Zeiss Sonnar FE 1,8 / 55 ZA T * (Sony FE 1,8 / 55)

Carl Zeiss Sonnar FE 1,8 / 55 ZA T * (Sony FE 1,8 / 55)

Lens Technical Description

  • Optical design: 7 elements (3 aspherical) in 5 groups
  • Focal lengths: 55 mm full frame and 82.5 mm for APS-C (NEX series and its continuation Sony 5000 / A6000)
  • F / 1.8 maximum aperture
  • Minimum Aperture f / 22
  • Number of aperture blades: 9
  • Minimum focusing distance: 50 cm
  • Maximum magnification: 0,14
  • Autofocus drive: yes (silent stepper motor)
  • Internal focus
  • Thread Diameter: 49 mm
  • Weight: 281 gram
  • Length: 71mm
  • Lens hood: a plastic lens hood is mounted in special grooves (not in the review)
  • Years of production: since 2013
  • There is dust protection about spray
Carl Zeiss Sonnar FE 1,8 / 55 ZA T * (Sony FE 1,8 / 55)

Optical design Carl Zeiss Sonnar FE 1,8 / 55 ZA T * (Sony FE 1,8 / 55)

So, judging by the specs, everything is very good - this is an excellent prime lens made and sold by Sony, but with Carl Zeiss involved. The Carl Zeiss inscription is something that undoubtedly increases the price of the lens, but at the same time should add quality and solidity. After all, this is an eminent brand that has accompanied photographers for many decades.

Carl Zeiss Sonnar FE 1,8 / 55 ZA T * (Sony FE 1,8 / 55)

Carl Zeiss Sonnar FE 1,8 / 55 ZA T * (Sony FE 1,8 / 55)

I think, from the photographs, everyone noticed the sad state of the lens. What can you do? During operation in difficult conditions, the lens receives scratches and dents and this is unpleasant. However, the good news is that after everything experienced, the lens did not lose its performance at all and worked for me like a clock. Let the careless attitude to optics in this review be for us a kind of crash test, which was passed by the lens just fine! Such stability and indestructibility is really cool for modern lenses that are crammed with sophisticated electronics! Something budget like Canon EF 50 mm f 1.8 (second version) would just fall apart into a hundred parts! Believe me, I had a sad experience with the aforementioned lens.

Carl Zeiss Sonnar FE 1,8 / 55 ZA T * (Sony FE 1,8 / 55)

Carl Zeiss Sonnar FE 1,8 / 55 ZA T * (Sony FE 1,8 / 55)

The convenience of use. Assembly

Here, too, everything is cool and does not cause a negative. Yes, a peculiar lens, all entirely metallic. In the hand as something solid and even primitive. Everything is smooth and there is not a single switch. When you take the lens in your hand it’s like a piece of pipe with sharpened and smoothed edges. Personally, he caused such associations in my purchase and first use. This lens is the embodiment of minimalism in a good way. Even some manual fix from the 60s looks more fun! This is all individual and carries aesthetic rather than practical meaning.

Focusing

The focus ring is also metal, conveniently located and has a ribbed surface. In operation, it is practical and gritty, the stroke is always smooth, uniform and quite soft. This is a modern lens and uses an electronic focus ring. That is, in fact, rotating the focus ring, you tell the lens in which direction the focus mechanism should be turned. You yourself do not twist, the mechanism as it happens in most lenses. Hence the remarkable smoothness of the rotation of the ring. Switching to manual focus occurs automatically as soon as you start to rotate the ring, and, conversely, when you press the shutter button halfway, the camera activates autofocus again. I liked this system and its implementation.

Once again I will write that the focus is of the internal type, the front lens is always motionless. Dust in the lens did not appear after several years of operation and this is very good. The lens focuses really silently. But the diaphragm at work makes a barely audible ear, but still a little audible clicks on the video. An external sound recorder to help you. Autofocus speed is sufficient for comfortable operation in normal conditions. However, autofocus still does not fly a bullet and may be slightly inferior in speed and responsiveness to old screwdriver lenses like Nikkor AF 50 mm f1.8. I would also like to note the fact that the camera itself makes the lens focus not so lightning fast as, for example, modern mid-level SLRs from Nikon or Canon. This fact constantly confused me when working with the Sony A7 camera. Tracking autofocus loses to competitors.

The speed of focusing and changing objects in the tracking autofocus mode. Demo video.

Carl Zeiss Sonnar FE 1,8 / 55 ZA T * (Sony FE 1,8 / 55)

Carl Zeiss Sonnar FE 1,8 / 55 ZA T * (Sony FE 1,8 / 55)

Image Quality

On the main thing ... so will you get that very modern super resolution if you get this modern super fix? Yes, the resolution is at a very high level, however, it did not surprise me. A good manual fix gives a resolution of the same level with a diaphragm covered up to 2.8. Maybe the 24 megapixel of my Sony A7 is simply not enough to fully demonstrate the capabilities? If someone has a network experience using this lens on the A7R, share it in the comments! By the way, I’ll add that I recently sold the lens to a person who was just looking for super sharpness for his A7R and he kind of found it, falling in love with this lens from the first test frame))) Well, on the well-known site - the benchmark of optics and cameras, this lens got Well, a very high rating for sharpness!

In short, sharpness is super!

But not only sharpness is important in a lens! It so often happens that the lens does not give good quality at a fully open aperture (especially for fast fixes). First of all, the so-called spherical aberrations interfere. Speaking about the hero of our review, we can confidently state that the defects of the optical circuit are minimized! Three aspherical elements in the design do the trick. According to this indicator, this lens confidently outperforms its competitors in the face of Nikon AF-S 50 mm f 1.8, Canon EF 50 mm F1.8 and, of course, an older version of the fifty for Sony, namely Minolta AF 50 mm f 1,7. This is the equipment that I use myself and I remembered offhand. All of them are more or less inferior to our Carl Zeiss.

Of course, the lens is not ideal optically and there are some unpleasant moments. Vignetting at wide open aperture is quite strong, but it corrects well both in the native converter from Sony and in Adobe Camera RAW. With distortion, everything is exactly the same - it is there, but it is corrected thanks to the profile.

Unpleasant defects also include the color of contrasting objects in the out-of-focus area in greenish and purple colors. Unfortunately, this is also present in this lens, but less pronounced than in older and inexpensive models from competitors mentioned above.

Bokeh (background blur pattern)

How can one not say about the nature of blurring the background while testing such a lens? Yes, it’s all individual and a matter of taste, but still I’ll say that the lens’s bokeh is modern and rather dry. It is not bad, but still he lacks the usual smoothness for fifty dollars. Who has a different opinion, write in the comments on this subject. Probably, a modern circuit with super sharpness unfavorably changes the nature of bokeh, and I didn’t really like it when I first met.

This is a lens for mega sharpness and is perfect for a studio (which I do not have) and I'm talking about a real professional studio where they stamp portraits in mega quality and aim to fulfill good commercial orders, they just use cameras with 36+ megapixels.

Gathering information before the review, I as usual looked at what professional photographers from the West tell and show with this lens. As expected, this is primarily a studio, a professional shooting of models, where a lot of processing is often expected later, to emphasize and multiply the optical perfection of this lens. Object shooting? why not ! However, we note the mediocre in its class MDF. That is, the lens Carl Zeiss Sonnar T * FE 55 mm f / 1.8 ZA macro capabilities are not very.

Link to the photo in the gallery in the original format. Link to camera JPEG.

Results

The Carl Zeiss Sonnar T * FE 55 mm f / 1.8 ZA is a professional lens that was born to make money in the studio. He does not belong to amateur photographers in any way. There is an option for Sony mirrorless cameras that is three times cheaper - this is Sony FE 50 mm f / 1.8 his amateur orientation is obvious.

Advantages

  1. Proven indestructibility and excellent optics using all modern technologies. Great build.
  2. Highest sharpness for cameras like Sony A7R and older.
  3. Stepping focus motor (silent and accurate autofocus)
  4. Ergonomics at a height, a very convenient lens.
  5. The electronic focus ring is mechanically independent and does not rotate with autofocus.
  6. Permanent manual focus control.
  7. Internal focusing. You can use polarizing filters without inconvenience.
  8. Rounded aperture blades, fairly rounded aperture at all values.
  9. Dust and moisture protection.

Disadvantages

  1. There is not a single scale on the lens. There are no labels except the name of the lens and the manufacturer.
  2. The noise of the iris during video shooting. Heard as a periodic buzzing sound.
  3. The price for a new copy is high, however, it is worth considering professional affiliation and everything falls into place.
  4. Not impressive MDF in comparison with competitors.

Thank you all for your attention! If I forgot to mention something, correct me. Material prepared by Alexey Ovoshchnikov

You will find more reviews from readers of Radozhiva here.

Add a comment:

 

 

Comments: 61, on the topic: Carl Zeiss Sonnar FE 1,8 / 55 ZA T * (Sony FE 1,8 / 55). Review from the reader Radozhiva

  • Н

    Well, and Sonya’s color, buh-ee. I went to see ssd color from Nikon

    • Denis

      in such a bright sun, Nikon's CCD will be even worse. Nikon's CMOS will be better here

      • Н

        Go to the previous review from Arkady, too, a fifty dollars on a CCD with d100 and fuck from color https://radojuva.com/2018/05/nikon-af-50mm-1-8-mkii-mic/ and then go here and look at this color

        • Arkady Shapoval

          Not everyone can cope with the color a7, especially if you pick the ditches with a third-party one.

        • Alexey de Paris

          Have you shot on both the D 100 and the A7? I shot and with d100 everything is easier when processing. There are generally a minimum of settings and everything is ok.

  • Pokekmon

    Strange colors. As if instead of the camera in the review, there were D300s or D90 or D700 or D7000, i.e. Someone from Nikonov on the first CMOS aunt Sonya. A similar emphasis on greenery, but Nikon of those years, he is even more unpleasant.

    • Pokekmon

      I don’t want to offend anyone, but I remember that the Sonivods themselves did not particularly appreciate the colors of the first A7 compared to the A850 and A900.

      • Alexey de Paris

        I completely agree, this is the main reason for the rare use of this camera by me personally. Moreover, in the review there are photos shown in both the native and the Adobe converter. Native damn what in HDR! A third-party envelope changes colors very much from the native one (which is not good and wrong) and it turns out in colors something like D300S.

    • A. Smooth

      It's such a wild post-processing in a RAW converter. Amateur mistakes in processing "overexposures" are very noticeable.

      • Alexey de Paris

        Hello dear "professional"! Have you heard about HDR? There are no overexposures in any photo. To get HDR, on the contrary, I drew shadows, if you know what I mean.

        • A. Smooth

          So I'm not talking about the shadows. The lights are spoiled :-) And everyone has already paid attention to a strange skinton. Processing is a matter of taste, but we would have clean jpg with settings from the camera. Thanks.

          • Alexey de Paris

            Bedet you clean jpeg already sent some photos to Arcadia. That day when I was shooting the review, I chose RAW without jpeg in the camera and created a problem for myself. I had to tinker

            • Arkady Shapoval

              The native utility Image Data Converter converts RAW, the output is a clean product, without third-party interference.

              • Alexey de Paris

                In my native converter, I did the conversion of all photos, except for the last ones (HDR). A couple more photos from the middle were taken from the side. Where they shout oh !!! what acid colors is a native converter, where you see Nikon's skinton is an Adobe converter with almost no settings. Something like that)

        • Novel

          Do not pull shadows / highlights (never if possible), draw blacks / whites, they compress the tone range correctly, especially on wildly contrasting daytime photos. Put the equal, it’s interesting to see what can be pulled out really.

        • Novel

          You screwed up the saturation, the colors went almost into a solid solid. There is no light Zannar picture even in the shade. As it is clear that day, there are no reflectors, no tents of any kind, not the best way to evaluate the lens. But from the pictures it turns out “something fast”.

        • Artem

          Alexey de Paris Peresveta is in a couple of photos, especially where a man with a bicycle and a dog. Thanks for the review, the lens, like the Sony system, is needed by true fans of this color. But you showed what a true trash Aunt Sonya has))))

  • Onotole

    Thanks for the review!
    It is written well, but almost all commas in the text need to be rearranged.

    The lens is ugly in appearance. And his bokeh is ugly. But sharp, contagion. In general - yes, from the studio with such - not a leg.

  • Skai

    Yes, it is redundant on cameras with the usual megapixel count. But given the dead af at 50 1.8, unfortunately I do not see any alternatives to it. On the second seven I tried it - it was spinning much faster. And there is no real tracking autofocus, except for the a9 and a7lll. I liked it when I felt it.

  • Nrfx

    Great, compare with Minolta MD 55 1.7
    https://phillipreeve.net/blog/test-20-minolta-mc-1-755-vs-1000-zeiss-1-855/

  • Michael

    Typos:
    “Etc. on your Sony A7”
    “The FE 55 mm f / 1.8 ZA is a professional lens” here the dash is missing.
    Thanks for your review. For me, this should be the fifty-kopeck piece - after all, this is a standard lens, not a portrait one, and the nature of the bokeh is not the main thing for it.

  • Alexander

    “During operation in difficult conditions, the lens gets scratches and dents and this is unpleasant” - this only says that the photographer did not care about his photographic equipment, about nothing else ... From a photographer who bought for his money and who knows how to take good my photographic equipment, this would not have happened ... And the colors, and in general, the image is terrible ... Only two - three turned out fine ...

    • Andrei

      Yes, it’s like a young lady’s lack of cleanliness. Not good at all…

    • Alexey de Paris

      You do not understand the meaning. The fact that the lens went through everything and did not fall apart while maintaining full efficiency is what matters. This is a kind of crash test conducted not specifically for the review. Believe my experience, I work with photographic equipment all the time and professional Nikkory videos jammed after falling from one meter. As well as fresh kenonovskie elki with burned focus motors a month after the end of the warranty. This lens in this state was bought without a bargain from me for 2/3 of the price of a new one (although it even surprised me)))))

      • Andrei Other

        It is hard to say. My lenses in 8-10 years went through fire and water. No chips, no scratches and everything works.

        • Andrei

          Yes, just in the days of a young Beaujolais, you need to leave your camera at home ...

  • Pokekmon

    I accidentally stumbled upon one of the photographers on a flickr who has this first generation 55 / 1.8 and A7.
    The same emphasis on greenery and the same shades as on Radozhiv, and just the same dermatological sharpness on women's faces, and this photographer from Japan, on flickr, tried to compensate for all this, but he did not particularly succeed ...
    In general, Aleksey Ovoschnikov is not to blame - two different people cannot be the same, and besides, that inhabitant of Japan with flickr will have more experience of photography than Aleksey.

  • Vitaly N

    His focus may be accurate, but in my opinion it’s not always where it is needed.

  • Valery

    Y-yes colors to say the least. More and more I am convinced that I made the right decision by buying Fuj x-t1. The fifty-kopeck piece is also so-so compared to similar fuja optics ...

  • Pawel

    I read this review and was surprised at some things. The author has laid out a list of his equipment, in particular lenses, there are several interesting models (about nikon), but it looks more like a collection that I managed to buy on Avito on the cheap to put in a sideboard. For example: 24-50, 35-135, 70-300 and 75-240 4,5-5,6. And this is in the presence of excellent 28-105, 70-200 2.8 and 80-200 2.8 (why both I do not know). But it's none of my business why you need these “exhibits”. The review itself is written in good language and is easy to read. The impression is that the author has long been engaged in professional photography and video recording. But when I saw the photos, it seemed to me that they were taken by another person. And if about colors it seems like they explained that this is Sony's "bad" camera (although in the editors the pros get almost any color), then it is completely incomprehensible why such disgusting photographs are frankly rotten. It seems to me that the author is a photojacker, collects equipment, attends photo forums, writes articles, but does NOT shoot. Everything said IMHO.

    • Stepan

      Life is so arranged on planet Earth - someone tests airplanes, someone builds them, others set records, and most just fly. The opinion of a professional photographer about the technique is interesting, but they have no time - they are in the “fields”, plow and mow :)

      • Pawel

        Arkady manages to "mow" in the fields and write interesting articles. Well, okay, I'm an amateur, but I would still hesitate to upload a photo where the horizon is littered with a bunch of overexposures, legs are cut off and no artistry. It is better to lay out less, but better, especially judging by the tightness and the lens was actively used. Well, since no one else writes about this, and Arkady posted these photos without corrections, apparently this is just my opinion. Sorry if offended

        • Stepan

          “Offended” -? It doesn't concern me. This is how I ... reason.

    • Alexey de Paris

      I would like to note that I buy and sell photographic equipment and therefore my collection is varied and the list changes almost every day. For the same reason, I shoot with almost all popular systems, and mastering everything at the same time, as you can probably imagine, is not an easy task. About 24-50, 35-135, 70-300 and 75-240 4,5-5,6. The first three are very good and useful lenses, have you tried them yourself? 75-240 4,5-5,6 - this is my first telephoto, I used to write a review (which was not on the site before me) and now I sell it as unnecessary. About colors ... did you shoot with the A7 and it worked RAW? Of course, you can always shoot in jpeg and it will be easier, but I shot everything in RAW that day and created a problem for myself. Try to do something with RAW from A7 and then write.

      • Arkady Shapoval

        And thanks for that :)

      • Pawel

        I tried 24-50 and 35-135 both of which gave 50 bucks, I did not take it. 70-300 is the best budget zoom, but with 70-200 2.8, it makes no sense since 300 mm are soapy.
        “I would like to note that I buy and sell photographic equipment” - now everything fell into place, I thought it was bought for myself, then there are no questions, write reviews well, it's nice to read

      • Ivan

        Alexei, I’ve personally been shooting on a7 II for 2 years now, and I can say for sure that the ditches from this seven stretch just fine, they are like plasticine, but you need to know how to work with them otherwise it won’t work. By the way, races from Canon are not an example of worse stretch)

  • Michael

    Hello, Alexey. It would be interesting to see a review on the Tamron SP 500mm

    • Alexey de Paris

      Thanks for the comment, there will definitely be a review on Tamron. It is very interesting to shoot on it, but only on a sunny day, so that the material is typed slowly.

  • Kirill

    All the same, how much I hate the colors and textures of all A7 cameras - how many examples I have not looked through on the network, after Nikon, Canon, Sigma, this wild felt-tip acid and dirt does not come to me. All the faces are red-orange, the greens are terrible, all with one acid shade without variations, on night and astrophotography there are always dirty magenta noises (Kenon Darkness is resting two) Note that despite the high sharpness of the optics, not a single photo has the smallest details - all blurred with watercolor noise reduction even at ISO 100. Old Nex 3,5,7 give better micro-details and colors. After any cheap Nikon DSLR, such A7 soap simply does not fascinate, to put it mildly

  • Igor

    How many "top-level professionals" have gathered. And the author with his photographic equipment was washed, and the littered horizons and the non-artistic quality of the photo were appreciated. And the leading camera brands went over ...
    The task of the author of the review was to evaluate (subjectively) and try to convey to us, the readers, the specific "pros and cons" of this lens. In a visual form, by illustrative examples. The author coped with this task perfectly. I have attached very visual photographs and my personal feelings, which quite allow us, the readers of the resource, to quickly (for ourselves) conclude - "Do I need such a lens or not?"

    • Pawel

      I agree, the task has been completed, there are no more questions.

  • Valery

    this is definitely not needed)))

  • Valery

    the author has not in vain sold it)))

  • Artem

    And what kind of trash in the foliage? Is this a professional lens that suits you? and colors, of course, horror, twisted

  • neocol

    That photo, that review is just monstrous.

  • Andrei

    With all questions to Sony's cameras, the bulk of the pictures with this lens, exposed on the Web, has a Zonnar look. He may like it or not (I would rather not), but in fact he is there. It is mostly absent in the pictures from the review, so there are doubts about “the author coped with the task”. To shoot high-quality zonnars, you need not just a good photographer, but, so to speak, a photographer sharpened for zonnars ...

    • Rodion

      Sorry, but from the zonnar here is only the name. The last time "Zonnar's bow" could be seen on a series of telephoto lenses of type 135 2.8, and then - the "bow" there is also quite an "Ernostar's"))) So this is a clear example of the influence of the nameplate on the perception of the picture.

  • Novel

    The lens pattern is a gradation in brightness and saturation. If the saturation is turned to the maximum, and the saturation is almost equalized, the picture will be devoured by post-processing. Therefore, nothing is visible, a terrible post-processing was imposed on mediocre photos in terms of performance. The lens got lost along with the drawing in the process. In general, all these profound arguments about the color of sleepyheads, skin tone and other ephemeral characteristics seem rather strange to me. When retouching, the skin tone is done by anyone and it looks fine. If you need a tan - there will be a tan, if you need a snow white - there will be a snow white. Here, just a person out of habit screwed up, although in the photo at noon after the rav, you need to screw it up very carefully, there the contrast is maximum or so.

  • Valentine

    The criticism is too harsh. Even without looking at EXIF, you can clearly see which files were converted through the native Sony program, and which ones through Adobe Camera Raw. The native Image Data Converter has strong contrast and high saturation of colors by default (just a huge part of the photos that caused great delight here came from this converter). An easy way in Image Data Converter to bring such a picture back to normal is to select the “Creative style” submenu, in it the “Neutral” profile. Further, if necessary, work according to the situation. As for Adobe Camera Raw, the program immediately opens files with its own Adobe Camera Standard profile, in which the color saturation and contrast are reduced, so it is easier to avoid any excesses in processing or simple conversion. I wish Alexey to do what he loves, not to pay any attention to unconstructive criticism. We are waiting for new reviews. Thanks.

    • Alexey de Paris

      Everything is with converters, you are in the subject. Once again, I note that nowhere did I add color saturation. This happens when expanding the dynamic range (optimization of the D range) in the native converter.

  • Alexander

    Sonya’s normal color, you need to process it without fanaticism, Adobe standart, Camera portreit, everything will be ok! After Nikonov D3, D700, Kenonov 1D m3, 1 Ds m2, no problems or disgust, but how many features were added to the DD!

  • Photographer from God

    The photo is a wild trash, you can’t see the advantages of a full frame and the optical quality of a very expensive lens. Similar photos can be taken by an amateur in his crooked DSLR, infa 100%.

  • Novel

    https://500px.com/romanhammer - here at the uncle both alpha7 and Sonnar. And everything is fine with the color, and the drawing is saved.

    • Photographer from God

      Better, well, it's still not super)))) 50-55 mm is poorly suited for large portraits and it’s not even a matter of geometry, you just need to poke a camera with your face and one eye will be sharp and the other will not be sharp, but for Street photo, genre, art photography need experience and understanding. An amateur is best to buy an inexpensive micro 4 \ 3 camera and a bunch of optics for it.

      • Boris

        On this link, photographs were taken on different lenses (and 55, and 85, etc.). Photo processing is great, including tone and color correction, portrait retouching, sharpening, etc. In general, there is a long cycle of work. It's difficult to talk about the on-camera colors and the genuine lens design. You either wrote it all for fun, or you are at the very beginning of your journey.

        • Alexey de Paris

          The link shot on one single lens, all without processing, the sonyA7 + sony NEX 3n camera. Nowhere is there any portrait retouching! What are you talking about?

          • Andrei

            This is not about your link, but about the one where the uncle of young ladies in different forms shoots ...

      • Rattler

        Will you tell me what to buy? Can you still advise what to eat?

  • Michael

    Pictures with poisonous oversaturated colors.

Add a comment

Copyright © Radojuva.com. Blog author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2022

English-version of this article https://radojuva.com/en/2018/06/sonnar-fe-1-8-55-za-t-sony-carl-zeiss/

Versión en español de este artículo https://radojuva.com/es/2018/06/sonnar-fe-1-8-55-za-t-sony-carl-zeiss/