ZM Planar vs Sonnar C stopped down
I am aware of the much debated OOF/bokeh/focus shift differences between the ZM Sonnar C 50 (which I own and use a lot for portait/people/reportage) and Planar ZM (which I am thinking about buying) when shot wide open.
Now - what about performance at f/8-f/11? I am primarily interested in across-field sharpeness, crispeness, and microcontrast (and resulting 3D rendering) for landscape when used with fairly high-resolution film like Delta 100, Acros, ATP or Chrome Elite slide film and large prints. I am missing some "bite" in my Sonnar C landscape photos, but that may also have its source elsewhere (film development, light, metering, etc).
Seems, from what I have seen, that the Planar has the edge, but then, shots had different photographers, situations, light, etc.
Any practical experiences?
I was very happy in that respect with the 2.8/25 Biogon (well, the reference I suppose) and 2/35 on both M6 and M8.