SLR C Sonnar 50/1.5 equivalent

[mfogiel]

I am still circling around a choice of lenses for portraiture, and while I am well equipped in the RF field, I feel, I am still lacking something extrordinary in the SLR world.
I have just taken some portraits of friends last we with the C Sonnar, and I am still amazed how nicely this lens renders - I mainly use it at f 2.8 though, because focusing wide open with an rf is always a lot more problematic if you want to recompose.
I have been wondering therefore, what would be your best recommendation for a 50-60mm range portrait lens in the SLR world - not necessarily superfast, as I do not believe this is so useful in practice.
In particular, I'd like to know if there are any Summilux R users here, and what would be their comments about this lens relative to the Summilux M pre asph, as this is probably my second most favourite portrait RF 50.
The mount is not so important, as I would be willing to get an extra body just for this lens, if it is really outstanding, however I already own Nikon F and Leica R bodies.
Thanks
Marek

[Richard G]

I really like the 55mm Super Takumar f2. The slight increase in focal length really adds something.

[JamesFromSydney]

The 50/1.4 Zuiko for the OM is great, very dreamy wide open, with smooth sharpness as its stopped down.

I'm generally not a fan of SLRS, but have an OM1N just to use as a portrait camera with the Zuiko lenses -- that's how good they are for that.

[BobYIL]

Originally Posted by mfogiel

I am still circling around a choice of lenses for portraiture, and while I am well equipped in the RF field, I feel, I am still lacking something extrordinary in the SLR world.
I have just taken some portraits of friends last we with the C Sonnar, and I am still amazed how nicely this lens renders - I mainly use it at f 2.8 though, because focusing wide open with an rf is always a lot more problematic if you want to recompose.
I have been wondering therefore, what would be your best recommendation for a 50-60mm range portrait lens in the SLR world - not necessarily superfast, as I do not believe this is so useful in practice.
In particular, I'd like to know if there are any Summilux R users here, and what would be their comments about this lens relative to the Summilux M pre asph, as this is probably my second most favourite portrait RF 50.
The mount is not so important, as I would be willing to get an extra body just for this lens, if it is really outstanding, however I already own Nikon F and Leica R bodies.
Thanks
Marek

I am afraid that you will not be able to find an exact equivalent, for the C-Sonnar is known for rather abrupt transitions from focused to OOF areas, still delivering a buttery smooth dream-like bokeh for the latter. It's a specialty formula that's why we love it so much.

The last Summilux-R 50 (E60) is contrasty at full and f2 apertures with a smoooth bokeh background however the signature is different. All Nikon hi-speed lenses deliver bokeh to make your eyes crossed except the Noct-Nikkor which exhibits the best bokeh (IMO) of all normal-Nikkors (expensive like hell..)

For portraiture on the Nikons I use three vintage lenses:

The Macro-Elmarit 60/2.8 (sharpness wise the closest thing to the new Apo-Summicron) not for bokeh or facial portraiture but rather like the 100/3.5 Planar on the Hasselblad, for up-the-waist-level shots. These two lenses have similar close-plan characteristics, Elmarit however is crazy sharp till the corners. For facial portraiture my favorites since decades:

- 105/2.5 Nikkor. I will use it on the D800E too, besides the 85/1.8G; such a modest lens, perfectly fine sharpness without being too contrasty at f2.5 but when stopped down it's to compete with any 100mm lens. Bokeh, as you know, is to die for.

- 90/2 Summicron-R: Go with the one with "90" imprinted on the side. Lovely bokeh and not overly sharp wide open (ladies would love its rendition to not accentuate the wrinkles ). Stopped down it's razor sharp.

Leicas need flange from Leitax to use them on the Nikons (15 min. DIY conversion.)

These lenses are not expensive at all and to be sold easily with almost no loss; however they maintain their value in our day too.

Hope this helps..

[EdwardKaraa]

I find the Zeiss 50/1.4 Planar to have a similar drawing style, even more dreamy wide open.

[Richard G]

I saw a review of the Zeiss ZF 50mm Planar 1.4 that was impressive - can't remember which magazine. Looking at pictures online the out of focus areas look very nice. The closer focus than the Sonnar and your preference for f2.8 with the Sonnar anyway might make this one at f1.4 close to what you want. I know a lot of Canon and Nikon users are buying up Zeiss primes.

[mfogiel]

BobYIL
I have just bought the 105/2.5 Nikkor, as well as the 90/2 Elmarit R and 60/2.8 Macro Elmarit R... It looks like you read my mind, haha...
Re: Planar 50/1.4 - it is one of the few lenses in the ZF line, which I have not bought, because I use the Makro Planar instead. Besides, opinions are heavily divided about the quality of its bokeh, so I am still looking for ideas...

[Drago]

There's no 50 sonnar in SLR as i think it's impossible to make, but there'r a lot telephoto lenses which uses sonnar formula. Zuiko 85 f2, the old nikkor 105 are just some of them. For 50mm lens though i'd choose one of these :

Takumar 50/1.4 - the old single coated version. It has really nice rendering wide open and stopped down you get the sharpness
Zuiko 50/1.4 as already mentioned - i'm little biased here so wont comment
Carl Zeiss Jena Pancolar 50/1.8 - the jena lenses have awful build quality, nothing common with Zeiss, but they relay on the old, pre war designs and imo have really nice rendering. Not perfectly corrected like their west brothers or nikkors, but that's their charm

The summilux R is too expensive, so i'd try some 50s before go on it. They'r dirty cheap in the SLR world

[rxmd]

I would look at some of the older slightly longer lenses (58/1.4 Biotar and so on), I think they come closest. Not the real McCoy though if you want a 50 Sonnar look.

[BobYIL]

Originally Posted by mfogiel

BobYIL
I have just bought the 105/2.5 Nikkor, as well as the 90/2 Elmarit R and 60/2.8 Macro Elmarit R... It looks like you read my mind, haha...
Re: Planar 50/1.4 - it is one of the few lenses in the ZF line, which I have not bought, because I use the Makro Planar instead. Besides, opinions are heavily divided about the quality of its bokeh, so I am still looking for ideas...

Do not expect the same bokeh of the C-sonnar from any lens around 50mm FL; it's a weird & unique design; the "abrupt" changes in focused-OOF areas are to be duplicated rather by longer focal lengths, maybe 70-85mm lenses.. Also you can not mount all kinds of SLR lenses on the Nikon or Leica R bodies (Canon EF bodies are far more convenient in this regard.)

OTOH, if you are after some smoothest bokeh (not necessarily the Sonnar bokeh) then take a look at the Sigma 50/1.4 AF.. It was the smoothest one I have seen for the SLRs and a very good lens too.

[Crazy Fedya]

I second 50mm f/1.4 Super Takumar, especially 8 element veersion. It is kind of harder to come by, but it renders out of focus area beautifully. There is a reason it was called Planar Killer, when first released. It comes in M42 moount only, but that is easily adaptable to a whole variety of different mounts.

This is the example of what it can do:

[mfogiel]

BTW, has anybody got any experience with the Contarex Planar 55/1.4 ?
http://kevincameras.com/gallery/v/co...90/00.JPG.html

[CK Dexter Haven]

I mentioned it in your previous thread, and continue to insist you try the Nikon 50mm 1.8 Series E. It'll cost you not more than $40. And, i use it almost exclusively at f2.8. I saw some images from a guy calling himself "hobgrumble" on flickr (since removed), and bought it immediately. Shot on Agfa APX100/Rollei Retro 100, in D-76, it's everything i was looking for from Leica, Contax, etc.

Otherwise, sure, pay a mint for a Summilux-R. I might advise the Sigma 50/1.4, but i've tried a few of them, and was always let down by the focus shift. It might be manageable on a digital camera with AF calibration, but on a film body, not so much. I had one for a Canon 5D2, and had some consistency issues. On a Nikon F100, though, it was brutal and super soft.

The Contax/Yashica 50mm 1.4 is a nice lens. Sharp, but maybe too contrasty. The Series E is much more 'vintage' while not being soft at all. Seriously — <$40. If you have a Nikon, you can't go wrong. It's tiny, and it's awesome.

[f16sunshine]

There is the Sonnar Takumar f2/58mm. It's an M42 lens and quite tiny.
I have one I bought for about $200 on an old Pentax which is quite a bit for an old Reflex "normal". It definitely has that sonnar "look".
It is the only reflex Sonnar "Normal" lens. Rare but not impossible to find.
I don't have any sample photos online. Mine has a stiff Focus and needs cleaning. Here is a flickriver.

http://www.flickriver.com/search/sonnar+takumar+58mm/

[redisburning]

the obvious answer (which Andy beat me too) is the 58mm takumar, which actually is a sonnar formulation.

good luck finding one.

have you tried the Nikkor 58mm f1.4? that might be a good choice if you dont want to mess with finding the very rare takumar.

if you like Minolta the 58mm f1.2's behavior at f2 is irreproachable; quite sharp and with exceptionally smooth OoF areas. At f1.2 it's a bit dreamy and the boke is a bit fidgety but still nothing as bad as a Zuiko (note: I like OM lenses, but let's not pretend they have the best boke in the world as a general rule. there are exceptions, I know).

[Phil_F_NM]

The Contax SLR (Kyocera generation) 45mm Tessar would have a great out of focus background. The 50mm f/1.7 Planar is very sharp, relatively inexpensive. The 85mm f/2.8 Sonnar is amazing as well but more expensive. Both can be adapted with a Leitax adapter.

I'd also put in another vote for the various Takumars listed. Fantastic lenses.

One thing you could try is to find a true Sonnar from a FSU manufacturer and have the mount changed to Nikon. Pretty much all of them are M42. Lots of excellent third party options out there for thrift store prices.

Phil Forrest

[raid]

I like using the Pentax SMC 50mm/1.4 for portraits, and the Nikkor 105mm/2.5, and the Zeiss 50mm/1.4 and 85mm/1.4 in Rollei QBM mount. These are lenses that can produce very nice looking images. The Canon FD 85mm/1.2L is also one my favorite portrait SLR lenses.

In RF, I love the old Zeiss Sonnar 5cm/1.5 for portraits. It is not a Sonnar C.

[wintoid]

For bokeh and portraits, I prefer my OM 50mm f1.2 to anything.

Here's an example...


Tangled hair by wintoid, on Flickr

[raid]

Komura 105mm/3.5:





Its a cheap lens that delivers nice looking portraits.

[raytoei@gmail.com]

beautiful images people....and i am really surprised by the pentax super takumars....

[mfogiel]

@Phil F NM
I have a Nikkor 45/2.8 P, which , I suspect is in reality the same lens as the Zeiss Tessar, and moreover I have also bought the Contax Sonnar 85/2.8.
@wintoid
This shot is quite remarkable - do you remember at which aperture have you done it?

[BobYIL]

If you were using the EF mount -5DII for example- then it would be easy.. 50/1.2L or 85/1.2L (especially!) have the smoothest bokeh known. (Or, a Nex-5N with the FD versions of these lenses, not so expensive.. )

[paulfish4570]

meyer-optik oreston 50/1.8 in m42 mount.

[paulfish4570]

nikkor 50/1.8, bw400cn:

[paulfish4570]

nikkor 50/2, hp5: