ZI 50/2 Planar

scottmcl · 06-08-2005

I'm currently shooting a CV 50 Nokton. Not too many complaints except that (1) the lens is a bit large; (2) the shade sucks, so I almost always shoot it without a shade; (3) I sometimes think I want a different lens signature. I also have the little CV 50/2.5 and have been giving that one another chance at the encouragement of some folks on another forum.

As for signature, I toy with (1) a current Leica 2.8 for the "Tessar look" that I like with my Nikon 45/2.8 AI-P. I'm told that if I like the Nikkor, I should really like the Leica collapsible. (2) a clean Leica rigid for a lower contrast + creamy bokeh or even (3) a current 50 Summicron to just go for fantastic resolution in a modern lens.

In my indecision, I save some money and keep shooting the Nokton :-) I'd let it go, but I have a Leica 28/2 that I just adore, and given I shoot the 50mm FL so much more, I wish I could fall in love with a 50 in the same way.

Anyway, how does the new ZI 50/2 fare? What are its strengths and weaknesses. I've heard good things about the ZI 35/2, but little about the new Planar.

BTW, I shoot pretty much 100% B&W with my RF gear.

Scott

MIKIRO · 06-09-2005

Hi. I have been using one for a couple of months. To my eye, the lens is hard to fault in every aspect, i.e., sharpness, contrast, bokeh, etc. However, it lacks a strong character such as biting sharpness of Leica 50/1.4 asph. In this lens I am yet to see the signature I saw in Contax 50mm/f1.4 and 45mm/f2 Planars. Perhaps, I am hard pressed to tell any differences in images taken with the Planar and the current Summicrion. If you adore your Leica 28/2 asph, you may prefer Leica 50/1.4 asph.

Cheers,
MIKIRO

awilder · 06-09-2005

Interesting comment about the 45/2 Planar since the optical layout and MTF graphs looks about identical to the 50/2 Planar.

David Kieltyka · 06-09-2005

In my experience the Zeiss' strongest points are its consistency across the frame, even at wide apertures, and its smooth out-of-focus rendition. Smoother than the rigid (or current) Summicron. There are no weak points. It has the same contrast and color character as the 45mm G Planar but a gentler look at wide apertures & close focusing distances due to the smoother bokeh.

If biting central sharpness wide open is what you want the ASPH Summilux is the one to get. And your Nokton is no slouch either. The Planar is plenty sharp at f/2--sharp enough to induce moire with my Epson R-D1 under the "right" conditions--but compared to the ASPH trades off a touch of absolute center performance for crisper corners.

-Dave-