Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Leicas and other Leica Mount Cameras > Konica RF / Zeiss Ikon ZM Leica Mount Rangefinders

Konica RF / Zeiss Ikon ZM Leica Mount Rangefinders Konica and Zeiss versions of the AE electronic film rangefinder camera

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

My itch with the Sonnar-C
Old 11-09-2015   #1
k__43
Registered Film User
 
k__43's Avatar
 
k__43 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 948
My itch with the Sonnar-C

badly needs scratching ..

I love the lens, but the one thing that sucks is the 0.9m close focus. I'd love to get a bit closer. Don't start telling me because of the sonnar focus shift it's impossible to focus n stuff - I don't want perfection there.

I see 3 choices:
- selling it and get a V3 summicron and loose a stop (I like the character of the v3 as far as I could tell from pics in the net)
- getting a Contax Sonnar f/1.5 and a Amadeo-Adapter (I actually already bought the lens) and loose the nice coating of the ZM.
- finding a close focus mod. is this done yet?

Please fill my head with more thoughts about my 1st world problem. I'm looking for input
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-09-2015   #2
lawrence
Registered User
 
lawrence's Avatar
 
lawrence is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 2,108
If you want the character of a Sonnar there's no point in considering a Summicron; the two 'Crons that I owned looked very different to a Sonnar. This is hardly surprising given that they are a different optical formula i.e. modified Gauss.

If you're looking for a different 50mm I'd like to recommend that you also consider one of these:
  1. 2.5 Color-Skopar
  2. 2.0 Biogon ZM
  3. 1.5 Nokton

So far they are my favourites. Good luck!
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-09-2015   #3
mfogiel
Registered User
 
mfogiel's Avatar
 
mfogiel is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Monaco
Posts: 4,658
The only thing that can compete with C Sonnar in terms of rendering is the Summilux 50 pre asph. It is slightly less sharp, but more even, and focus shift on film is negligible. The last version with the sliding hood has the min focusing distance of 0.7m.

20131702 by marek fogiel, on Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-09-2015   #4
lam
Dave
 
lam's Avatar
 
lam is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 945
I actually just sold a Nikkor-S.C. 5cm f1.4 LTM, which is based on the Zeiss Sonnar. It is .9m but has a 'close focus' function in that there is a ball click after .9m you lose RF coupling but it allows you to get down to .4m which is 1.5ft.. (crazy yes)..

Shame I just found this thread. You can find them pretty decent price though, definitely something to check out.
__________________
website twitter
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-09-2015   #5
f16sunshine
Moderator
 
f16sunshine's Avatar
 
f16sunshine is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Seattle
Age: 51
Posts: 6,258
Quote:
Originally Posted by lam View Post
I actually just sold a Nikkor-S.C. 5cm f1.4 LTM, which is based on the Zeiss Sonnar. It is .9m but has a 'close focus' function in that there is a ball click after .9m you lose RF coupling but it allows you to get down to .4m which is 1.5ft.. (crazy yes)..

Shame I just found this thread. You can find them pretty decent price though, definitely something to check out.
The nikkor is a gorgeous lens but quite glowy wide open (the 2 I've tried).
I like the glow but it's definitely not the sonnar C which is sharp and already pretty high contrast at wide open compared to the Nikkor.

I also owed the V3 summilux until it was stolen (2011).
I replaced it with the Nokton f1.5/50mm. It may be the best bet.
There was no real world difference in rendering between these two lenses. The are both larger than the C sonnar though.
That V3 Summilux is hard to find and becoming over priced when one considers other options available (very similarly performing options like the Nokton).

Nokton and Summilux are DG schemes. Neither will have that Sonnar Bokeh if that is important to you?
__________________
Andy
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-09-2015   #6
FrankS
Registered User
 
FrankS's Avatar
 
FrankS is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Canada, eh.
Age: 62
Posts: 19,391
Crop. .
__________________
my little website: http://frankfoto.jimdo.com/

photography makes me happy
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-09-2015   #7
kxl
Social Documentary
 
kxl's Avatar
 
kxl is online now
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Sunny SoCal
Posts: 2,988
Shoot a mirrorless digital body and get a close focusing adapter -- problem solved!
__________________
Keith
My Flickr Albums
RFF feedback


"... I thought the only way to give us an incentive, to bring hope, is to show the pictures of the pristine planet - to see the innocence. ― Sebastiao Salgado
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-09-2015   #8
ferider
Registered User
 
ferider's Avatar
 
ferider is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 11,250
The Nikkor glow is gone by f1.6 and up. And the Nikkor can be modified to focus coupled down to 0.7m:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...ad.php?t=56962

But even the smoother 5005 Nikkor version has bokeh that is a bit harsher than the C-Sonnar. Same as the Zeiss Sonnar from the 50s, the Canon 50/1.5, etc. I never thought classic Sonnar bokeh was particularly smooth myself.

Two representative 5005 shots:





And the pre-asph Summilux is not very smooth either. It's a typical Mandler optimization for minimum coma and high infinity resolution. And it shifts very noticably on digital. Prices for both E43 and E46 versions have gone through the roof, recently.

The smoothest 50 that I own is the 50/1.5 VM Nokton:



Roland.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-09-2015   #9
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 2,106
My 2c.
I wanted the sonnar, then for the 0.7m got the v3 cron. It's nice but it's no sonnar.
For some reason, I find 0.9m not really restricting, but 1.0m I find way to long (on a 35mm lens - never used a 1.0m 50mm). I rarely use 0.7m on a 50, it is almost too close to frame accurately enough for the magnification.
Get the sonnar.
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-09-2015   #10
k__43
Registered Film User
 
k__43's Avatar
 
k__43 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 948
Thank you guys for your input.

I know the V3 cron has no comparable character to the sonnar but it has character none the less.
The Nokton - I forgot the Nokton there for a minute. I always thought it's a boring lens but your shot Helen has something
The new Nokton is indeed 0.7m close focusing and goes for under 600€ for new and open box.

I just scanned some tests with a Contax uncoated Sonnar which is definitely less sharp but looks as awesome wide open for portraits. It flares like mad tho. I think I will sell it and not buy the adapter for it .. the ZM is just way better

The missing stop of the V3 cron might ruin the fun on the long run.
I'm no 50mm man so more than one is unnecessary (well I've always the J-8 in the drawer)

the v3 Lux is too expensive .. saving some money would have been a afterthought in this

I might stick with the sonnar-c a little longer (again). A mod would be the ideal solution I guess.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-09-2015   #11
k__43
Registered Film User
 
k__43's Avatar
 
k__43 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 948
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankS View Post
Crop. .
Cropping doesn't get you further away from people on your table in a bar. You have the get up a draw all the attention on you - that basically is my problem with the distance.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2015   #12
santela
Registered User
 
santela is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 145
Okay this is probably not gonna help you since all your listed cameras are film, but if you are not completely opposed to digital, you could get a Sony A7 and an adapter that'll allow you to focus as close as 0.5m.

Sorry if it doesn't help but that's the best I got.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2015   #13
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is online now
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,606
The minimum focusing distance of the Sonnar is 0.9 as apposed the best 50 which seems to be about 0.7

You'd sacrifice the nicest 50mm RF lens on the market for 0.2 of a meter difference?
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-15-2015   #14
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
The minimum focusing distance of the Sonnar is 0.9 as apposed the best 50 which seems to be about 0.7

You'd sacrifice the nicest 50mm RF lens on the market for 0.2 of a meter difference?
I did just that. The alternative (late West-Germany Sonnar 1,5/50 + adapter) cost me less than half what I got for my C Sonnar.

Bonus: it doesn't wobble. Ever!

C Sonnar has better ergonomics, though.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2015   #15
k__43
Registered Film User
 
k__43's Avatar
 
k__43 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 948
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
I did just that. The alternative (late West-Germany Sonnar 1,5/50 + adapter) cost me less than half what I got for my C Sonnar.

Bonus: it doesn't wobble. Ever!

C Sonnar has better ergonomics, though.
Nice to hear you are happy with that combo.

I tried a pre-war uncoated f/1.5 on a contax III and I'm not really really happy - it works for what I'd want to do with it mainly but it's not sharp enough for my taste and flares like a m&$%F&%A
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2015   #16
Richard G
Registered User
 
Richard G's Avatar
 
Richard G is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: 37,47 S
Posts: 5,178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
The minimum focusing distance of the Sonnar is 0.9 as apposed the best 50 which seems to be about 0.7

You'd sacrifice the nicest 50mm RF lens on the market for 0.2 of a meter difference?
Agree completely with Keith. In your lifetime and late in the life of new products in 35mm film, Zeiss brought out a rangefinder film camera and then a whole lot of M mount lenses which included the 50 C Sonnar. And you have one. And you've used it. And you want more? Keep away from windows and high places: the Lord may strike you down. The C Sonnar is my only must have lens. It makes my heart skip a beat, even at f5.6.
__________________
Richard
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2015   #17
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is online now
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,606
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard G View Post
Agree completely with Keith. In your lifetime and late in the life of new products in 35mm film, Zeiss brought out a rangefinder film camera and then a whole lot of M mount lenses which included the 50 C Sonnar. And you have one. And you've used it. And you want more? Keep away from windows and high places: the Lord may strike you down. The C Sonnar is my only must have lens. It makes my heart skip a beat, even at f5.6.

And lets not forget it has the approval of our esteemed RF scribe Roger Hicks. He rates it as his favourite 50mm M mount lens.
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2015   #18
k__43
Registered Film User
 
k__43's Avatar
 
k__43 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 948
Hey I said I have an itch with that problem, no pain - I'll probably stick to it as it seems for now. I love it as much as most people, but leaning weirdly on your chair or standing up from the table at all is exactly what you often have to do for those 20cm, i.e. making notice of your photo taking intention while you actually just wanted to take an unnoticed snap.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2015   #19
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,462
Get a dedicated 50mm Amedeo adapter and a $5 Jupiter-8 in Kiev/Contax mount. You get 0.7m, all the Sonnar character at f2, don't have to worry about compensating for focus shift wide open (there is focus shift as you stop down!) and J-8 is almost as good wide open as other f1.5 Sonnars @f2.

__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2015   #20
k__43
Registered Film User
 
k__43's Avatar
 
k__43 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 948
Ha, this opens another possibility that was there all along - I only haven't thought about it. I will mod my LTM J8! bummer about that extra stop tho and: no, I'm not going down that J3 route as I'm not patient enough to shim one.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2015   #21
mcfingon
Western Australia
 
mcfingon is offline
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 1,133
Some J3's come pre-shimmed for Leica focus. How you tell in advance is another story.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2015   #22
mcfingon
Western Australia
 
mcfingon is offline
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 1,133
J3 on IIIf Leica, at f2.8 maybe?
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2015   #23
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
 
Rob-F's Avatar
 
Rob-F is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Age: 78
Posts: 6,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by k__43 View Post
badly needs scratching ..

I love the lens, but the one thing that sucks is the 0.9m close focus. I'd love to get a bit closer. Don't start telling me because of the sonnar focus shift it's impossible to focus n stuff - I don't want perfection there.

I see 3 choices:
- selling it and get a V3 summicron and loose a stop (I like the character of the v3 as far as I could tell from pics in the net)
- getting a Contax Sonnar f/1.5 and a Amadeo-Adapter (I actually already bought the lens) and loose the nice coating of the ZM.
- finding a close focus mod. is this done yet?

Please fill my head with more thoughts about my 1st world problem. I'm looking for input
Since you love the lens, you should probably keep it. How much closer can you actually focus with a different RF lens? To 0.7M instead of 0.9? Or might you be able to get closer than 0.7M with the Amadeo? Would it be worth your while to pick up an SLR or DSLR, say a Nikon F3, or similar, and use a 50/1.4 Nikkor or 55/3.5 Micro-Nikkor? It sounds like you do enough work in that range to justify it.

Just my $0.02.
__________________
May the light be with you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-16-2015   #24
tonyc
Registered User
 
tonyc is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 118
Hello

A cheap fix for Sonnar close focus, is to use the Jupiter 3
and unscrew the lens slightly from the camera/adapter.

Be careful not to unscrew too far . . .

-TC
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-10-2016   #25
agoglanian
Reconnected.
 
agoglanian's Avatar
 
agoglanian is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: San Francisco, CA
Age: 33
Posts: 929
I'm planning on getting the C Sonnar personally. I can work with the .9m MFD (though I like many other would prefer to at least have .7m available). However one neat trick with the M240 is having the OUFRO adapter available! Albeit forcing me to use live view or the EVF, but hey it works.

I have the 35mm f/1.2 Nokton II and though it's a real storyteller of a lens, I'm finding that for my one "faster-than f/2" lens I think I would prefer it to be a 50, and the look of this lens reminds me of the canon 50mm f/1.2L that I loved oh-so-much for several years on Canon. (Quirks and all)
__________________
- Abram

M-A | M10 | Q | 500CM

Instagram. | Website.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-06-2016   #26
k__43
Registered Film User
 
k__43's Avatar
 
k__43 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 948
Update on my doings .. I sold it, it hurts a bit tho.
I bought a M9 with the money and I'm trying to get a nice J3 now that I will mod. It is easier to check the correctness of your shims with the M9.

I don't use 50mm usually as a walk around lens. It's more or less for portraits only, so I can live with the less good coating vs. the C-Sonnar
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-06-2016   #27
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 2,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by k__43 View Post
Update on my doings .. I sold it, it hurts a bit tho.
I bought a M9 with the money and I'm trying to get a nice J3 now that I will mod. It is easier to check the correctness of your shims with the M9.

I don't use 50mm usually as a walk around lens. It's more or less for portraits only, so I can live with the less good coating vs. the C-Sonnar
In the end they're only lenses. I'm sure you can get another when the time is right!

Enjoy your M9
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-06-2016   #28
SaveKodak
Registered User
 
SaveKodak is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: New York City
Posts: 573
I'm surprised there is so little love for the VM 50/1.5 Nokton. It's cheapish, with a lot to love both in terms of character and performance.

As for the C Sonnar, I too am trying to sell mine after just a few short months of use. It's a beauty at 1.5 when taking portraits, but so is my ZM Distagon 35 at 1.4, which focuses closer. It's not exactly the same look but it seems to be what I'm looking for, as the lens doesn't really leave my camera.

IMO the C Sonnar is probably THE lens to get with a Sony plus a helical focus adapter.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-07-2016   #29
k__43
Registered Film User
 
k__43's Avatar
 
k__43 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 948
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaveKodak View Post
I'm surprised there is so little love for the VM 50/1.5 Nokton. It's cheapish, with a lot to love both in terms of character and performance.

As for the C Sonnar, I too am trying to sell mine after just a few short months of use. It's a beauty at 1.5 when taking portraits, but so is my ZM Distagon 35 at 1.4, which focuses closer. It's not exactly the same look but it seems to be what I'm looking for, as the lens doesn't really leave my camera.

IMO the C Sonnar is probably THE lens to get with a Sony plus a helical focus adapter.
When I tried a M9 last year the C-Sonnar was my main lens for the weekend despite the fact that the loaner came with a Summilux 50 ASPH.

I got the J3 yesterday and so far it seems it is enough 50mm for me. I rather invest in another 35mm now.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-07-2016   #30
Jockos
Registered User
 
Jockos's Avatar
 
Jockos is offline
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Sweden
Age: 31
Posts: 985
http://shop.lomography.com/en/jupiter-3-plus
To .7m!
__________________
Don't trust anything I say or write before I get my morning coffee, at least I don't.

Da gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-07-2016   #31
k__43
Registered Film User
 
k__43's Avatar
 
k__43 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 948
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jockos View Post
Yeah, it's not bad .. I started that thread before the release of that lens - I thought about it when it came out.
I would buy one used as I actually never buy new, I'm not rich. They are not available second hand yet.
Meanwhile the old J3 I have should be enough - even with the wrong focal width and its inability to focus to infinity (I usually never shoot portraits at infinity focus) - I see the glow as an feature (at least for now)
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-09-2016   #32
k__43
Registered Film User
 
k__43's Avatar
 
k__43 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 948


Good enough for now - just need to change the close focus and lube the helical when I'm at it
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 15:54.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.