Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > RFF Polls

View Poll Results: Which Zeiss 50 ZM for you?
50 f2 Planar 61 50.83%
50 f1.5 Sonnar 48 40.00%
Something else 11 9.17%
Voters: 120. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Zeiss 50: To 2.0 or not to 2.0
Old 07-22-2007   #1
Avotius
Some guy
 
Avotius's Avatar
 
Avotius is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,520
Zeiss 50: To 2.0 or not to 2.0

So Zeiss has these two great 50mm lenses out there. Tho Planar 50 f2 and the Sonnar 50 f1.5.

Anyone interested in either of these will have read as much as they can about both and know the ins and outs of each....sooo....which way do you go?

btw, I used the two zeiss lenses because they are relatively close in price (especially here in china) compared to the Leica offerings.
__________________
Flickr.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-22-2007   #2
kshapero
Photog
 
kshapero's Avatar
 
kshapero is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Florida, USA
Age: 69
Posts: 9,680
Sonnar 50 f1.5
__________________
Akiva S.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kshapero

Cameras, Lenses and Photos

"Cheeky but not brazen"
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-22-2007   #3
Marc-A.
I Shoot Film
 
Marc-A.'s Avatar
 
Marc-A. is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Paris (France)
Age: 41
Posts: 1,175
Avotius,
I'm about to buy the Planar. I made my decision lately.
I don't need the 1.5 stop. I don't know about the front focus shift but I certainly know that I can't focus accurately at 1.5. Besides, what X Ray and Meleica have said about the Planar satisfied me that it's as good as any Leica 50.
It shall be the Planar then!
Best,
Marc
__________________
My Flickr

My PBase
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-22-2007   #4
back alley
IMAGES
 
back alley's Avatar
 
back alley is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: true north strong & free
Posts: 49,113
i've had both and kept the sonnar.
the 50/2 is very sharp, it's a great lens and consistant.
the 1.5 seems more flavourful, flexible and as has been stated by others, is more like several lenses wrapped up in one.
not being a 'real' fifty kind of guy i can rationalize having the 1.5 for more than the focal length, it's the character.
i also rationalize having the cv 50/2.5 for it's small size on the r4.
__________________
heart soul & a camera
xe3...14/16/18/23/23/27/35/50/56/60/15-45/16-55/55-200
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-22-2007   #5
ferider
Registered User
 
ferider's Avatar
 
ferider is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 11,254
Will depend on what you use it for.

Note that the two lenses have different minimum focus distance
so you can do certain types of portraits with the Planar that
you cannt do with the Sonnar. And vice versa, due to speed and
OOF behavior.

The Sonnar is a bit slower to handle due to focus shift (also when
corrected for f1.5, BTW).

You didn't want to hear this I'm sure, but the two lenses could coexist
in the same bag

Roland.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-22-2007   #6
mfogiel
Registered User
 
mfogiel's Avatar
 
mfogiel is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Monaco
Posts: 4,660
Avotius,
The C Sonnar is not like a "todays" lens until f 5.6, so if you need a normal lens for reportage, and you like shooting closer up, the Planar is an obvious choice. On the other hand, if shooting portraits is your thing, there is no other lens on the market that can render like the C Sonnar - I think this lens itself should justify a Zeiss Ikon as a lens cap... :-). The f 1.5 against f2 comparison is totally meaningless here. If you want to see how a "todays"Planar draws at wide apertures, take a look at my Makro Planar 50/2 shots here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/5917703...7600939299824/
the 50/2 Planar (which I also have BTW) is very similar.

I've just posted a thread with a link to a series of test shots on C Sonnar across apertures, take a look and see for yourself:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...803#post601803
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-22-2007   #7
msadat
Registered User
 
msadat is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 42
I sent in my sonnar to zeiss for the "wide open fix" ( it was a very quick turn around), 50 is my favorit focal length and a i have a whle bunch of 50s. the sonnar now tops them all. this includes for my 4 leica 50 (1.0,2.0,.14. and 1.4 asph). but the fix was needed.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-22-2007   #8
FanMan
Registered User
 
FanMan's Avatar
 
FanMan is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: at the edge of the Swabian Mountains
Age: 52
Posts: 152
have voted for the C-Sonnar - 'cause I like its results.

But it is not an easy-to-handle lens to my opinion.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-22-2007   #9
Marc-A.
I Shoot Film
 
Marc-A.'s Avatar
 
Marc-A. is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Paris (France)
Age: 41
Posts: 1,175
Quote:
Originally Posted by ferider
You didn't want to hear this I'm sure, but the two lenses could coexist
in the same bag
I don't want hear this, Roland!!! Stop teasing us !!!
__________________
My Flickr

My PBase
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-22-2007   #10
FanMan
Registered User
 
FanMan's Avatar
 
FanMan is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: at the edge of the Swabian Mountains
Age: 52
Posts: 152
indeed! have to save my money for the 85-Sonnar!!
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-22-2007   #11
Avotius
Some guy
 
Avotius's Avatar
 
Avotius is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,520
heh, dont tell me guys! I already made my choice! I just thought it would be fun to know what people were thinking about these two pieces of glass now that we have two great lenses to tinker with
__________________
Flickr.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-22-2007   #12
jan normandale
Film is the other way
 
jan normandale's Avatar
 
jan normandale is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: on Location
Posts: 3,910
so you made a choice, and...... ??
__________________
RFF Gallery
flickr
Blog

it's all about light
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-22-2007   #13
triplefinger
Registered User
 
triplefinger's Avatar
 
triplefinger is offline
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Age: 53
Posts: 440
I love my zm 50/2. I covet the 1.5 but have a spectacular jupiter-3 and just don't see a good reason for it.
__________________
my RFF gallery

best contact: mikematzdorff AT gmail DOT com

==========================

Canon P - nikkor 50/1.4 - fed 50/3.5 - Holga lens in M mount! GH2 VL 25/0.95 + nikons 35/2, 50/1.2, 55/1.2, 85/1.8

==========================
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-22-2007   #14
SimonPG
www.f8Vision.com
 
SimonPG is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia.
Posts: 17
The Planar 50mm f2 is an excellent lens and the equal of the current Summicron-M 50mm except at wide open. That difference is because the "formula" used by Zeiss is for a different optimisation purpose than Leica's wide open performance optimisation objective.

I shoot mainly Hasselblad 6x6 with the Zeiss glass and these have the trademark Zeiss characteristics that go back to the Contarex lenses. So, it is great to see the Zeiss formula available in Leica M mount now.

Had I not already owned my Summicron-M 50mm and 35mm ASPPH lenses, I would certainly have bought the Zeiss offerings becuase I like the Zeiss formula and the look it delivers.

Of course I have no criticism of the Leica versions - they are outstanding all the same. The Zeiss are NOT better, just different.

Having never used truly fast Zeiss lenses, I would prefer the f2 over the f1.5, but I say that with no knowledge of how the f1.5 performs.
__________________
Simon
My web site: http://www.f8vision.com/

My galleries: http://www.f8vision.com/gallery.html

Leica M7; Hasselblad XPan II; Bessa L.
Hasselblad 501CM, 503CW.
Linhof 4x5.
Canon 1vHS.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2007   #15
Nachkebia
Registered User
 
Nachkebia's Avatar
 
Nachkebia is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Age: 35
Posts: 1,992
I would say depends what kind of photos you want to take, if you want a lens that can do anything you desire with perfect balance go for planar ZM! if you want that smooth retro look go for sonar, end of story \

P.S Owning planar 50m with 50mm asph lux I still want sonnar and probably will get it someday, because I don`t think there will be more lenses coming in near future with such a build quality with such retro look
__________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nachkebia/

Zeiss Ikon, Leica M7, 21,25,35 biogon ZM, 28 elmarit ASPH, 50 planar ZM, 50 summilux asph
(hardcore nikonian)

Last edited by Nachkebia : 07-23-2007 at 01:21.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2007   #16
Avotius
Some guy
 
Avotius's Avatar
 
Avotius is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,520
Quote:
Originally Posted by jan normandale
so you made a choice, and...... ??

Oh! Yeah, I made a choice and im going to go with the planar because I like a good all around lens with consistency. Plus close focus is something that I need, and I have my heart set on a summilux one of these days...

but despite all that I am surprised how fast this simple poll wondering which lens people liked turned into a technical conversation about which was better

then again all this me buying a lens malarkey is all based on if my gf gets her visa to go to the states or not. If not its lens time, if she get it.......in a year its lens time
__________________
Flickr.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2007   #17
Marc-A.
I Shoot Film
 
Marc-A.'s Avatar
 
Marc-A. is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Paris (France)
Age: 41
Posts: 1,175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avotius
I am surprised how fast this simple poll wondering which lens people liked turned into a technical conversation about which was better
What did you expect? "I like this one" or "I don't like this one"? If there's nothing to say except I like this one rather than that one, I don't see the point of discussing gear, nor participating in a poll in this forum. My 2 cents.
__________________
My Flickr

My PBase
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-23-2007   #18
Avotius
Some guy
 
Avotius's Avatar
 
Avotius is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,520
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc-A.
What did you expect? "I like this one" or "I don't like this one"? If there's nothing to say except I like this one rather than that one, I don't see the point of discussing gear, nor participating in a poll in this forum. My 2 cents.

heh....have a nice read through this http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...ad.php?t=44453
__________________
Flickr.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-24-2007   #19
Marc-A.
I Shoot Film
 
Marc-A.'s Avatar
 
Marc-A. is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Paris (France)
Age: 41
Posts: 1,175
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avotius
heh....have a nice read through this http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...ad.php?t=44453
I'm sorry Avotius, I'm not smart enough to understand your reference; you surely have an idea, but I don't get it.
Please read again my previous post, with no "heh". There's nothing to be surprised of when people talk about gear in a thread about gear. That's my point, I don't mean anything else.
__________________
My Flickr

My PBase
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-14-2007   #20
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
 
mfunnell's Avatar
 
mfunnell is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,460
If I didn't like my M-Hexanon 50 so much as my "general purpose 50" I'd probably be thinking very seriously about the 50 Planar. But since I do have and like that lens, I'd be far more likely to want to investigate the Sonnar. However, I have other 50s (and a 55, which is almost the same) I need to explore first, before I even think about acquiring another one. (:slaps self: "out, damned GAS!")

...Mike
__________________
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness." Dave Barry

My flickr photostream has day-to-day stuff and I've given up most everywhere else through lack of time or perhaps interest.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-14-2007   #21
thomasw_
Registered User
 
thomasw_'s Avatar
 
thomasw_ is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Fort Langley, BC
Age: 53
Posts: 1,628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nachkebia
I would say depends what kind of photos you want to take, if you want a lens that can do anything you desire with perfect balance go for planar ZM! if you want that smooth retro look go for sonar, end of story.......
Vlad nails the issue here for me. For my uses the planar is a better compliment to my lens bag. Bear in mind that for low light with a 5cm FL I do have the L summilux 50 for a very different signature.
__________________
f l i c k r
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-15-2007   #22
kshapero
Photog
 
kshapero's Avatar
 
kshapero is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: South Florida, USA
Age: 69
Posts: 9,680
I use the C Sonnar 50mm f1.5 and the CV 40mm f1.4 on my ZI. What a pair!!
__________________
Akiva S.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kshapero

Cameras, Lenses and Photos

"Cheeky but not brazen"
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-15-2007   #23
awilder
Registered User
 
awilder is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,339
For people that have gotten the focus shift "fix" or the latter ones with the fix built in, how does the improved ZM 50/1.5 Sonnar-C perform under various focusing situations, i.e. close up at f/1.5 and f/2.8-4, mid-distance and far at the same apertures as with close up?
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-15-2007   #24
thorirv
-
 
thorirv is offline
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 346
just read through this (as well as the linked 50 thread)... now i haven't read much about the zeiss 50's (just flirting with the idea of getting one), but is the general consensus that the sonnar needs "fixing" to focus correctly.??
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-15-2007   #25
ferider
Registered User
 
ferider's Avatar
 
ferider is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 11,254
"but is the general consensus that the sonnar needs "fixing" to focus correctly.?"


No.

It's not broken.

It will shift after the change as much as before.

So do older Sonnars, like the Nikkor 50/1.4 that was used professionally for many, many years
without this issue even coming up.

Say you have a modified or newer lens with maximum sharpness at f1.5.
Further, say you will shoot at f5.6. Your f5.6 DOF window will start (i.e. softly) at
your focus plane and go back, i.e. the lens will back focus.

Last edited by ferider : 08-15-2007 at 12:56.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-15-2007   #26
thorirv
-
 
thorirv is offline
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 346
ferider, i don't quite understand what you're saying... does it shift? at 1m (mark on lens), does it focus a subject correctly at 1m. or does it have to be "modified" to do so? or is the "issue" more complicated (since you mention other sonnars)? all i'm thinking, is that this is a new lens, and i would assume that i could mount it on a camera and expect it to focus according to the rf, close as well as infinity (meaning a correctly calibrated rf, accurate enough to focus it at these distances).
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-15-2007   #27
ferider
Registered User
 
ferider's Avatar
 
ferider is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 11,254
Quote:
Originally Posted by thorirv
ferider, i don't quite understand what you're saying... does it shift? at 1m (mark on lens), does it focus a subject correctly at 1m. or does it have to be "modified" to do so? or is the "issue" more complicated (since you mention other sonnars)? all i'm thinking, is that this is a new lens, and i would assume that i could mount it on a camera and expect it to focus according to the rf, close as well as infinity (meaning a correctly calibrated rf, accurate enough to focus it at these distances).

Basically it shifts before and after the "fix".

Older versions of the lens, when you focus at 1m, will shift toward you
(front focus) by around 6cm at f1.5, not at all at f2.8 and back-focus
by about the same amount at f5.6.

Newer versions of the lens, when you focus at 1m, will not shift at f1.5,
will back-focus by 6cm at f2.8 and around 12cm at f5.6. Not as visible
because the DOF window covers the shift partially, but visible IMO.
Basically your focus plane will always be at the border of the DOF window,
towards you.

In really, it's a little more complicated since the corners behave a little
differently, but in practice, in the center that's what happens.

Roland.

Last edited by ferider : 08-15-2007 at 13:30.
  Reply With Quote

Old 08-18-2007   #28
foto_fool
Registered User
 
foto_fool is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 733
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfunnell
If I didn't like my M-Hexanon 50 so much as my "general purpose 50" I'd probably be thinking very seriously about the 50 Planar. But since I do have and like that lens, I'd be far more likely to want to investigate the Sonnar. However, I have other 50s (and a 55, which is almost the same) I need to explore first, before I even think about acquiring another one. (:slaps self: "out, damned GAS!")

...Mike
Mike this is exactly the reason I don't have the Planar - the Hexanon is so good. It is a little bigger though.

I have the Sonnar and it is my favorite M-mount 50, followed closely by a very nice Summarit that just came abck from a CLA by DAG. I use the extra stop a lot. The Hexanon gets used about 5 x less than these other lenses.

- John
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-16-2008   #29
cmogi10
Bodhisattva
 
cmogi10's Avatar
 
cmogi10 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Northern California
Posts: 1,687
I think I'm going to 1.5

  Reply With Quote

Old 01-16-2008   #30
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,969
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc-A.
What did you expect? "I like this one" or "I don't like this one"? If there's nothing to say except I like this one rather than that one, I don't see the point of discussing gear, nor participating in a poll in this forum. My 2 cents.
Make that 4 cents, because I agree completely. Unless someone tells me why they like a particular lens, I can't begin to judge whether their choice can tell me anything. And if it can't tell me anything, why am I going to waste my time reading it, or participating in a poll?

Among 50mm Leica-fit lenses I currently have in my possession (I don't own all of them) are the Sonnar; a 1930s Elmar; a DR Summicron; a Noctilux; the new Summarit; a Nokton (current); a Color-Skopar 50/2.5; and a Canon 50/1.2. I have tried an awful lot of others including most Leica 50s (except Summiluxes, for some reason), the 50/2 Planar, various Summicrons, most FSU lenses, and more.

The 1,5/50 C-Sonnar is easily my favourite: it has a 'magic' that I don't see in any other 'standard' I own or have used except perhaps the 58/1.4 Nikkor. The Planar is a superb lens. So is the current Summicron. But they don't have the 'personality' of the Sonnar -- and incidentally, I cannot begin to see why anyone thinks this lens is tricky to use. My second choice for a new 50 would be the Noctilux, and my third, the new Summarit.

Cheers,

R.

Last edited by Roger Hicks : 01-16-2008 at 03:52.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-15-2008   #31
john_s
Registered User
 
john_s is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 828
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Hicks
........The 1,5/50 C-Sonnar is easily my favourite..................., I cannot begin to see why anyone thinks this lens is tricky to use. My second choice for a new 50 would be the Noctilux, and my third, the new Summarit.

Cheers,

R.
I found it tricky to use because of the focus shift. I take fairly close portraits of children at wide aperture, and couldn't get it to focus. Altering the focus (plus or minus) according to which aperture I was using was too tricky for me. I did some tests with tripod and found that the problem was all to do with the focus shift.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-22-2008   #32
visiondr
cyclic iconoclast
 
visiondr's Avatar
 
visiondr is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 1,203
My understanding was that with a Sonnar calibrated for f/2.8 all one has to do to avoid focus shift at f/1.5 is to focus on the end of the subject's nose. Thus the plane of focus will fall at the eyes. Is that correct? If so, that sounds simple enough.

I would choose the Sonnar calibrated for f/2.8. That would leave a good all-round lens.
__________________
Ron


“The enemy of art is the absence of limitations.”
Orson Welles

flickr (visiondrawn)

  Reply With Quote

Old 03-22-2008   #33
mfogiel
Registered User
 
mfogiel's Avatar
 
mfogiel is offline
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Monaco
Posts: 4,660
visiondr
No, the "f2,8" version front focuses at f1.5. Search for my comparative focus test of the C Sonnars.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-23-2008   #34
FanMan
Registered User
 
FanMan's Avatar
 
FanMan is offline
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: at the edge of the Swabian Mountains
Age: 52
Posts: 152
Quote:
Originally Posted by visiondr View Post
My understanding was that with a Sonnar calibrated for f/2.8 all one has to do to avoid focus shift at f/1.5 is to focus on the end of the subject's nose. Thus the plane of focus will fall at the eyes. Is that correct? If so, that sounds simple enough.

I would choose the Sonnar calibrated for f/2.8. That would leave a good all-round lens.
if you focus with an 2.8-optimized version on the nose, the portrait will be entirely out of focus when using the lens @ 1.5. With a 2.8-version you will have to focus on the person's ear when using aperture 1.5. With a 1.5-version you have to focus on the tip of the nose when using aperture 2.8.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-23-2008   #35
Doug
Moderator
 
Doug's Avatar
 
Doug is online now
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Pacific NW, USA
Posts: 12,787
I think one can reasonably prefer either of the focus optimizations and work the consequent downside usefully into one's work. Mine is the original f/2.8 optimization, and in practice this seems more appropriate for my use, and I've figured easy workarounds for the times it's not ideal.

I like the character of the lens even at mid-apertures and seldom shoot wider than f2.4 or so. For wider apertures at portrait distances I can focus on the desired point and then lean forward a few cm. Or, more generally, focus as desired and then manually rotate the focus ring so that the focused distance marking is halfway to the first DoF marking at left of center.

As to which lens... I have both and plan to keep both. The Planar is a more conventional lens with exquisite performance, while the Sonnar is a real character calling for special handling.
__________________
Doug’s Gallery
RFF on Facebook
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2008   #36
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,016
Why choose Zeiss when you have the Leica line?

Crucify me! [not]
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2008   #37
triplefinger
Registered User
 
triplefinger's Avatar
 
triplefinger is offline
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Age: 53
Posts: 440
2 of my 3 favorite lenses are Zeiss

planar 50/2
biogon 25/2.8
summicron-c 40/2

this just in Zeiss, good.




Quote:
Originally Posted by raid View Post
Why choose Zeiss when you have the Leica line?

Crucify me! [not]
__________________
my RFF gallery

best contact: mikematzdorff AT gmail DOT com

==========================

Canon P - nikkor 50/1.4 - fed 50/3.5 - Holga lens in M mount! GH2 VL 25/0.95 + nikons 35/2, 50/1.2, 55/1.2, 85/1.8

==========================
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2008   #38
gertf
Registered User
 
gertf's Avatar
 
gertf is offline
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 170
The Sonnar is fantastic. Shift is easy to compensate for with the 2.8 optimised version. I love mine

Incidentally I purchased it after reading Roger Hicks' review.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-30-2008   #39
Arvay
Obscurant
 
Arvay's Avatar
 
Arvay is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Moscow
Posts: 679
I went for Sonnar 'cause I have planar on my Rollei and will have on G1.
I really love the picture from planar but see no reason to have all lenses similar.
Second reason is that I liked portraits made with Sonnar
Third reason is that I can buy it new at my place for reasonable price :two times less than Leitz Summicron here and three times than Summilux
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-03-2008   #40
Turtle
Registered User
 
Turtle is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Hicks View Post
....-- and incidentally, I cannot begin to see why anyone thinks this lens is tricky to use. My second choice for a new 50 would be the Noctilux, and my third, the new Summarit.

Cheers,

R.
Surely having to account for shift at varying apertures slows you down and is a PITA when you are rushing to get things done. If you work slowly it might be fine but if you have to grab shots with no time at all I would not want to contemplate such an issue! The sonnar might appeal to me for more relaxed portrait work perhaps but I went for the planar for simple dependability at all apertures. I wanted a lens that I did not have to think about in use and that offered the same look and handling as my other ZMs. It does this perfectly and so I can slip from lens to lens without a second thought. I can certainly see the appeal of the sonnar, but it would not work for me as my only lens. The 1.5 optimised version sounds fun and would be something I would love to try for female portraiture in particular.

I am consistently amazed by how wonderful the planar images are wide open or close too. very smooth with lovely bokeh and whilst sharp, not insanely so at these apertures. At 2.8 and beyond it is like a razor however.
  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 Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
50 2.0 summicron bokeh Innerimager Epson R-D1 Leica M mount Digital Rangefinder 4 12-13-2006 15:07
Initial Review of the Zeiss Ikon Camera and 35/2 willie_901 Rangefinder Photography Discussion 4 08-18-2006 20:01
Zeiss Ikon and Summitar 50 troym Konica RF / Zeiss Ikon ZM Leica Mount Rangefinders 9 07-09-2006 23:07
Servicing Zeiss lenses and cameras in the future troym Konica RF / Zeiss Ikon ZM Leica Mount Rangefinders 7 06-28-2006 19:16



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 15:50.


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.