The F1.5 optimized C Sonnar experience ?

[mfogiel]

I am a big fan of Zeiss lenses in general, and of the C Sonnar in particular. I use it mainly for portraits, ans I find that at the 1.3-1.7 m distance f 2.8 delivers just the right dof to generate outstanding images with splendid "roundness". If you do that on XP2 or Kodak 400 BW and make a noise suppression passage in PS later, you really get creamy shots, particularly flattering for ladies, else you shoot it on a "harder" film, and do not remove noise, and the drawing is more detailed, yet very pleasing.
But, I have just bought a nice M7 from a member of this forum, to be dedicated to stealth shooting with a 50mm lens in interiors, where I would need an aperture like f1.2 - f1.5, and since I do not feel like shelling out tons of money on the Summilux, I am wondering if getting another sample of the C Sonnar, dedicated exclusively to the f1.5 aperture would make sense, or would I be better off with one of the alternative f 1.2-f1.5 lenses. Has anybody got an experience of this kind to share?

 

[drjoke]

Yes! I would like to know this too. Also what email to contact, and what's the shipping address if I would like to get mine fixed. What kind of papers to I need to send, etc.?

 

[kshapero]

Stay with the C Sonnar or consider a CV 40mm/1.4 MC for low light sharpness and price.

 

[ferider]

If money is no object, I would consider the 35 Nokton. 35/1.2 is better for low light,
then say 50/1.0.

If it is, like Akiva said, the 40 Nokton is a great lens.

I would hesitate to have my C-Sonnar optimized for 1.5 - then I couldn't
take the great 2.8 shots any more 🙂

Roland.

 

[kshapero]

If money is no object, I would consider the 35 Nokton. 35/1.2 is better for low light,
then say 50/1.0.

If it is, like Akiva said, the 40 Nokton is a great lens.

I would hesitate to have my C-Sonnar optimized for 1.5 - then I couldn't
take the great 2.8 shots any more 🙂

Roland.

Agree with the above.

 

[jsuominen]

Hmm, somehow I remember that Marek (mfogiel) already owns CV 35/1.2 lens... 🙂 But how about a cheaper alternative for another ZM 50/1.5 -> CV Nokton 50/1.5?

It doesn't have any focus shift problem at f/1.5. Some samples here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/259991956/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/1487891766/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/496108764/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/299560104/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/299559526/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/241735355/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/222614791/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/222614591/

 

[mfogiel]

Indeed, I already have the CV 35/1.2 and then the M7 will be 0.85, so with glasses I doubt I will be able to use 35mm framelines, and besides, I find a 35mm too short for stealth shooting - you have to get too close. Thanks for your splendid examples of the Nokton 50 wide open shots Jari... In fact this lens is quite sharp and the bokeh not bad at all... I wish Zeiss made a nice 50/1.2 lens to satisfy the demanding low light shooters, but I think it might not materialize at all... BTW I did not mean to alter my current C Sonnar optimum focus, but to get a second one, dedicated entirely to the full aperture shots...

 

[jsuominen]

BTW I did not mean to alter my current C Sonnar optimum focus, but to get a second one, dedicated entirely to the full aperture shots...

That might be a good idea. Then the rest of us C Sonnar "wanna-be-owners" could see, how that fix would affect the lens. 🙂

 

[Doug]

I am a big fan of Zeiss lenses in general, and of the C Sonnar in particular. I use it mainly for portraits, ans I find that at the 1.3-1.7 m distance f 2.8 delivers just the right dof to generate outstanding images with splendid "roundness".

Sounds like you have more experience in this mode than I, and what you say is encouraging! Here's an example; my financial advisor at his desk, with M2, C-Sonnar at f2.8, Fuji NPS 160.

Edit: Checking records more closely reveals exposure was f2.0 and 1/60...

 

[mfogiel]

I have sent a mail to Zeiss a couple of days ago, asking about the possibility of seeing a release of a faster 50mm ZM lens in the future, and also about the info, when they have changed the optimized focus on the C Sonnar from f2.8 to f1.5. The answer is interesting, although obviously they did not disclose anything about a concrete future model. On the other hand, it looks like the C Sonnar continues to be manufactured the old way, here's the relevant line:

"Yes, we are thinking about releasing new ZM lenses in future - but it is too early to talk about details.
As you mentioned, the C Sonnar T* 1,5/50 ZM is optimized to minimize focus shift at f/2.8. If you´d like to use it mostly full open, we can adjust it to minimize the focus shift at f/1.5.
This service (1x per lens) is free of charge as long as the lens is within warranty time. Just send your lens together with the following filled out form to us:".

At this point, I think I will wait for a faster "Nocti-Planar" from Zeiss rather than risking a C Sonnar that will only work wide open.

 

[jbf]

Ok this is a strang equestion but what exactly is a "focus shift" even? I hear people talking about it but as far as visual terms go I have no idea what it actually looks like to see "focus shift".

 

[Roger Hicks]

Focus shift is exactly what its name implies, i.e. as you stop down, the plane of focus retreats.

When I picked up 'my' Sonnar in Oberkochen, Dr. Nasse recommended that the best way to deal with focus shift with the 1,5/50 is to imagine that all the depth of field is behind the focused point.

I have followed this advice with (as far as my own pictures are concerned) perfect success, using M-series Leicas, film and digital.

Why put up with it? Well, because you get a very compact, very fast, very sweet-handling lens: one of my favourite 50mm fast lenses of all time for an RF, and I've tried quite a lot of them. An f/1,2 or f/1 has almost zero depth of field, but f/1.4 or f/1.5 is just about usable. I've also tried the 35/1.2 Nokton but decided that my old 35/1.4 Summilux was preferable because of its size and handling.

Cheers,

Roger

 

[drjoke]

Robert Hicks, do you have any of such pictures in your gallery anywhere? I am very interested in getting this done.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Robert Hicks, do you have any of such pictures in your gallery anywhere? I am very interested in getting this done.

No, not yet. I suppose I should. The thing is, because my wife and I review things for magazines, we are obviously hesitant to post too many images (or reviews on our own web-site) before the road tests appear in print. Then by the time they do appear in print, we're doing something else.

Tomorrow, for example, we're planning to leave for Spain and Portugal to test the new TMY and the new 28/2 Nikon-fit Distagon.

Cheers,

Roger (not Robert)

 

[ljsegil]

I concur with Roger in his appraisal of the 50/1.5. I find it just fine as is, producing beautiful imagery wide open or slightly stopped down. I haven't felt any need to have the lens altered and do not find close focusing wide open to be a problem. I guess I just naturally (not necessarily deliberately, I don't think I'm that good a photographer) focus in a manner that works with the lens, I think usually focusing on the closest point of my subject that is amenable to judging focus with the ZI rangefinder. No experience with digital use, however.

In the meantime,I'm still hoping to find a 35/2 Biogon under my pillow one of these days to complement the Sonnar. Oh well, can't have all of the things all of the time, just so long as I can have some of the things some of the time (A. Lincoln, though only approximately. Known more for his erudition than his photography).

 

[kshapero]

Focus shift is exactly what its name implies, i.e. as you stop down, the plane of focus retreats.

When I picked up 'my' Sonnar in Oberkochen, Dr. Nasse recommended that the best way to deal with focus shift with the 1,5/50 is to imagine that all the depth of field is behind the focused point.

I have followed this advice with (as far as my own pictures are concerned) perfect success, using M-series Leicas, film and digital.

Why put up with it? Well, because you get a very compact, very fast, very sweet-handling lens: one of my favourite 50mm fast lenses of all time for an RF, and I've tried quite a lot of them. An f/1,2 or f/1 has almost zero depth of field, but f/1.4 or f/1.5 is just about usable. I've also tried the 35/1.2 Nokton but decided that my old 35/1.4 Summilux was preferable because of its size and handling.

Cheers,

Roger

I'm sticking with my C Sonnar as is.

 

[FanMan]

Focus shift is exactly what its name implies, i.e. as you stop down, the plane of focus retreats.

When I picked up 'my' Sonnar in Oberkochen, Dr. Nasse recommended that the best way to deal with focus shift with the 1,5/50 is to imagine that all the depth of field is behind the focused point.

is that really correct? front focus and DOF is behind the focused point? I think the front focus can be handled by assuming that the DOF is in front of the focused point.

 

[drjoke]

I have ZM Sonnar 50mm, and I just got Hexanon 50mm. I like both of them very much, and am having a very hard time deciding when to use which.

 

[x-ray]

As stated above the CV Nokton 50 1.5 is a killer lens. I have the Planar, asph summilux 50 and the CV Nokton and find the Nokton to be very close in performance to the asph summilux. The differences don't justify the massive difference in price.

I was considering the C sonnar and a Noctilux when I deceided to go with the CV Nokton (2nd one I've owned). I was concerned with the focus shift from the sonnar and Noctilux and went back and reviewed my negs from my first Nokton. I detected no shift at any aperture with that lens so I went with another new one. Now comparing the negs I almost regret selling my first and buying the asph summilux. There's just not that much difference between the two wide open and basicall none stopped down a stop or two. The differences wouldn't justify $500 difference much $2500. I will also add that the new 50 Nokton has a much nicer and more positive aperture ring than my first. The clicks are deeper and I've had no problems with knocking the aperture setting off.

 

[Hacker]

As stated above the CV Nokton 50 1.5 is a killer lens. I have the Planar, asph summilux 50 and the CV Nokton and find the Nokton to be very close in performance to the asph summilux. The differences don't justify the massive difference in price.

I was considering the C sonnar and a Noctilux when I deceided to go with the CV Nokton (2nd one I've owned). I was concerned with the focus shift from the sonnar and Noctilux and went back and reviewed my negs from my first Nokton. I detected no shift at any aperture with that lens so I went with another new one. Now comparing the negs I almost regret selling my first and buying the asph summilux. There's just not that much difference between the two wide open and basicall none stopped down a stop or two. The differences wouldn't justify $500 difference much $2500. I will also add that the new 50 Nokton has a much nicer and more positive aperture ring than my first. The clicks are deeper and I've had no problems with knocking the aperture setting off.

Does it mean that the Noktpn and C-Sonnar is very similar to the 50 Lux ASPH?