Zeiss Sonnar 50mm f1.5 vs Canon 50mm f1.4

filmtwit

filmtwit

Desperate but not serious
Local time
3:19 PM
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
3,956
Location
West Coast
View My Gallery
I currently have a Canon 50mm f1.4 (ltm-M) that I'm pretty happy with, but tend to not like 1 meter minimum distance on it. The .9 on the Zeiss Sonnar 50mm f1.5 is tempting in within reach (economically speaking). What else are I going to gain getting the Zeiss over the Canon other then the minimum focus distance difference? Am I going to lose anything?

Thanks,
 
You get a more modern lens design and presumably better coating.

As far as image quality, I think that's subjective. Some people like the look of photos from older lenses. Some like the rendition from modern optics.

Also, the 1.5 Sonnar is M-mount only (and also in the Nikon S mount in a limited production run).
 
The Zeiss is a Sonnar, the Canon is a Planar. Different images from different designs. The difference between .9 and 1 meter is not enough to invest in a whole new lens for that reason alone. The Sonnar is going to have a different look but the 3.9" of close focus distance won't be as big of a deal as how the lens renders an image. If you want closer focus, you'll have to get a later Summicron, a DR Summicron or a J-3 and modify it for close focus a-la Brian Sweeny.
(I'm working on how to get the Canon 50mm f/1.4 to close focus just a bit more too. If I can move the stop and allow the helical to travel just a few more millimeters, i can get it down close to .7m but that is a daunting task without doing serious surgery or having the front group of the lens just fall out.)

Phil Forrest
 
Ziess vs Canon

Ziess vs Canon

Well, I do not have a "real" Zeiss 50 Sonnar, but I have an old russian J-3 that has been "Sweeny-fied" to work correctly on my M9. I also recently purchased a Canon 50 1.4 from KEH. I took some portraits with both and really like the drawing of the J-3 for people/skin versus the Canon. The Canon was harsher on skin tones/lines/contrast areas. Both were comparably sharp. I have some J-3 shots in a set on my flickr site if anyone wants to see how the sonnar draws.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/feros-ferio/sets/72157624902857841/
 
My Canon 50/1.4 in LTM has a close focus of 3.5ft. I know there is a "type 1" and "Type 2" of this lens, but I do not remember if close-focus was different.

The Nikkor 5cm F1.4 and 5cm F2 Rigid can be modified for 0.7m RF coupling. The threads of the LTM mount need to be filed down to line up with the cut-out on the M-Adapter.
 
Uhhh, no.
Cropping in on a file is definitely not the same when we're talking about a very fast aperture and close focus. The difference in DOF and drawing of the image will be noticeable between 1.0 meter and .7 meter. It's that close-focus that differentiates one photo from another or else there would be no reason push a fast lens to focus accurately at .7m. We could just crop in on our wide-open shots taken at 10 or 20 feet.

Phil Forrest
 
The Canon is a great lens, quite special with it's speed and 6 elements.

To get closer I would first try a tele.

That being said, I use an LTM Nikkor 50/1.4 as fast tele, modified for 0.7m min. focus. A Sonnar, too, great lens.

Roland.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom