Zeiss 50: To 2.0 or not to 2.0

Zeiss 50: To 2.0 or not to 2.0

  • 50 f2 Planar

    Votes: 61 50.8%

  • 50 f1.5 Sonnar

    Votes: 48 40.0%

  • Something else

    Votes: 11 9.2%
  • Total voters
    120
Avotius

Avotius

Some guy
Local time
4:37 PM
Joined
Dec 5, 2005
Messages
3,518
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.
 
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
 
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.
 
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.
 
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/59177039@N00/sets/72157600939299824/
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/forums/showthread.php?p=601803#post601803
 
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.
 
have voted for the C-Sonnar - 'cause I like its results.

But it is not an easy-to-handle lens to my opinion.
 
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
 
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.
 
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 :D
 
Last edited:
jan normandale said:
so you made a choice, and...... ??
Click to expand...


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
 
Avotius said:
I am surprised how fast this simple poll wondering which lens people liked turned into a technical conversation about which was better
Click to expand...

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.
 
Avotius said:
heh....have a nice read through this http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=44453
Click to expand...

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