50/1.4 camera/lens combo

J

jett

Well-known
Local time
12:22 PM
Joined
Oct 16, 2011
Messages
223
View My Gallery
Looking for a solid 50/1.4 SLR outfit.

The lens should have good bokeh, decent sharpness, and no focus shift (not sure if this is a big deal for SLR's) at f1.4.

The body should be great for manual focus and it should have a plain matte screen. I'd prefer a mechanical shutter but there are a lot of great bodies that have electronic shutters, so I'm not ruling any of those out. I don't need meters or any automation.

I was thinking of getting a Contax with a 50/1.4 Planar. I've never handled a Contax SLR. How is that combination? Any body recommendations? Do the bodies have interchangeable screens?

I was also thinking of a Nikon F3 with a 50/1.4 Nikkor or a 50/1.4 ZF Planar. I have a Nikon F but it feels clunky. I've handled an F3 before, and they feel more refined and so I'd opt for one of those. I know I can change the screens too and so I'm not worried about the Nikon body if I go this route. I'm only uncertain about the lens because my 50/2 Nikkor HC has awful bokeh. I haven't checked on the prices but I feel that the Contax Planar should perform similar to the ZF Planar and I figured that the Contax Planar is cheaper since it is legacy. Not sure.

I'm open to more body/lens combinations but I also realize that the list is endless (OM, Pentax, Canon FD, and etc.).
 
What's the budget ? What will you use it for ?

C/Y Planar 1.4 wide open is not exactly amazing ! Nervous bokeh, much better at infinity than close focusing...

I would go for a Leicaflex SL2 + Summilux-R 50mm 1.4 if I could afford it !
 
C/Y Planar 50/1.4 has awful OoF rendering wide open, some focus shift and hemorrhages contrast as you get closer to MFD.

And it is still the best of the regular 50/1.4s. In fact, it's a good lens in general.

Your best bet is the E60 Summilux-R and an R6, or if you really have cash an F3 and the 55/1.4 distagon. These two are in a different class. The APO distagon is in a different class than the E60 'lux, too.

If you don't intend to shoot at f1.4, then there are some legitimately good F2 options that would fit your needs. OM 50/2 Macro, Summicron-R 50 E55, Zeiss 50MP, Contax Zeiss 50/1.4 (yep). All have good OoF IMO, except the OM which IMO has the second best OoF rendering of any lens behind the Pentax 67 105/2.4.
 
I really like the 1.4 Planar in C/Y mount and like the bokeh wide open compared to other 1.4's I've used. Still, I nearly always shoot with a Leica M (especially low light), so am starting to sell off my Contax stuff.

Personally, I'd skip the Nikkor. I've had 3 vintages (still have 2) and all were decent f2 lenses and pretty funky at 1.4. The Zeiss looks better to me at every stop and distance.

In spite of trying to simplify, I've always been very curious about the much ballyhooed Pentax 1.4, so couldn't resist when a Spotmatic with the 50/1.4 Super-Takumar showed up at Goodwill today. I'm looking forward to messing around with it a bit, but don't expect to keep it in the long run.
 
If you want a plain matte screen then whatever you select should have interchangeable screens. And these would have to be available on the used market.
 
I will second the Pentax Spottie with the Super Tak 50/1.4. Or, if you are a no-battery type, the Pentax SV with the Super Tak 50/1.4. These are tough, super reliable cameras, with great optics.

The Nikon F with a Nikkor 50/1.4 non-AIS is another great option but it is far heavier.
 
I have a Rolleiflex SL-E, with Zeiss Planar 50 1.4. Not a bad combo, some people say the SL-E isn't that reliable, but they are inexpensive the glass is awesome. Got mine from the original owner who bought it in the 80's, works great.
 
The old Pentax Spotmatic is a great camera in its way. And the Takumar 50mm f1.4 lens is superb - sharp as you would want (or be able to get even today) and with wonderfully soft bokeh. It is renowned for this. Both the camera and its lenses are cheap. The camera is fully manual and reliable. I cannot speak too highly of Pentax equipment of this period. Especially the lenses which were superbly built - all metal and glass and very old school - no plastic anywhere. It is said that the first version of this lens (with 8 elements) was sold as a loss leader below the cost of manufacture to boost sales and was even better than the later 7 element version which was quietly slipped into the market without fanfare after a short time. If so it must be a "cracker" of a lens. I do not know as I only have the later version.

Here is a Flikr group dedicated to the lens. I till use my lens on an M4/3 camera where it performs brilliantly.

https://www.flickr.com/groups/takumar_50mm_f14/
 
If you are after 50/1.4 bokeh I could recommend these:
1- Summilux R 1st version
2 - Pentax 50/1.4 any version
3- Sigma 50/1.4
4 - if you don't mind going up to 58mm , Nikkor S 58/1.4
5 - if you don't mind going down to f 1.2, there would be :
Pentax 50/1.2, Nikkor 50/1.2, Canon 50/1.2, Olympus 50/1.2 and 55/1.2, Minolta 50/1.2 and above all Minolta 58/1.2
Body wise, the best by a large amount is Nikon F3, although the F2 is also nice with the plain prism. Pentax KX and MX are great, and OM bodies are acceptable.
There is an issue: most of these lenses will not focus precisely wide open with these lenses, so if you plan on shooting much wide open, you need to try out various combinations and adjust. The easiest way, is to get the Nikon F3, as you can fit some 30 different screens to it, and one or another is bound to work.
From my experience, these can work together:
Nikon F2 and Nikkor S 58/1.4
Pentax KX and 50/1.2 and 50/1.4
Nikon F100 and Sigma 50/1.4
Leica R5 and 50/1.4 1st (Leicaflex and R4 misfocus with this lens)
Minolta MD7 and 58/1.2

As said above, the Spotmatic with a M42 50/1.4 will be the cheapest option, but I have not had the time yet to test it for focus, while I can see that the VF is VERY dim. The Sigma is really a 45mm.
To sum up - ideally, you should buy with a return option, and test the lens/body for focusing precision before you commit. If I were you, I'd get a black Pentax KX with the 50/1.2 - best bang for the buck for the quality.

Minolta Rokkor 58/1.2 wide open

201211501 by mfogiel, on Flickr

and here at f2.0

201213007 by mfogiel, on Flickr
 
I have the Zeiss 50 Planar. Some people swear by it; it never really did anything for me.

Seen and heard good things about the Tokyo Kogaku 58mm Topcors, but it looks like they're going for a lot. (edited--I thought they were M42 screwmount, but they're Exacta mount)
 
An Olympus OM-1 or -2 will blow the Spotmatic's viewfinder out of the water, and for little extra cost; and the 50mm f/1.4 Zuiko is no slouch. Look for a 1-4n or 1-10 screen for a plain matte or matte-with-grid option.
 
Honestly, any 60s-80s film body matched with the brand 50mm/f1.4 lens is going to be very good. They all competed and prided themselves on this - though perhaps looking for different characteristics than are currently fashionable these days. As it happens, and no doubt reflecting modern judgement back on an era when I couldn't afford the cameras and lenses available, I'd go for either a Pentax SMC 50mm/f1.4 on one of a number of very straightforward Pentax bodies (personal preference: a KX or an MX; an LX might be brilliant, but I've never tried one) or a non-L Canon 50mm/f1.2 on any of the Canon FD-mount bodies (with my personal preference being a New F-1; while acknowledging that to be something of a modern indulgence I could never have afforded at the time).

That having been said, for a whole bunch of different reasons not regarding lens-rendering connoisseurship I'm most likely to use either a Nikon FM3a with CV 40mm/f2 or an OM-4T with Zuiko 50mm/f1.4.

...Mike
 
Unless you are looking for some particular signature, pretty much any multicoated lens from the seventies on will do - with multicoating and the industry-wide improvement in designs, differences became marginal. By design, SLR lenses cannot focus shift while used fully open either, as you focus through the lens fully open - and in the time frame in question they generally are tamed so that the focal plane stays well within the DOF as you stop down, so that focus shift generally is no issue (until you mount them on a high resolution digital SLR, where different DOF limits apply).

But it can be hard to focus a fast lens on extra-bright SLR finder systems, even more so if you wear glasses and have no prescription eyepiece, as the eye may chase the aerial image rather than lock on to the barely discernible screen texture of "superbright" screens. If SLR focusing feels difficult for you, stay clear of SLRs popular for finder brightness, and go for a classic coarse ground glass like on the Spotmatic (or the wide array of alternative matte screens on professional system SLRs, where there will be something suitable for every situation and lens).
 
jett said:
Looking for a solid 50/1.4 SLR outfit.

The lens should have good bokeh, decent sharpness, and no focus shift (not sure if this is a big deal for SLR's) at f1.4.

The body should be great for manual focus and it should have a plain matte screen. I'd prefer a mechanical shutter but there are a lot of great bodies that have electronic shutters, so I'm not ruling any of those out. I don't need meters or any automation.

I was thinking of getting a Contax with a 50/1.4 Planar. I've never handled a Contax SLR. How is that combination? Any body recommendations? Do the bodies have interchangeable screens?

I was also thinking of a Nikon F3 with a 50/1.4 Nikkor or a 50/1.4 ZF Planar. I have a Nikon F but it feels clunky. I've handled an F3 before, and they feel more refined and so I'd opt for one of those. I know I can change the screens too and so I'm not worried about the Nikon body if I go this route. I'm only uncertain about the lens because my 50/2 Nikkor HC has awful bokeh. I haven't checked on the prices but I feel that the Contax Planar should perform similar to the ZF Planar and I figured that the Contax Planar is cheaper since it is legacy. Not sure.

I'm open to more body/lens combinations but I also realize that the list is endless (OM, Pentax, Canon FD, and etc.).
Click to expand...
Focus shift is a problem that manifests when a lens is focused wide open and stopped down to a smaller lens aperture before exposure, where the precise point of focus changes at that reduced lens opening. If a lens with a maximum aperture of f/1.4 exhibits focus problems at f/1.4, this is not because of focus shift—you are, after all focusing at f/1.4, so if you take the shot at f/1.4, how is the focus going to shift? It can't. Any deviation from the point of focus in the viewfinder would likely be because of a calibration error between the viewfinder and the focus of the lens at the film plane.

If you are using a f/1.4 lens at f/2 on the other hand, focus shift may be a consideration depending on the lens.
Cheers,
Brett
 
sevo said:
Unless you are looking for some particular signature, pretty much any multicoated lens from the seventies on will do - with multicoating and the industry-wide improvement in designs, differences became marginal. By design, SLR lenses cannot focus shift while used fully open either, as you focus through the lens fully open - and in the time frame in question they generally are tamed so that the focal plane stays well within the DOF as you stop down, so that focus shift generally is no issue (until you mount them on a high resolution digital SLR, where different DOF limits apply).

But it can be hard to focus a fast lens on extra-bright SLR finder systems, even more so if you wear glasses and have no prescription eyepiece, as the eye may chase the aerial image rather than lock on to the barely discernible screen texture of "superbright" screens. If SLR focusing feels difficult for you, stay clear of SLRs popular for finder brightness, and go for a classic coarse ground glass like on the Spotmatic (or the wide array of alternative matte screens on professional system SLRs, where there will be something suitable for every situation and lens).
Click to expand...
sevo just beat me to it, while I was composing my post...
 
I like the Minolta 50/1.4 lenses. As good or better as the f/1.2's but with a much more affordable price. Take a look over at The Rokkorfiles for a test of these lenses. I suppose you want a Minolta XK or XK-M as camera, but those aren't cheap. But both the XE and XD had interchangeable screens, so, take a look at those.

Edit: hit the post button to soon :bang:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Shab
A 35mm lens for a Nikon FM3A
2 3
Replies
42
Views
4K
Dogman
Dogman
ecowarrior
Is this really a worthwhile Leica lens upgrade?
2 3
Replies
45
Views
3K
rfaspen
rfaspen
p.giannakis
Agrrr... AF Nikkor 50f/1.4 delamination
Replies
6
Views
631
Muggins
Muggins
Jamie Pillers
One camera, one lens?
2 3
Replies
48
Views
2K
38Deardorff
38Deardorff
stephen_lumsden
Pre-war biogon 35mm f2.8 vs Planar 35mm f3.5
2
Replies
20
Views
1K
TenEleven
TenEleven
Back
Top Bottom