50 Sonnar and the focus shift

I dont its a silly question but for those who own the lens: did you get the silver or the black version and why?
So far I have only black lenses (one reason in case of Leica lenses is the lower weight) but for some reason I find the 50/1.5 Sonnar looks very nice in silver - so I am tempted to get it in silver.
Any thoughts?

And: Any more images from the 50Sonnar?
Anybody compared the way it draws with that of a Noctilux?

Thanks , Tom
 
I got it in black from the bay... BTW I think Zeiss has done a real mess in marketing this lens, they should have explained how it draws, and it is truly amazing - you can establish the look of the photograph by deciding which f stop to use it with, at f8 it challenges any high performance ultra sharp lens, at f5.6 it looks a lot like a first rate normal lens from 15 years ago, at f4 it starts looking like a portrait lens, at f2,8 it does a job which I really enjoy: it blurs the OOF areas like butter and smoothes the skin like cream, but it still keeps the contrast in the eyes, etc, at f2.0 and f1.5 it just veils the image like an old Imagon soft focus lens - you get at least 4 lenses for the price of 1 🙂 AND you don't get any flare!
 
Thanks. Thats what I wanted to hear and I think I will order a silver Sonnar 50/1.5 soon.
I am very interested in the way it draws between f1.5 and f4.

Cheers, Tom
 
All this talk about that focusing issue seems to me somewhat stuck in the middle of nowhere.
Since I've bought and sold/sent back three used Summicron 50ties for scratches, etched lens and something which looked like fungus, I was starting to look for a nice new 50. I've had the CV Nokton, but I somehow did enjoy it. I got a CV Heliar 50/2 which I like, but where that collapsible mechanism turns me off somehow.
So now I turned to Zeiss, which seem quite appealing to me. Getting a Sonnar for the money I would have paid for a really clean Summicron seemed like a good deal, until I found so many threads about that focusing issue. All end in some nirvana, where that issue can be fixed, but it might raise a backfocusing issue when one is not shooting wide open, but it might be ok, but many don't want that because it's some sort of compromise... and so on...
So what is the essence, if there is one?
Is the Sonnar (adjusted to 1.5) a suitable lens for everyday life? Can one be happy with it, without having that feeling one might have compromised too much buying it instead of the Planar for example (one stop less, but no issues)?
Or shall I ask this way: Is the Sonnar worth the money for one stop more than the Planar, but focussing issues which might somehow ruin a good shot whereas some other 50 might have succeded capturing it?

I'm confused...
 
for simplicity of use and certain peace of mind the planar is the answer. it's a great lens, very sharp but not clinical or harsh.

for a more flexible approach or for more flexible shooters, the sonnar offers the beauty of the 'sonnar look' plus a very sharp image when closed down a bit.
i had both and sold the planar as 50 is not my favourite focal length to begin with and i thought if i were to keep only one that i would go with something more flexible.
it's a personal choice more than a which is better choice.

joe
 
I bought the compact 50 Sonnar before the fuss over focusing began, and had to go back to look closely at some shots wide open or nearly so to check the plane-of-focus. My own focusing errors, and moving about, tends to mask the lens's issue. I'll probably not be shooting wider than f/2.8 all that much. Nice to have that option, though, and when wide open I plan to either lean forward a bit for a near shot after focusing, or focus some 10% behind the subject.

Like Joe, I'm not a 50mm fan, but somehow I've acquired three in M or Ltm mount: The Sonnar, the f/2 Heliar collapsible, and the first one was the 50 f/2.5 Skopar. I note that each of these is a bit unusual (even controversial) in the optical department, for an individual "look."
 
If it was just about getting a good workhorse 50mm for a good price Iwould probably go for a used Summicron.

Personally I like the 50mm a lot on the M8 (28 and 50mm are the lenses I use most) and I am interested in those lenses which have a "certain" character.

I use50mm a lot for shooting portrait and people and just think the somewhat softer chracter of the Sonnar could be a plus for that.

On the other side I admit that its a bit overhyped, differences are there but how big are they?

Cheers, Tom ..still wanting a 50 Sonnar. Anybody in Germany wants to sell his chrome version to me for a good price?
 
I think the C Sonnar has not been sufficiently appreciated so far. The apertures from f5.6 onwards are just a free extra, the real thing is between f1.5 and f4. From what I see, old soft lenses never had the contrast and flare resistance that C Sonnar has, and then there is that OOF rendition that looks like a Renoir painting... I have to shoot a roll of Astia with this lens one day, without ever putting anything in focus - will be curious to see the results...
 
t_streng said:
If it was just about getting a good workhorse 50mm for a good price Iwould probably go for a used Summicron.

Personally I like the 50mm a lot on the M8 (28 and 50mm are the lenses I use most) and I am interested in those lenses which have a "certain" character.

I use50mm a lot for shooting portrait and people and just think the somewhat softer chracter of the Sonnar could be a plus for that.

On the other side I admit that its a bit overhyped, differences are there but how big are they?

Cheers, Tom ..still wanting a 50 Sonnar. Anybody in Germany wants to sell his chrome version to me for a good price?
Click to expand...
As I said, I would have loved to purchase a Summicron. First one I got off evilbay and that "mint" one had funky cleaning marks on the rear element. Could not return it, so I had to sell it loosing 200 EUR. Then I did the smart move and turned to a mailorder Leica-dealer who advertised a mint Summicron. I received it - it had an etched surface on the rear element. The replacement was advertised as not just mint, but as new. Surfaces were clear, but inside the lens in the center it had some fine dustlike particles. Examining them with a magnifying glass those particles had some (2-3) long and very fine hairs reaching for the border. Leica shopkeeper here believed it to be a fungus.
Totaling a 350 EUR loss on postage and the first lens, I am sick of Summicrons now. I just want a working lens with clean surfaces and no biohazard developing inside.

Now that I have found a site with some beautiful photos done with the Sonnar, I believe this one will finally give me peace of mind. I like the look of the photos, it seems to be a nice lens for what I want to do with it.
Here's the link: http://barbecuediguana.com/archives/2007/04/01/the-zeiss-ikon-and-zm-glass/
 
Last edited:
for anyone who's had the focus change done.... how does the focus work from f2.8 - infinity now (where it was dead on before)?
 
collum said:
for anyone who's had the focus change done.... how does the focus work from f2.8 - infinity now (where it was dead on before)?
Click to expand...

Almost no shift from f1.5 to f2. From 2.8 to 5.6, focus shift is about half the DOF,
i.e. you can use the DOF scale to compensate. All that in the center, corners
are a bit different.

Roland.
 
Just got a new Sonnar 50/1.5 and on my M8 the lens clearly frontfocuses.
I can see the focus shift-at f2.8 the FF focus is better.
I think I shall get the lens calibrated for f1.5 as you need.
Any further experience about how good the DOF compensates for the focus-shift when the lens is calibrated for f1.5?
 
So, if I was to buy a NEW Sonnar ZM, it would NOT be adjusted for 1.5? I was under impression that Zeiss adjusts new ones now to 1.5. And if not , I'd need to send it to them - how long of a turn around will that be?
 
kshapero said:
I wish I knew what you guys were talking about, can someone explain.
Click to expand...

The c-sonnars currently show a maximum front focus at aperture 1.5. There are rumors that Zeiss changed/or will change the lens so that there is no more front focus at 1.5. However, you will have a back focus then at aperture 2.0-11 (which is/may be covered by depth of field).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

das
Leica LTM Looking for 50mm M39 Suggestions!
2
Replies
22
Views
1K
Coldkennels
Coldkennels
M
Servicing a Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 1:2 f=5cm T "v3b ZE CR arrs" for Contax
Replies
9
Views
576
mhw
M
A
5CM F1.5 Sonnar with damaged front element
Replies
11
Views
571
Alberto G
A
J
Did Nikon really blow Leitz and Zeiss out of the water in 1950? Not quite, but....
Replies
3
Views
208
NIKON KIU
NIKON KIU
Sonnar Brian
Minolta 5cm F1.8 Super-Rokkor, Leica Mount.
Replies
6
Views
597
Sonnar Brian
Sonnar Brian
Back
Top Bottom