Carl Zeiss 50mm 1.4 for SLR systems

raid

raid

Dad Photographer
Local time
1:20 PM
Joined
Nov 2, 2005
Messages
36,567
Have you used any of the Zeiss Planar 50mm 1.4 lenses that were made in Rollei QBM or CY mounts?

Have you seen any side by side comparisons for these two lenses? Which brand is somehow better?

I have used the Planar 50/1.4 QBM on m 4/3 cameras with an adapter. I love the results from this amazing lens.

What are the current market values for these lenses?
 
I am using Planar 50/1.4 (ninja star aperture) on my SLR Contax cameras - I love the lens, but cannot compare to Rollei mount version, never tried. I paid for mine 90€, but those days are long gone, now it is 200-300€ territory depending on condition.
 
The Rollei mount QBM version can cost $600+. Maybe this is because QBM lenses are more difficult to find online.
 
50 zf version for Nikon here, I use them on the FM serie, I absolutely love it. Payed 300 euro a while ago, I don't know now...
 
The Nikon ZF version seems to sell for less than the old type versions. I bet, the Nikon ZF lenses are better optically.
 
raid said:
The Rollei mount QBM version can cost $600+. Maybe this is because QBM lenses are more difficult to find online.
Click to expand...

I have just checked Contax Planar on ebay - in completed deals it can be found under 300€, but asking prices in buy it now are >500€, so basically same 600$ as for QBM mount.
 
Yes, this can very well be he case. Such lenses were very well built and the optics were first class quality.
 
raid said:
The Nikon ZF version seems to sell for less than the old type versions. I bet, the Nikon ZF lenses are better optically.
Click to expand...

I haven't compared the two, but in the filmmaking world the 50mm 1.4 C/Y is well regarded primarily for it's coatings which happen to be identical to the famous Zeiss Super Speed primes. Those people tend to overlook the ZF and ZE for their more modern look even though the optical formulas are mostly unchanged. I tend to assume that the C/Y prices are kept high by the cult status amongst filmmakers who want a cheaper alternative to extremely expensive discontinued Zeiss cine optics.
 
ZE version has bokeh wide open which many find as awful. It is more like f2 lens, with great colors during day lights and f5.6.
Many ditched this lens for ZE 50/2. I went for 50L EF and never looked back.

Old Y/C are just overhiped among vlogin hipsters now in addition to old days bargain hunters. :) On modern cameras they won't offer any better image than modern nifty-fifty in native mount. Just as any old lens you would have to deal with darken VF once lens is not wide open.
 
Hm, I happen to find my Rollei mount QMB Zeiss lenses superb. Especially, the Zeiss Planar 85/1.4 and Zeiss Distagon 35/1.4, plus the wonderful Zeiss Planar 50mm 1.4. Each of these three lenses is superb. These are not CY lenses but they were made for the Rollei SLR system.
 
Super on super cropper like M43? Or you somehow used it on FF like your Nilkon DSLR or M10, not x2 crop.
 
I could get an adapter for $1000 [ a special offer to me] but this is a lot of money. It is very complicated to modify QBM to Leica M.

It has RF coupled RF capabilities. I use such lenses with m 4/3 cameras, as you have said.
 
The C-Y and QBM lenses are the same design. I have an MM 50/1.4 on my Aria and an AE on my ST. Both bought at peak digital, and I don’t follow prices, eBay completed sales are usually the best approach.

I don’t see why you would go to any lengths to use these lenses on a Leica M. I understand wanting to experiment, but the pain does not seem worth the gain when you can buy a Contax SLR for film or a mirrorless for digital.

Marty
 
Marty: you have a point here. On the other hand, using a unique lens is special. I have several unique lenses for Leica.
 
Hi Raid,

I have used a Zeiss 50f1.4 that came with a 167MT - I don't know if this is the same lens you refer to. I only shot a test film and sent it back to the seller as the drive was playing up. The pictures came out as good as any lens from a major camera manufacturer, I wouldn't be able to tell a Zeiss 50f1.4 from the Nikkor for the majority of the pictures in that film. The only obvious difference between the Nikkor and the Zeiss is that the Zeiss doesn't display that strong vignetting that the Nikkor does. Whether that is worth the effort to adapt it or not, you can only tell.
 
raid said:
Marty: you have a point here. On the other hand, using a unique lens is special. I have several unique lenses for Leica.
Click to expand...

My point is that it is the same lens on any other camera with a decent but relatively inexpensive adapter. I understand playing with lenses, I really do, but I really do not understand anything that involves a $US1000 adapter. And if what you want is a giant pile of weird lenses adapted in all sorts of awkward ways for Leica M, I understand that too, but if so, why ask RFF?

Marty
 
bit off topic, but interesting that ZE or ZF lenses dont see to suffer from wobble issues of ZM line. least I havent read anyone posting such issues.
 
I have both the ZF 50 1,4 and the C/Y 50 1,4.
(Unfortunately I bought most of my lenses new)
I also have the ZF 50 2 Macro, which is much heavier, but I like it much better.
That is the lens I would go for
 
jarski said:
bit off topic, but interesting that ZE or ZF lenses dont see to suffer from wobble issues of ZM line. least I havent read anyone posting such issues.
Click to expand...

Five screws holding the mount together and a normal brass on brass helicoid rather than teflon rollers. The ZF and ZE lenses won’t develop wobble.

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