Got a nice deal on the C-Sonnar 50mm, but having second thoughts

[der Koekje]

Hey guys. I'm in the process of picking up my first Leica (an M6 or M6 Titan by the looks of it), and I'm looking to pair it with a nice lens. Since these are expensive bodies, and I don't quiet have the cash on hand for a lineup of lenses yet, I thought I would pair it with a Zeiss lens since I really like their rendering and they provide better value for money (especially the Distagon but I can't find a second hand copy).

To this end, I found a nice deal on the C-Sonnar 50mm F1.5 ZM, but I'm worried about having this as my only lens. Since I'm planning to use it with film, it's going to be hard adjusting to the focus drift because I can't reliably practice without having a digital back for reference. It will also be hard to give the camera to my girlfriend or friends and trying to explain this issue to them.

I also worry about sharpness. I know it's a characteristic design but as my only lens I do kind of want something sharp and I'm not sure whether this one will deliver on this front. How do you guys usually use this lens? At F2.8? Is it comparable to the Planar at that aperture? I know film is about character rather than clinical sharpness that's expected from digital, but I'm not looking to do lomography here.

I'm also looking at the Planar and the 35mm F2 Biogon, but I do appreciate the extra stop of light for indoor/night photography. I'm looking at the TTArtisan lenses as well. I wonder when they are planning to release their 50mm F1.4 and whether I should wait for it.

Anyway. I'm just curious to hear your thoughts about using the Sonnar as my only lens for a while.

 

[Archiver]

For the first 8 or so years, the C Sonnar was optimized for f2.8. This means that the focus shift occurred only from f1.5 to f2 or so. The closer it got to f2.8, the more accurate focus became. Now it is optimized for f1.5 at the factory. I am not sure how to determine the optimization of this lens apart from putting it on a digital rangefinder, or shooting a roll of film for test purposes. But it should only take a few images at the beginning to figure out.


M9 - Elvis Lives by Archiver, on Flickr


If you're handing the lens to girlfriend or friends (do you really want to hand your new, expensive, M6 or M6 Titan to someone else???) then set it to f2.8 and be done with it. Let them wrangle with rangefinder focus and give you blurry pictures, focus shift is the least of your worries if you have to explain focus shift and rangefinder focusing to someone unfamiliar with it. Oh yeah, you'll probably have to meter for them, too.


M9 - Valentino by Archiver, on Flickr


There is absolutely no issue with sharpness at f1.5, not to me. The lens resolves a lot of detail - the wide open characteristic of this lens is in 'rendering', which is a lower contrast look with huge specular highlight balls, a slight glow, and very soft, dreamy bokeh. The lens becomes more contrasty at f2.8 but retains the pleasant bokeh, and is very sharp. This is one of my favourite lenses for portraits or anything with people in them. This is in no way a lomography lens. It is a high quality, well designed and engineered lens which produces beautiful images.

M9 - Thierry Mugler by Archiver, on Flickr

The focus shift itself is easy to manage. The shift distance at f1.5 is only about an inch, which is like nodding your head slightly in affirmation. Focus first, then lean forward slightly. That's all you need.


M9 - Bathing in the Sun by Archiver, on Flickr


M9 - Lin Fa Kung Lantern by Archiver, on Flickr

 

[TenEleven]

A couple of thoughts:

I would not say that film is about "character" namely because the word has picked up a lot of negative connotations. I'r rather say film is about, well, depending on whom you ask the physical hands-on process, or the rendition, or its ability to hang onto highlights much better without looking like an over doctored HDR image.

The modern ZM Sonnar 50/1.5 is plenty sharp for film even wide open. Don't worry about it! I should add that the most crucial part with film shooting these days is not the (modern) lenses but the process of turning it into prints or scans for the web. I've seen some truly atrocious lab-scans and developments. Don't crimp on that area. The best lens in the world is not going to save your pictures if all you have is a 800x600 highly jpeg artifact riddled crap scan.

Focus shift is also largely a non issue -- especially on film. You're supposed to use the rangefinder to its strength, aka use it to quickly focus and compose with moving subjects - not for shoot static test charts.

I wonder if a M6 is a good learners camera. Perhaps get something cheaper but also more reliable without a light-meter? Perhaps an M2 or M4 of some persuasion if it has to be Leica?

Lastly I would stop worrying about all these other lenses and start shooting the Sonnar. Your questions will start answering themselves. Do you like the 50mm focal length? Do you perhaps want something smaller and lighter? Need the speed? Just go and shoot you'll figure it out as you go.

 

[dfranklin]

I picked up one of these lenses about six months ago. I love it. Focus shift has not been an issue for me. I seem to have just as much chance of nailing the focus wide open with this lens as I do with my summicron 50. Which is to say, most of the time I get it, and if I don't it's as likely to be because my subject moved (I'm often photographing my kids) as anything else. In practice, I don't even think about the focus shift. But if critical focus is something you really want to control, I'm sure you can easily figure out how to manage it, as Archiver says. I love the rendering of the C-Sonnar, and the compact size is really great. It's plenty sharp wide open. I would definitely recommend it.

 

[jawarden]

The 1.5 Sonnar is an outstanding lens. Give it ten rolls of film and see if you agree. If you don't like it there are plenty of other 50mm lenses (including the Planar you mentioned and many others) that are easily substituted.

 

[jawarden]

....... This is in no way a lomography lens. It is a high quality, well designed and engineered lens which produces beautiful images.......

- Ditto. -

 

[kxl]

If you have all those concerns, then the Sonnar may not be a good candidate as an 'only lens' for you. You may want to consider the ZM Planar.

 

[der Koekje]

Wow, I was not expecting so many responses this fast. Let's see if I can get to all of you guys.

If you're handing the lens to girlfriend or friends (do you really want to hand your new, expensive, M6 or M6 Titan to someone else???) then set it to f2.8 and be done with it. Let them wrangle with rangefinder focus and give you blurry pictures, focus shift is the least of your worries if you have to explain focus shift and rangefinder focusing to someone unfamiliar with it. Oh yeah, you'll probably have to meter for them, too.


This is one of my favourite lenses for portraits or anything with people in them. This is in no way a lomography lens. It is a high quality, well designed and engineered lens which produces beautiful images.

The focus shift itself is easy to manage. The shift distance at f1.5 is only about an inch, which is like nodding your head slightly in affirmation. Focus first, then lean forward slightly. That's all you need.

Haha, I'm generally very careful around my gear as I tend to sell it to pick up new gear for new experiences. But I don't want to be that guy who tells people they can't touch my shiny toys. Unless you're a landscape or astro shooter, photography should be a social experience.

Great shots by the way. The M9 has such a nice way with colors.

A couple of thoughts:
...

Yeah, I probably didn't use the best word to describe it. I do like the idea of slowing down, and focusing on the process, improving it over time (by finding the style, film, etc. that I like). It's just that as a medium, film is now very popular for it's vintage look with washed out colors, and I do want a style a bit more true to life (I'll be very honest, I was just jealous of those beautifully preserved highlights).

I picked up the Contax G1 over christmas and really enjoy the experience, but it's about as automated as it gets. Why do you say the M6 is not a good learner camera? I'd assume this would make operation quicker without having to manually meter every change of scene.

And yeah. I enjoy doing the research and finding the right techniques to get the files digitzed. I think I'll end up using a high megapixel sensor to shoot the negatives, rather than using a scanner. The results seem very promising. I got some scans back from the lab and there are many jpg artifacts.

 

[der Koekje]

I picked up one of these lenses about six months ago. I love it. Focus shift has not been an issue for me. I seem to have just as much chance of nailing the focus wide open with this lens as I do with my summicron 50. Which is to say, most of the time I get it, and if I don't it's as likely to be because my subject moved (I'm often photographing my kids) as anything else. In practice, I don't even think about the focus shift. But if critical focus is something you really want to control, I'm sure you can easily figure out how to manage it, as Archiver says. I love the rendering of the C-Sonnar, and the compact size is really great. It's plenty sharp wide open. I would definitely recommend it.

So you just forget about the focus drift entirely? Or have you just got instinctively gotten used to the operation and are nudging or focusing behind the eyes? I'm glad you like the lens, what made you decide to use it alongside the Summicron?

If you have all those concerns, then the Sonnar may not be a good candidate as an 'only lens' for you. You may want to consider the ZM Planar.

I like the Planar too, it's probably the safer pick, but availability of ZM lenses is poor in my area (I always buy used).

 

[TenEleven]

I picked up the Contax G1 over christmas and really enjoy the experience, but it's about as automated as it gets. Why do you say the M6 is not a good learner camera? I'd assume this would make operation quicker without having to manually meter every change of scene.

My primary concern would be speed also accuracy.

Firstly the M6 meter kind of gets you into that state of mind where you just follow exactly what the meter dictates without much thinking of yourself. I am not saying this as a put-down, I've fallen into this trap myself with the ZI.

The speed part is that the quickest part to meter a scene is not:
-look at M6 viewfinder
-depress shutter button halfway
-see which way the arrow points, or if you're lucky you get a dot
-take camera away from eye
-adjust lens/shutter speed

But to do as Winogrand did and sort of know by "muscle memory" whereabouts the light of a certain scene would read and change the settings immediately upon entering the scene/light.

This means that you are always ready to shoot and will not have to make adjustments. Even if your guess is not spot-on, you will eventually get good enough to be +/-a stop and that means you "got" the picture.

The accuracy part is that lenses flare, and the M6 meter is TTL but you can not (because it's a rangefinder) see exactly what the lens sees - so you will need to make educated guesses as to why the M6 is metering as it is and/or why it's showing certain values. (Contre jour would be such an example where you absolutely do not want to do as the camera says.)

Lastly the M2/4 are likely cheaper on the used market and there's something to be said about the simplicity of having a single-stand alone frame-line in the viewfinder VS frame-lines in pairs of two as with the M4 or M6.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I bought one years ago, and sold it soon after. The plain fact is that is is not very sharp away from the center (which is VERY sharp), even stopped down. Its a good lens for wide aperture work where you want to take advantage of the unique bokeh that the Sonnar gives. As a general purpose lens, a Leica Summicron or Zeiss Planar will be a much better choice.

 

[Ccoppola82]

I love mine. I don’t shoot 35mm film for optimum Sharpness. I have digital or 120 for that. I shoot it because I love the aesthetic and it offers something profoundly different than digital. It can be almost atmospheric in wide apertures, but stopping down the contrast increases dramatically and gives a perceived sharpness. . The Sonnar has always been plenty sharp for me (I mostly shoot people, family) and shoot it either 1.5/2 or 5.6 or above and haven’t noticed any focus shift issues. Honestly, my focus is generally going to be off more than the focus shift in shots where people are moving and I’m wide open. I think for the size of the lens, the speed of the lens, and the character you get especially combined with film...it’s a clear winner. I won’t be selling mine anytime soon.

 

[CharlesDAMorgan]

I recently bought one at a decent price and so far, I adore it. It has character in abundance, and like all contemporary Zeiss lenses is beautifully made and coated. Two test shots below at a local monastery, the first at f1.5, the second at f8. As Chris says, it's soft at the edges and if you plan to do things like landscapes or architecture, not really the ideal choice - a Summicron or Planar or equivalent. If however you mainly want people, street or isolating subjects, then it's perfect.

 

[Out to Lunch]

It's sharp enough for me. If you got a good deal on the Sonnar, go for it. As people commented above, it's a solid lens.


With the Leica M-E





With the Zeiss-Ikon ZI

 

[ktmrider]

Get the Sonnar if you have a good deal. Focus shift of 1" or so is not a big deal and can be easily dealt with. Have you looked at the new 50f1.2 Nokton? It may be the best 50 made right now without going into outer space for Leica pricing. If you are looking for "fast", it is one half stop faster then the Sonnar.

I have the Zeiss 25 and 35f2.8 and think they are some of the best lenses in their respective focal lengths. Would get one of the Zeiss 50's but have had the latest version of a 50 Summicron since early 1990's and hate duplicating focal lengths but I made an exception for the 50f1.2.

If you "google" 50f1.2 Nokton reviews, one will come up which was published in VIEWFINDER in Dec, 2018 by a past president of LHSA and he loved it.

 

[Archiver]

Haha, I'm generally very careful around my gear as I tend to sell it to pick up new gear for new experiences. But I don't want to be that guy who tells people they can't touch my shiny toys. Unless you're a landscape or astro shooter, photography should be a social experience.

Great shots by the way. The M9 has such a nice way with colors.

Yeah, I probably didn't use the best word to describe it. I do like the idea of slowing down, and focusing on the process, improving it over time (by finding the style, film, etc. that I like). It's just that as a medium, film is now very popular for it's vintage look with washed out colors, and I do want a style a bit more true to life (I'll be very honest, I was just jealous of those beautifully preserved highlights).

Well, we all have our own ways of valuing and dealing with objects and people. In the ten years I've had my M9 (which I love, by the way, it's my favourite camera) I think I've only let three or four people touch it. One is a photographer friend and RF nut. Another was a camera shop person who had never seen one before. Even if photography is a social activity, it doesn't have to involve all and sundry touching your gear. My family and friends tend to understand the value of my gear and how much I personally value it, so they don't touch, lol. I like to keep the company of people who respect other people's property.


By the way, the M9 is capable of some wonderful film-like results. Slightly underexposing to preserve highlights works well, because M9 raws can be pushed quite hard.

 

[LCSmith]

Its a good lens for wide aperture work where you want to take advantage of the unique bokeh that the Sonnar gives. As a general purpose lens, a Leica Summicron or Zeiss Planar will be a much better choice.

I agree. For awhile I used the 1,5/50 as a permanent 50 on my M2. Aspects of the lens that drew my attention were its relatively diminutive size and weight and its speed. In the end the lens seemed like a jumble of old-style-rendering with new-style-contrast. To my eye, untrained though it be, the contrast makes the old-style-rendering too jumpy.

 

[Richard G]

A lens for a lifetime. Wonderful character also at f5,6. Compact. Well made. You may never notice focus shift, especially on film. Waste a roll and do test shots with your own lens. The Zeiss colours are lovely too.

Great advice from TenEleven about the M6 meter. It is scarily good. You could read a lot of good books on exposure and only very occasionally do better than just balancing those little red triangles.

 

[giulio stucchi]

I loved the rendering of my sonnar c 50 1.5 and I had no major issue with the focus shift. At the time it was my only 50, only reason I sold it: I wasn't happy with 1/3 click f-stop. Might be silly but it was kind of irritating for me.
FYI I am only shooting black and white film on meterless M cameras.
I would say, go for it.
Cheers
g.

 

[jmilkins]

I really like mine. The 1/3 stops grates a bit if you have 1/2 stop muscle memory like on my other 50s.

Sharpness fine for me on film or digital and film. It has a (modern) look I appreciate.

If you have either the 45 Planar (highly regarded,v sharp) or 35 Biogon ( said to be the “worst G lens” but its sill stellar) or 28 Biogon on you G system, the ZM Sonnar for an M would be a nice point of contrast.