Help me fill out my ZI kit

[kshapero]

Have a ZI with a CV Nokton 35/1.4 SC, and a Leica Elmarit 90/2.8. I also have a CV Bessa R4A with a CV 21mm. I need (or at least think I do) a 50mm lens to complete my kit. I have a Jupiter 8 50/2 which images real nice but the aperture ring, if you have ever owned one, has no clicks so it can move way too easy. So...help me pick a 50mm lens for those times when a 50mm is the lens to use.🙂

 

[Paddy C]

That's easy isn't it?

50/1.5 ZM Sonnar or 50/2 Planar. Because you don't have another Zeiss lens I would be very tempted by the Sonnar. That would give you speed and character.

 

[segedi]

+1 50/2 Planar

 

[Vics]

I'd think about a Leica lens to match the signature of your 90 Elmarit. Maybe the rigid cron? Or even an Elmar 3.5. That would be a cool walkaround lens!

 

[Photon42]

I through in the 1.1/50 Nokton. Why? It's just a very fast lens which comes in handy in certain situations. I like the signature as well. You've already got the small 35. No need for another stealth lens 🙂

 

[hausen]

+ 1 for 50/1.5 Sonnar

 

[kshapero]

I through in the 1.1/50 Nokton. Why? It's just a very fast lens which comes in handy in certain situations. I like the signature as well. You've already got the small 35. No need for another stealth lens 🙂

that's a good point. But 1.4 seems plenty fast for me. What about the Heliar 50/2? or even a Summarit 2.5?

 

[fotomeow]

well we see who the Zeiss fans are!
I think the Zeiss rendition will be too modern compared to your kit. If you want to have a similar look/feel to the CV 21mm and 35mm and the 90/2.8, I would shoot for a CV 50/2.5 or so, or an older Leica, like the Rigid (as said above).
Do you want consistent rendition from lens to lens or do you want to mix it up?

 

[keepright]

Another endorsement of the 1,5/50 ZM Sonnar – it's two lenses for the price of one-and-a-third. I admit that I prefer my 2/35 Biogon most of the time, but you already have a good 35 (not that one is always enough) and the 1,5/50 is something special if you like that kind of thing.

I don't see much additional value with the 50/1.1 over the 35/1.4 for low-light use; give the difference in holdable shutter speeds, it's pretty much an even swap.

 

[kxl]

I had both the Sonnar and Planar at one time, before I decided to trade the Sonnar for a 25/2.8 Biogon, and kept the Planar. It was a personal preference. Seems like you already have a good spread with a 21-35-90, so I don't think you "need" a 50, but of course wanting one and needing one are two different things, and absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Myself, I have 2 ZI's, and more often than not, I usually go out with a 3 lens kit, either an 18-35-75 or a 25-50-90. Of course, there's no hard fast rule for a "kit" and I do mix and match sometimes, but I always seem to go back to one of the above combos.

 

[Photon42]

that's a good point. But 1.4 seems plenty fast for me. What about the Heliar 50/2? or even a Summarit 2.5?

I don't have either - so it's difficult to talk about personal impressions 😉

From what's available, the Heliar only focuses down to 1m, AFAIK. The Nokton isn't actually much better, but the Noctilux competition from Leica is the same - so no direct better option for a 1.1 aperture. The Summarit 50 I think goes down to 0.8m.

I don't want to talk you into the Nokton, but it is not always about getting around low light conditions, but to toy with the ultra thin DOF.

Rgds
Ivo

 

[jsrockit]

Voigtlander 1.5 Nokton
Zeiss Planar
Leica Summicron
Voigtlander Nickel Heliar f/2

 

[imush]

I endorse the Heliar 50/2, unless you really need a superfast lens. It is smaller and cheaper than the Planar (or Sonnar, for that matter). Sorry for the ostentatious examples, but they are to the point:

 

[illuminati_02]

My 2 50's are the Sonnar and 'Lux pre-asph e43. I love both of them, but honestly the lux blows me away. It is magical and if I ever had to choose between them I would be keeping the lux. They both seem incapable of producing anything but special prints, but the Leica is extra super spectacular special. ... 😉

 

[Roger Hicks]

Another Sonnar user. I never used 50s much, after I could afford a 35/1.4, until I got the Sonnar. I have had several other fast 50s, Nokton old and new, Summarit, Xenon, Canon f/1.2, and in non RF fit, 58/1.4 and 50/1.2 Nikkors. Only the C-Sonnar persuades me to use 50mm (but then, I can't afford a Noctilux f/1, which I borrowed for a year from a friend)

Cheers,

R.

 

[haempe]

What about the Heliar 50/2?

I love my Heliar. It has character. Not that crazy Sonnar bokeh, but different then all the double-gauss around. It is my favorite 50. Not fast enough for all my needs, but for avalaible darkness I have now a Canon 50/1.4. Not that pleasant as the Heliar, but sufficient in bad light situations and affordable.
The Heliar gives some dreamy atmosphere to the OOF areas, but is really sharp in focus.
Two examples on Polypan F (which produces the glow):

 

[tbarker13]

Love the Zeiss planar. Might be a nice addition to your kit to have a lens that offers a more modern rendering.
Really wanted to like the two Sonnars I tried, but just couldn't put up with the focus shift.

 

[jsrockit]

Quite beautiful color here...

 

[kshapero]

I endorse the Heliar 50/2, unless you really need a superfast lens. It is smaller and cheaper than the Planar (or Sonnar, for that matter). Sorry for the ostentatious examples, but they are to the point:

nice examples

 

[kshapero]

ZM C Sonnar 50/1,5 --- lovely look to shots of people. BTW, akiva don't you own a M3?

yes I do. BTW the Heliar looks rather soft. The examples are good shots but I think I am ruling out this lens. I am leaning toward the C Sonnar. A little more than I want to spend, but I guess I could be like normal folks and save up for it.