Recieved a 50 1.5C Sonnar ZM today, samples

This is a very interesting post (no sarcasm), but this whole Sonnar-C debacle is still standing on one leg. If only there were a way to put this same Zeiss lens on a Zeiss Ikon body, take similar pictures at known distances, and compare them to the same shots taken with the Leica MP...

The whole character thing, the "Sonnar look" thing, may hold water; I don't know anything about optics. But, I do know manufacturing, and tolerances, and how they can get stacked when pirating a design. Zeiss may have some bright lights working for them, but I'll bet they don't have Leitz's machining drawings in their drawers. I suspect a cam profile and/or mount depth/spacing difference, albeit one that only a very shallow depth of field reveals.

I'd been considering this lens, seriously, because I want a lighter best-quality fast fifty, but there's just no damned way I'm going to risk $900 US to buy one of these to use on my CL. I know I can focus my stupid Summilux properly on the CL, but this lens is looking more and more like a pig in a poke.
 
As I said on another post, maybe a used late model Summilux (E46) would be a better bet for an alternative high speed 50 that's free of focus shift issues. The Nokton 50/1.5 or Canon 50/1.4 is probably a best bet for those on a budget. Interestingly, they are all double Gauss designs and maybe this accounts for less focus shift as the lens stops down. All fast lenses of course exhibit focus shift but it's only a matter of degree. I would expect an aspheric design like the Nokton or Summilux aspheric to have the least. From what Zeiss says, it appears that the focus shift is slighty more prominant with the 50/1.5 Sonnar-C at closer distances which maybe why the minimum distance is 0.9m vs 0.7m on the ZM 50/2 Planar.
 
Last edited:
Gabriel M.A. said:
You mean Capa. HCB used Elmar, Summitar and Summicron. Capa used Contax and Nikon, among others.
Click to expand...

I think HCB used a Sonnar for a while (around 1950?). BTW, Ansel Adams used a Sonnar, too, for his 35mm shots. Some are quite sharp, like this one:

ansel3.jpg


Joe's photos show that he got a good sharp lens, wide open. So it must be a sample issue.

Roland.
 
i'm convinced my copy of this is not shifting focus up close.

this shot was focussed at the right corner angle, the inside edge. (booth bench)

it was shot at something like 1/8 of a second at 1.5 on delta 100.
it may be a bit soft due to the shutter speed and my hands but you can see that what i focussed on is where the focus is.
 

Attachments

  • booth bench.jpg
    booth bench.jpg
    97.9 KB · Views: 0
Joe's photos show that he got a good sharp lens, wide open.
Click to expand...

Yes, unquestionably.


So it must be a sample issue.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the majority (if not the entirety) of these focus hiccups we've been reading about have been seen while the lens was mounted on Leica bodies. I won't swallow that sample theory whole until someone gets a lens that behaves badly on a Leica, tries the same specimen on the body it was made for and tested on- the ZI, and gets similar poor results. Simple, basic troubleshooting SOPs.

We need to bribe Joe to lend his correctly-focusing Sonnar to an M owner for a couple of mirror shots, focused on the eye. Then Joe steps up to the same mirror with his Zeiss body, asks for his lens back...

And them we need to fly him and his ZI out to wherever someone is scowling at an out-of-focus Sonnar-on-Leica M restroom shot. THEN, we'll have a test.

Or we could just let the man go kill some baby seals. I dunno.
 
From my experience with a classic 50 Nikkor the Sonnar design does have slight focus shift with closer focus (you could say the depth of focus front to back of the focus plane changes). Something you learn to live with and can compensate for once you get to know the lens.

If you are looking to save some cash and not pick up the 50 ASPH try a time tested and wonderful lens in the form of a pre-ASPH Summilux. It has a beautiful look wide open and stopped down in practical handheld use is one of the best all around Leica lenses ever made, very flare resistant, gorgeous color. The older 43mm thread lenses are priced under $1,000 generally and built like a tank ( a few falls and knocks have proven that! ), the newer 46mm thread version has the most modern lens coatings and focuses to .7 meter with a short throw. For most folks it still challenges the photographer to meet the quality that the lens can produce.
 
dreamsandart said:
...try a time tested and wonderful lens in the form of a pre-ASPH Summilux. It has a beautiful look wide open and stopped down in practical handheld use is one of the best all around Leica lenses ever made, very flare resistant, gorgeous color. The older 43mm thread lenses are priced under $1,000 generally and built like a tank ( a few falls and knocks have proven that! ).... For most folks it still challenges the photographer to meet the quality that the lens can produce.
Click to expand...


Truth. Every word.

But the old, tank-like Summilux is a very, very heavy lens; mine (a chromed brass version 2) weighs 300 grams. That's why the new f/1.5 Sonnar got my attention; it's 50 grams lighter. Use of plastics, maybe.

I don't know what this "color" stuff he's talking about is, and I haven't shot it straight into the sun yet. Freaking gorgeous bokeh, though.
 

Attachments

  • Pistol Porn.JPG
    Pistol Porn.JPG
    85 KB · Views: 0
Biggles said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the majority (if not the entirety) of these focus hiccups we've been reading about have been seen while the lens was mounted on Leica bodies. I won't swallow that sample theory whole until someone gets a lens that behaves badly on a Leica, tries the same specimen on the body it was made for and tested on- the ZI, and gets similar poor results. Simple, basic troubleshooting SOPs.
Click to expand...

I'm stuck with a leica M2 that was actually for sale, but no one bought, I'll do some "tests" this weekend with my sonnar on that and the ZI. I haven't done much photography in a while. I believe my copy is pretty sharp.
 
back alley said:
i'm about ready to give up photography and take up...trapping or baby seal hunting, something less controversial than what lenses are sharp or not.
Click to expand...
photography's fine, especially if we do it ... it's all the expert opinions on the net (mine included) that are the problem. Less reading, more shooting ... me included.
 
I've just developed a roll, at the end of which I used the Sonnar at its closest range (0.9m). I'm finding it front focuses by about 2.5cm. I did the test using a magazine shot at an angle. The actual pictures are boring and won't mean much to anyone else since only I know where I focused. I only had two shots left on the roll so I haven't launched into testing at different stops.
It is something I can probably live with since there are no other issues.
Nick
 
Thanks for the replies

Thanks for the replies

I shot another roll already in B&W but have not yet processed anything. I did some focus tests but I am sure this is front focusing, as it seems to be normal for this lens. If this is the case, it's not going to work for me. I kind of bought it for close focus use (indoor low light and some portraits at 1.5) so I think it will go back, and maybe Ill buy a used pre-ASPH lux.

Thanks for the comments.
 
soft may be subjective but here is a man that owned other fast lenses which he felt did not have this 'problem' when compared. The Nokton is quite big and heavy too, so I guess there are not too many fast 1.4 options which are light. Maybe the Lux pre-asph is the solution, in black so as to get the aluminium weight saving. I have a brass 50 lux Asph and it weighs the same as my 90 elmarit M......
 
Couple more...

Couple more...

I REALLY do like this lens build, feel, size and quality when not at 1,5 and close up! My local drug store scaned a roll of XP2 HORRIBLY (Im getting lazy with scanning but next time I will scan) but here are a coiple more shots. I did two more mirror shots as well and concentrated on focusing to make sure it was not user error and both were front focused like the other.

In my opinion, this lens can not be used for up close shots becuase it would be hit or miss. But put yourself at a little distance and its AWESOME.

keep in mind, these were just quick test snapshots:

1st shot, from my car window - sonnar at 2.8

2nd shot - my son in his room at 10pm, SUPER low light at 1.5 with the sonnar (this one is not front focused)

3rd shot - my son in his room with a Noctilux

I just got an RMA from BH for the sonnar (they sent me the wrong color anyway) and I am still deciding if i should buy this again in black (color i ordered) and deal with its flaws or buy a used Summilux pre-ASPH or bite the bullet andgo for a Summilux ASPH (doesnt it focus closer than the pre-ASPH?)

The sonnar can be used stopped down and at F2 + it rivals the summicron (see garbage can pic) but at 1.5 it can only be used with certainty at a distance. So F2 up close is fine. 1.5 is not.
 

Attachments

  • 131ggson.jpg
    131ggson.jpg
    143.7 KB · Views: 0
  • 131sonnbrms.jpg
    131sonnbrms.jpg
    105.4 KB · Views: 0
  • 131noctb.jpg
    131noctb.jpg
    98.1 KB · Views: 0
back alley said:
i'm convinced my copy of this is not shifting focus up close.

this shot was focussed at the right corner angle, the inside edge. (booth bench)

it was shot at something like 1/8 of a second at 1.5 on delta 100.
it may be a bit soft due to the shutter speed and my hands but you can see that what i focussed on is where the focus is.
Click to expand...

whatever, you got BEAUTIFUL BOKEH! 😛

Get well. One time I had a wicked cold and some genuine Screech cured it in a snap.
 
I'm having similar thoughts Steve. Overall I love the lens, it handles really well, the images are great and it is the best lens I have owned. But do I get a refund and go for a later model pre-asph summilux? I think I need to run more rolls through at the larger apertures before I can make a decision.
Nick
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom