ERV
Well-known
Its interesting how the new lens has a similar character to the early sonnars.
Here are a couple of images with the originals;
The roses were taken with a 1930's 50mm 1.5 sonnar wide open,
and the tulips with a 1950's 50mm 1.5 at f2 or so.
I would have expected a little more sharpness from a modern lens, although I do like the sonnar 'look'.
Here are a couple of images with the originals;
The roses were taken with a 1930's 50mm 1.5 sonnar wide open,
and the tulips with a 1950's 50mm 1.5 at f2 or so.
I would have expected a little more sharpness from a modern lens, although I do like the sonnar 'look'.
Attachments
awilder
Alan Wilder
I think a critical side by side comparison of the old and new version will indeed reveal some improvement. The airspace in the current lens between E2 and E3 allows for additional degrees of correction made possible by the use of T* coatings. The older design simply "filled in" the same space by cementing a very low index glass with minimal optical effect between E2 and E4 (now E3) thus eliminating two air to glass surfaces improving contrast. Improved computer progams in design should also help to tweak performance.
Last edited:
Krosya
Konicaze
Huck Finn said:
Now THAT was the way to introduce this lens. But I can't recall Zeiss doing this and from what I gether, many people who bought one, didn't know/realize this "feature" of the Sonnar. If I wanted to buy a Sonnar AND read this first - I'd not have any problems, however, this is the first place I see this being well described as it should be.
back alley
IMAGES
very interesting thread, lots of good information.
my take is less technical and more simplistic (much like myself).
when i read the zeiss website i remember thinking that calling this a lens for the photojournalist didn't quite fit with my understanding of what a sonnar does. the fast speed of the lens might fit but not the characteristics of the lens.
my take on sonnars were that they were sharp in the centre and softened as you hit the edges, in a way that gave a very different look to them from say, the planer. i had not read anything about this modern sonnar or the older ones having a focus shift. this may be old news to some but for me not so much.
if the biggest shift in focus is up close and wide open then i should be ok as i rarely shoot at the minimun focus distance.
i wanted the faster 50 to play with dof wide open and to have the abilty to take some people pics in a darker environment.
it would appear that the zm 50/1.5 will do what i want it to do.
i can have sharp when i want it, outdoors in good light and i can have that sonnar look all the time and i can have a special look when i move inside or lower the lighting for a more intimate portrait session.
i think for a 50 this suits me quite well.
the zm 35/2 gives me what i want too, very sharp all the time and wider pov.
i'm keeping my sonnar.
and to note, i have a 50's 50/1.5 carl zeiss coming in, maybe this next week, and i plan a few side by side shots.
joe
my take is less technical and more simplistic (much like myself).
when i read the zeiss website i remember thinking that calling this a lens for the photojournalist didn't quite fit with my understanding of what a sonnar does. the fast speed of the lens might fit but not the characteristics of the lens.
my take on sonnars were that they were sharp in the centre and softened as you hit the edges, in a way that gave a very different look to them from say, the planer. i had not read anything about this modern sonnar or the older ones having a focus shift. this may be old news to some but for me not so much.
if the biggest shift in focus is up close and wide open then i should be ok as i rarely shoot at the minimun focus distance.
i wanted the faster 50 to play with dof wide open and to have the abilty to take some people pics in a darker environment.
it would appear that the zm 50/1.5 will do what i want it to do.
i can have sharp when i want it, outdoors in good light and i can have that sonnar look all the time and i can have a special look when i move inside or lower the lighting for a more intimate portrait session.
i think for a 50 this suits me quite well.
the zm 35/2 gives me what i want too, very sharp all the time and wider pov.
i'm keeping my sonnar.
and to note, i have a 50's 50/1.5 carl zeiss coming in, maybe this next week, and i plan a few side by side shots.
joe
Dan States
Established
Am I correct in understanding that the focus shift is as much as a meter....In the link above it says the plane of focus can move from 5 to 6 meters...This WOULD be what I found in my examples. Did I misread this?
Why have I never had this problem with my original Sonnars?
Why have I never had this problem with my original Sonnars?
Huck Finn
Well-known
As I read it . . . if you're focusing on something at a distance of 5 meters the focus plane can shift one meter to 6 meters when you stop down from f/1.5 to f/4. At that distance, depth of field is almost 3 meters at f/4, and almost 1 meter at f/1.5.
Ororaro
Well-known
Honestly, the CV 50 1.5 is top notch, one of the sharpest 50 I've ever tried. Why not try it?
Krosya
Konicaze
Huck Finn said:
Thats how I read it too and to me it's rediculous. I would NEVER want to buy a lens like that. If it said - 1-2 cm - I could "maybe" deal with that, but 1 meter? No way. And Zeiss should disclose this info at their web site as well have all dealers do the same. My J-3 doesn't seem to do that. And for a new $1000 lens - this HAS to be known in advance, before purchase, so people that still chose to get one are fully aware what to expect. So far it's the only place - here on this forum and link above that talk abou this as far as I know.
Like Joe says - I have never heard of this issue before.
back alley
IMAGES
NB23 said:
it's NOT a sonnar.
Mazurka
Well-known
I agree with Krosya. Never expected Zeiss to behave like Leica. 
But then again, they can afford to do so much more than Solms.
Or rather it's not the latest Sonnar. At that price, you could buy 3 Oberkochen-made samples (or two plus a Leica adapter) and avoid the "modified/rebadged Cosina" jab from Leica zealots.
But then again, they can afford to do so much more than Solms. back alley said:
Or rather it's not the latest Sonnar. At that price, you could buy 3 Oberkochen-made samples (or two plus a Leica adapter) and avoid the "modified/rebadged Cosina" jab from Leica zealots.
back alley
IMAGES
the cv 50/1.5 is not a sonnar.
or is it?
the stupid people that insist on making those jabs are getting under my skin less and less.
people can pay for what they want.
at the price/quality of the zm lenses i'm already over my head in terms of what my talent can do with the gear.
joe
or is it?
the stupid people that insist on making those jabs are getting under my skin less and less.
people can pay for what they want.
at the price/quality of the zm lenses i'm already over my head in terms of what my talent can do with the gear.
joe
Last edited:
Huck Finn
Well-known
Krosya said:
I agree that Zeiss should disclose this information up front. I think that the burden is especially on them to do so because they stress that their lenses are corrected for focus shift - as mentioned by Mazurka & others.
This issue of a 1 meter shift when shooting at 5 meters would be covered by depth of field, so . . .
Another poster said that he did experience focus shift with his J-3. I posted the link earlier. If you can't find it, I'll post it again. The fact that you haven't experienced it just means that it hasn't been manifested under the conditions in which you've shot. Not veryone who's posted here has experienced focus shift with their new Sonnars either.
This was apparently a known issue with the old Sonnars; Nikon described it in their discussion of this design for their old lenses. It's in the Nikon links already posted. I've also read it in other discussions os the old Sonnars. Maybe the expectations of photographers in those days were different.
awilder
Alan Wilder
What's the actual amount of focus shift from 5 to 6 meters?
The Zeiss statement explaining that there is a focus shift from 5 to 6 meters when stopped down to f/4 as explained here: http://www.rrisonmind.net/entry/The-answer-from-Carl-Zeiss-from-Germany piqued my interest.
My estimation is that it's about 0.084 mm based on the fact that the focus has been factory set for best results WRT focus shift at f/2.8 and Zeiss' explanation that the amount of shift equals a focus change from 5 meters to 6 meters when stopped down to f/4. The depth of field scale used by Zeiss is based on the standard Circle of Confusion (COC) of 0.03 mm and at f/2.8 giving acceptable sharpness +/- 0.084 mm on either side of the exact plane of focus as detailed half way into this article: http://www.dantestella.com/technical/flange.html#hexar.
For those that own this lens, you can actually find the location of f/2.8 on the DOF scale as well as 6 meters on the distance scale. Simply line up the very left edge of "5" on the distance meters scale with the tip of the focus index triangle. The right edge of "5" should now fall slightly inside the "4" index in the DOF. It's just at the right edge of "5" where 6 meters is actually located on the distance scale and this also corresponds to the location of f/2.8 on the DOF scale as well. Another way to look at it is that the focus shift from 5 to 6 meters equals the movement of the focus ring from one side of "5" to the other which should be a little over 1 mm. The linear movement of the lens occurs at a rate of 0.074 mm/1 mm of focus ring rotation. This also matches the 0.084 mm estimation of focus shift.
It was no accident that Zeiss selected those distances to illustrate the extent of the focus shift as they also correspond to the separation of exact focus and f/2.8 on the DOF scale.
The Zeiss statement explaining that there is a focus shift from 5 to 6 meters when stopped down to f/4 as explained here: http://www.rrisonmind.net/entry/The-answer-from-Carl-Zeiss-from-Germany piqued my interest.
My estimation is that it's about 0.084 mm based on the fact that the focus has been factory set for best results WRT focus shift at f/2.8 and Zeiss' explanation that the amount of shift equals a focus change from 5 meters to 6 meters when stopped down to f/4. The depth of field scale used by Zeiss is based on the standard Circle of Confusion (COC) of 0.03 mm and at f/2.8 giving acceptable sharpness +/- 0.084 mm on either side of the exact plane of focus as detailed half way into this article: http://www.dantestella.com/technical/flange.html#hexar.
For those that own this lens, you can actually find the location of f/2.8 on the DOF scale as well as 6 meters on the distance scale. Simply line up the very left edge of "5" on the distance meters scale with the tip of the focus index triangle. The right edge of "5" should now fall slightly inside the "4" index in the DOF. It's just at the right edge of "5" where 6 meters is actually located on the distance scale and this also corresponds to the location of f/2.8 on the DOF scale as well. Another way to look at it is that the focus shift from 5 to 6 meters equals the movement of the focus ring from one side of "5" to the other which should be a little over 1 mm. The linear movement of the lens occurs at a rate of 0.074 mm/1 mm of focus ring rotation. This also matches the 0.084 mm estimation of focus shift.
It was no accident that Zeiss selected those distances to illustrate the extent of the focus shift as they also correspond to the separation of exact focus and f/2.8 on the DOF scale.
Last edited:
SteveRD1
Well-known
SteveRD1
Well-known
Funny
Funny
Just noticed I was wearing the same sweater today that I wore when I took the sonnar and noct test shots. Guess I should spend more on clothes than lenses!
Funny
Just noticed I was wearing the same sweater today that I wore when I took the sonnar and noct test shots. Guess I should spend more on clothes than lenses!
back alley
IMAGES
gee steve, it seems kinda soft and really bad bokeh.........just kidding!!
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
I hear joe has given up clothes in favour of buying lenses etc.
back alley
IMAGES
Trius said:
1 pair of skivvies and 2 pair of socks! is all i need.
jano
Evil Bokeh
What, no banana?
back alley
IMAGES
that's why i need 2 pair of socks!