SLR C Sonnar 50/1.5 equivalent

sparrow6224 said:
The closest lens I can think of for an SLR to what you're talking about is the Rokkor 58mm f/1.4. (I have no knowledge of the religiously worshipped f/1.2 version...). Another lens that, as you stop down, sharpens considerably from a dreamy wide aperture look is the Ai-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.2. I love that lens. Of course now you have a Hasselblad so fugget about it.
Click to expand...

both of these are front focused (my fault, this was my first day with this lens), so please keep that in mind. this lens is actually fairly reasonable at f1.2. these are just so you can get an idea of how this lens does people wide open. if you look where the plane of best focus is you'll see that it's better than acceptable wide open, it's downright usable:


Untitled by redisburning, on Flickr


Untitled by redisburning, on Flickr
 
Nikkor pre-AI 105/2.5 and 58/1.4.

I shoot both on the D3100 (fully manual, not even the meter works) and they are nice...😎 and not all that expensive too. I bought either of them for around EUR 135, shipping in EU included... The 105 even came with caps, hood and bubble for that price...

Nikkor-S58mm14_cat.jpg

This was with the 58/1.4. Just an alley cat, but I love the rendering!
 
@CK Dexter Haven
I have bought the Sonnar as well, I have been surprized to see how compact it is.
@redisburning
While I was lookiung for an SLR version of Heliar 75/2.5, which I like a lot on Leicas, I saw, that the only reasonably priced copy in Europe, was for Minolta mount, then I saw an add for a Minolta body+58/1.4 for 130 EUR, and I ended up buying both...
I have acquired quite a bunch of gear in the last few weeks, and now I'd like to do some selection and testing, hoping to post any interesting findings here.
 
Well, I haven't seen the Zeiss 50mm 1.8 Planar for Rolleiflex mentioned here. I think it was available in a Nikon F mount too (which I'd rather have). This was the lens that "taught" me portraiture and the only reason I keep a Rolleiflex SL35 body around. My memory is awful, but I think this lens beat the supposed sonnar Jupiter-3 on my LTM gear, at least when shooting mid-wide (2.8), but I haven't pulled it out for a while....
 
mfogiel -- one of your shots, from Flickr, I thought was the Zeiss ZM 50mm for Nikon, not an RF. Was I mistaken? the Hasselblad Zeiss I long for is the 120 Makro -- beautiful.

Also, one of the first replies to your OP mentioned the Elmarit-R 60/2.8 Macro. I want to toss in a nother vote -- an amazing lens. But does not render like a Sonnar I don't think. The notable quality is sharpness. The transition to OOF I would describe as intelligent, rather than lovely. Not ugly or nervous, just sound.

Lastly, no one has mentioned this fact, but among the Nikon 105s, which are really stunning, a certain number of the early F (non-Ai) versions were actually Sonnar designs. Went over to double Gauss in 1971 which (I think) is same time as introduction of F2. Don't know if they are related. The SNs 100xxx to 287xxx are sonnars. After, it jumps to 400xxx and anything at or above that is a double gauss. I have one of each but haven't tested them against one another to compare. Yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom