Sonnar Lens Design Appeal?

[chris00nj]

On many threads, people speak highly of the Sonnar lens design. Other people's love of this lens design has sparked my interest in getting one. However, I can't figure out why people like the lens design so much?

What about the design makes the results more special than other lens designs?

Is there an area of photography where it greatly excels? B&W?
Portraits?

 

[clarence]

I like Sonnar Bokeh, and I use my Sonnar lenses wide open for portraiture most of the time. But I'm not even sure if it's a result of the Sonnar lens design. Bokeh is supposedly not taken into account when lens designers start crunching numbers to design a new lens.

This website is pretty good for an introduction to Bokeh. At the very least, you get to see a comparison of the different types of Bokeh and you can decide which sort you like:
http://www.rickdenney.com/bokeh_test.htm

Clarence

 

[furcafe]

For me, it's not the boke, but rather they way you tend to have a gradual reduction in sharpness & some light falloff @ the edges when shooting wide-open. It's a look that I associate w/old-fashioned large format lenses & is definitely great for portraits, color or B&W, IMHO. Perhaps not surprising since the Sonnar (if you count its Ernostar precursor) was the 1st great high-speed lens design back in the days before lens coating became common.

To my eyes, there are non-Sonnar (non-large format) lenses that have similar properties, like the Noctilux @ f/1, the 75 Summilux @ f/1.4, & the 80/2 Noritar for the Norita 66 medium format SLR. I'm sure there are others, so you may not need to get something w/an actual Sonnar design.

 

[Warren T.]

For me, it's not the boke, but rather they way you tend to have a gradual reduction in sharpness & some light falloff @ the edges when shooting wide-open. It's a look that I associate w/old-fashioned large format lenses & is definitely great for portraits, color or B&W, IMHO. Perhaps not surprising since the Sonnar (if you count its Ernostar precursor) was the 1st great high-speed lens design back in the days before lens coating became common.

To my eyes, there are non-Sonnar (non-large format) lenses that have similar properties, like the Noctilux @ f/1, the 75 Summilux @ f/1.4, & the 80/2 Noritar for the Norita 66 medium format SLR. I'm sure there are others, so you may not need to get something w/an actual Sonnar design.

For me, it's not just the bokeh either. I can't articulate it as well as others, except to say that I really like the "look" of images from my J-8 (Sonnar design).

Some samples attached, shot with the Jupiter 8.

--Warren

 

[Erik L]

i like the planars more myself.

 

[awilder]

The Sonnar look varies with speed and focal length. For example a 50/1.5 Sonar will have a completely different look to a 40/2.8 despite the optical layout being similar. Both however, are very sharp stopped down a couple of stops and both become a tad soft at the edge of the frame untill stopped down several stops. The faster versions tend to exhibit more spherical aberration at larger opennings causing some focus shift and a certain glow to the in-focus subject giving it a special look. Both are more resistant to unwanred flare and secondary reflections due to it's asymmetrical layout.

 

[ferider]

The OOF quality is very different from Sonnar to Sonnar. Some are nice, some aren't.

Also, some planar-based designs (like the pre-asph Summilux) have more rapid focus fall-off than the typical Sonnar.

For me it's size, flare resistance, and the punch in the picture center, a hard-to-define 3D quality that is great for portraits.

I do agree with Chris, there are non-Sonnars that "feel" the same. The Canon 50/1.2 and the Nokton 35/1.4 come to mind. And the 75/1.4 wide open. But that's purely me ....

Roland.

 

[Mackinaw]

I wonder if folks could tell a sonnar from a tessar from a gauss design if shown examples of each, side-by-side, with no identification.

Jim B.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I wonder if folks could tell a sonnar from a tessar from a gauss design if shown examples of each, side-by-side, with no identification.

Jim B.

I can tell if the example is a diagram of the elements, but I probably cannot tell from the photos. Even within those categories there are big differences between versions by different makers.

 

[morback]

Soft (gentle?)-sharpness and character. Great non-distracting oof, nice volume rendition.
It's not a cold clinical (a la Planar) lens, it's a warm human lens to me. Whatever that means.

For some reason the Contax T3's 35mm lens is labeled Sonnar, even though I've been told due to design they cannot be wider than 50? The results are beautiful though...

 

[ZeissFan]

There were numerous 40mm Sonnars, although I don't know if I've seen any wider than that.

The first 40mm (4cm) Sonnar that I can recall is the one from the Tenax II, which debuted in 1938. It's an f/2.0 model.

Then there is the f/2.8 40mm Sonnar made famous by the Rollei 35S.

Another 1970s lens was the f/2.3 40mm Sonnar on the Rollei XF 35.

Also, the f/3.5 40mm Sonnar on the Rollei A26 (126 camera).

Finally, the f/2.8 40mm Sonnar on the Rollei RF 35.

I seem to think that I'm missing one regarding the 40mm/4cm Sonnar, but perhaps not.

 

[Mackinaw]

A fun little quiz. Which was taken with the Sonnar?

Jim B.

 

[bmattock]

A fun little quiz. Which was taken with the Sonnar?

I don't know, but I like the bottom one better.

 

[ferider]

The first one.

The bottom one could be your and my favorite and most underrated fast 50 ...

 

[LeicaTom]

a hard-to-define 3D quality that is great for portraits.

I do agree with Chris, there are non-Sonnars that "feel" the same. The Canon 50/1.2 and the Nokton 35/1.4 come to mind. And the 75/1.4 wide open. But that's purely me ....

Roland.

I agree, for me it`s the "3D" EFFECT with portraits, and the creaminess of the Bokeh especially with the Canon f1.5/50 😀

I also just acquired a "minty" Canon f1.2/50 as well.....and I`m "jonesin" to use it with some Retro 1960`s Styled Portaits, soon soon! 🙂

Tom

 

[LeicaTom]

A fun little quiz. Which was taken with the Sonnar?

Jim B.

The top one is the Sonnar......the bottom one reminds me of the Canon f1.4/50?

Tom

 

[Bingley]

I agree w/ Leica Tom. I also like the way the Canon 50/1.5 renders color:

 

[Mackinaw]

The top one is the Sonnar......the bottom one reminds me of the Canon f1.4/50?

Tom,

You win the prize! The top is with a Nikkor LTM 50/F2.0 and the bottom is with a Canon LTM 50/1.4. If I recall correctly, both were taken wide-open.

Jim B.

 

[bmattock]

Tom,

You win the prize! The top is with a Nikkor LTM 50/F2.0 and the bottom is with a Canon LTM 50/1.4. If I recall correctly, both were taken wide-open.

Jim B.

Cool. I have the Canon LTM 50mm f/1.4. Yay, me.

 

[ItsReallyDarren]

I was going to guess the top one as the Sonnar but only because the sculpture was less contrasty than the bottom one.