Zeiss 50 C-Sonnar M-mount autumn pix

B

Benjamin Marks

Veteran
Local time
4:01 PM
Joined
Mar 27, 2005
Messages
3,340
This Sonnar is optimized for f:2.8. But it produces wonderful images at all f: stops. It has taken a little practice to learn how to use the lens, but the effort has been well worth it.


U1566I1255228282.SEQ.0.jpg


And another:

U1566I1255228283.SEQ.0.jpg


I think these images show the in-focus/out-of-focus transitions nicely.

Ben Marks
 
Beautiful. It's a wonderful lens. I've had one for 10 days. The focus shift is real but manageable once you know where the depth of field will fall in the first four stops. I'm surprised at some not noticing the focus shift, but it isn't as catastrophic as some imply. One poster reckoned it was a three card trick that soon becomes tiresome. I see what he means, but like any trick, if you don't pull it too often it will last and last and continue to delight. At the other end of the spectrum I think it was Helen who said it makes any ordinary shot extraordinary. There's certainly something in that too.
 
rd1 with zm 50 sonnar, taken this morning at the farmer's market.
focus is on the husks just in front of the pumpkin.


3998121945_b7d895ec8c_b.jpg
 
Nice one Joe. This autumn I have been feeling like I cannot take a bad image with this lens. Then again, the color is such a riot that I have been essentially pointing and shooting. Both of the above had very small tweaks in CS3, but I feel like someone has given me a big light bucket and told me to go paint the world.

Ben Marks
 
I would like Fall better if it was followed by Spring.

1956 J-3, optimized for F1.5, wide-open.

picture.php


1937 5cm F1.5 Sonnar, converted to LTM, wide-open.

picture.php
 
Benjamin Marks said:
Nice one Joe. This autumn I have been feeling like I cannot take a bad image with this lens. Then again, the color is such a riot that I have been essentially pointing and shooting. Both of the above had very small tweaks in CS3, but I feel like someone has given me a big light bucket and told me to go paint the world.

Ben Marks
Click to expand...

thanks ben.
i had a momentary lapse lately and was thinking of maybe getting rid of this lens but that would be just nuts!
my post process is very simple.
crop (optional)
adjust levels
unsharp mask
resize
 
Thankyou. There is a reason why Zeiss introduced this lens in modern times.

I was using the J-3 at a party yesterday, and my friend told his wife "That's one of the lenses that I was telling you about". He also described the pictures as "popping out at you".
 
indeed this is just one of the best 50mm lens i've ever used

below shot despite far from being perfect really shows 3d-like rendering of zeiss glass and what the fuss is all about :)

album01.jpg
 
Indeed very nice pics. Fantastic, even.

Having said that, can anyone point out just what 'the look' of the lens is compared, say, to a ZM 50 planar? Aside from some form of fuzziness when the Sonnar is wide open, I've never really understood it.
 
gotium said:
Having said that, can anyone point out just what 'the look' of the lens is compared, say, to a ZM 50 planar? Aside from some form of fuzziness when the Sonnar is wide open, I've never really understood it.
Click to expand...

Having this lens is like having 2 lenses in one. Smooth and creamy (see bokeh) wide open

10180025.jpg


sharp and sort of clinical when you stop down

10180026.jpg


10170009.jpg


10170014.jpg


the wide open signature is what the fuss is all about
 
Kichu -

That flower pic is magical. Thanks for posting.

Is it the bokeh that is characteristic, or the er, luminance of the in-focus areas? Opening up a planar would presumably produce some nice out-of-focus blur, with a sharp in-focus subject.

There is clearly something really lovely with the sonnar shots in this thread, but I'm not really sure what it is.
 
gotium said:
Is it the bokeh that is characteristic, or the er, luminance of the in-focus areas? Opening up a planar would presumably produce some nice out-of-focus blur, with a sharp in-focus subject.
Click to expand...

Lots of aspects actually. It's not only the bokeh (which would the the unsharp areas), it's also how sharpness and unsharpness spreads all over the frame... my lack of english here... the way the lens renders transition from sharp to unsharp, also the way the lens in sharp. No RF examples here, but in SLR
world compare Nikon 105 F2 DC shots with 105 F2.8 Micro Nikkor (macro lens). The macro one is sort of clinical sharp, the 105DC lens is sharp and smooth at the same time (specialized portrait lens).

Take a look, an eye from DC lens

20100.jpg


same eye from macro lens

20100.jpg


see how how portrait lens is smooth with skin micro-wrinkles etc, whil keeping the eye sharp

on the other hand macro lens got all the microwrinkles etc. etc.
 
Thanks again for posting examples, Kichu. Your macro lens picks up the pores and wrinkles, along with the fine capillaries in the sclera, while the DC lens is more milky - although the focal point for the DC photo looks like it is a tiny bit further forward. While I like the sharpness of the reflections in the iris in the macro photo, the DC photo is much more pleasing overall.

Your flower pic really bowled me over. I'd been planning on adding a planar to my ZI for people photos, but I think this has changed my mind. I'd probably learn a lot more from the Sonnar, if nothing else. It would be interesting to learn what leads to the particular "character" it produces, although I assume that the design was derived empirically, rather than deliberately.

BTW, if English is not your first language, you really have mastered it - in written form, at least.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom