furcafe
Veteran
You are correct, there should be no focus shift problem on the X-Pro1 so long as you focus @ your actual shooting aperture (unlike on a modern SLR, where you usually focus wide-open & the aperture is set during the exposure).
BobYIL
Well-known
Chandler, first try to place Mr. Mark somewhat 45 degrees to the camera and focus on the same eye again. Around f2.8 you will see the breads seeming sharper than his eye.
It's my favorite 50 and I have black and chrome versions too, both shift focus.. But a number of other lenses I used exhibit focus shift too; especially my Summilux 35-pre ( favorite 35) matches it in all optical faults and shift splendidly. Both have distinct signatures..
However my latest-formula Summicron 50 too has a little focus shift... Can you imagine? Digital revealed these all.
Anyway, at wide open and f2, do not mind at all... for distances less than 2 meters learn to lean backward a little for f2.8 and f4.. for the remaining apertures or longer distances you do not need to do anything. With a little practice this becomes a habit.
It's my favorite 50 and I have black and chrome versions too, both shift focus.. But a number of other lenses I used exhibit focus shift too; especially my Summilux 35-pre ( favorite 35) matches it in all optical faults and shift splendidly. Both have distinct signatures..
However my latest-formula Summicron 50 too has a little focus shift... Can you imagine? Digital revealed these all.
Anyway, at wide open and f2, do not mind at all... for distances less than 2 meters learn to lean backward a little for f2.8 and f4.. for the remaining apertures or longer distances you do not need to do anything. With a little practice this becomes a habit.
Michael Markey
Veteran
I love mine.
This @ 1.5.
This @ 1.5.
KM-25
Well-known
kxl
Social Documentary
When I had mine (optimized for f1.5), I always shot it at f1.5 anyway, which is where the magic happens. For daylight shots, I used an ND filter.
kokoshawnuff
Alex
M3, E100VS
M7, Tri-X
foolstop
Member
I share your experiences. 
Let me tell you my story.
Here, showing the pictures from three copies of this lovely lens.
This one, over twenty feet away.
Taken with M8, F/1.5 with the factory default copy optimized at 2.8.
Showed front focus. I have already tried some tricks to compensate.
Here, same lens, really close this time, I tried the tricks of leaning forward about four cm.
Pretty close, right?
Focus shift is there and significant.
Don't get me wrong, I am very happy with it.
With some practice, one can shoot butterfly, 15 feet way, here is the cropped picture at F 1.5, M8.
At f 2.8, it is already wonderful.
Let me tell you my story.
Here, showing the pictures from three copies of this lovely lens.
This one, over twenty feet away.
Taken with M8, F/1.5 with the factory default copy optimized at 2.8.
Showed front focus. I have already tried some tricks to compensate.
Here, same lens, really close this time, I tried the tricks of leaning forward about four cm.
Pretty close, right?
Focus shift is there and significant.
Don't get me wrong, I am very happy with it.
With some practice, one can shoot butterfly, 15 feet way, here is the cropped picture at F 1.5, M8.
At f 2.8, it is already wonderful.
foolstop
Member
Here are the pictures from the second copy.
An "S" version of the Sonnar.
I have tried over a dozen Amedeo Muscelli adapters.
This one does the trick. NO focus shift with F 1.5 nor F 2.8 at any range
Close range, M8 @1.5
Not so close, M8 @ 1.5
Same lens @ 2.8 (focused on the red symbol)
An "S" version of the Sonnar.
I have tried over a dozen Amedeo Muscelli adapters.
This one does the trick. NO focus shift with F 1.5 nor F 2.8 at any range
Close range, M8 @1.5
Not so close, M8 @ 1.5
Same lens @ 2.8 (focused on the red symbol)
foolstop
Member
The third one.
A factory default optimized at 2.8. Sent to Japan and "optimized" to 1.5.
Result?
Film first.
Full frame
At 1.5
At 2.8
At 1.5, more than ten feet away.
A factory default optimized at 2.8. Sent to Japan and "optimized" to 1.5.
Result?
Film first.
Full frame
At 1.5
At 2.8
At 1.5, more than ten feet away.
foolstop
Member
Same optimized copy.
Digital.
At 1.5, (the lady on the phone) over twenty feet away.
Another at 1.5, close range
Digital.
At 1.5, (the lady on the phone) over twenty feet away.
Another at 1.5, close range
foolstop
Member
"Optimized" Copy.
Close range,
@ 1.5
@ 2.8
This one @ 4
Close range,
@ 1.5
@ 2.8
This one @ 4
foolstop
Member
What should I say?
chandler_chou
Well-known
thanks for all your reply.
it contain lots of knowledge to this lens....
by reviewing all comments here, it seems the person who owned this lens and still owning it right now are all happy with ( or have a way to live with ) it....
why not we discuss the focus shift issue less and post your work with this wonderful lens more to show people the power c-sonnar 50......
上學後每天回家都有大號哦！ by 錢得樂, on Flickr
it contain lots of knowledge to this lens....
by reviewing all comments here, it seems the person who owned this lens and still owning it right now are all happy with ( or have a way to live with ) it....
why not we discuss the focus shift issue less and post your work with this wonderful lens more to show people the power c-sonnar 50......
上學後每天回家都有大號哦！ by 錢得樂, on Flickr
mfogiel
Veteran
why not we discuss the focus shift issue less and post your work with this wonderful lens more to show people the power c-sonnar 50......
Hey, I'm sorry to have stated these things in a image thread, but I felt it needed to be said. Sure, there work arounds, but someone who's not familiar with the lens at all might want to know about the all too real focus shift with the lens.
horosu
Well-known
The C-Sonnar has been one of my favorite lenses. Unfortunately, on my M9 (which I have since sold) it clearly exhibited it's known focus shift. I bought the Summilux 50 ASPH, which was fine but for its quite high contrast. I would have kept this lens were it not for the fact that I managed to grab one copy of the Hexanon 60/1.2 in LTM mount. Now, this lens has no focus shift, has a lower contrast (which works great on digital bodies) and is a very, very sharp lens.
But, enough for the talk, here are my photos taken with the C-Sonnar:
Film f 1.5, 1/60
Another one on film, this one at f8
And one on the M9 at f4, on a f2.8 optimized copy of the lens.
Finally, another one at f4 on the M9 and f 2.8 optimized copy of this lens
But, enough for the talk, here are my photos taken with the C-Sonnar:
Film f 1.5, 1/60
Another one on film, this one at f8
And one on the M9 at f4, on a f2.8 optimized copy of the lens.
Finally, another one at f4 on the M9 and f 2.8 optimized copy of this lens
horosu
Well-known
Oh, and just one more thing:
The upcoming rumors of the M10 hint at an EVF. This would make ANY focus shift discussion irrelevant.
Cheers, Horea
The upcoming rumors of the M10 hint at an EVF. This would make ANY focus shift discussion irrelevant.
Cheers, Horea
furcafe
Veteran
C Sonnar shots (all S mount version) on my flickr stream:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/furcafe/tags/carlzeiss5015csonnarsmount2008/
And 1 taken w/a ZM version borrowed from a friend (to contrast w/the 1937 version I was using that night):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/furcafe/5247677795/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/furcafe/tags/carlzeiss5015csonnarsmount2008/
And 1 taken w/a ZM version borrowed from a friend (to contrast w/the 1937 version I was using that night):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/furcafe/5247677795/
Nick
Established
1/30th, wide open, Natura 1600
Fallen asleep, waiting for ferry
Ilford Delta 3200 rated at 1600
Snowy
Fallen asleep, waiting for ferry
Ilford Delta 3200 rated at 1600
Snowy
BobYIL
Well-known
Digital "accentuates" the optical faults more.. On an M3, especially with hi-spped films like the Tri-X or HP5+ you would hardly notice some of these faults.. (And even after noticing them I believe you'd be able to develop small techniques to eliminate them like we do.. No big issue at all..)