Upload & Sell: Off
| p.2 #12 · Planar vs. Sonnar vs. Planar |
Martin, I have ZF and Sonnar, I think Sonnar has better wide open performance compare to ZF definitely. No question about that, At least for my both copies, I feel its resolution about equal or slightly less than ZF351.4 at 1.5, but with more contrast, so the impression is sharper than ZF35. My D700 is 12M, so it is not apple to apple.
However, I agree with everyone that it is not a landscape or planar lens. The extreme corner never pick up even past f8. I am fine with its sharpness performance slow down other than corner, though I feel there is nothing special about it as any lens past f5.6 will have decent sharp center.
Overall, I feel it is not reach P50 level as for lens performance, I like its size, and wide open performance, but it is over priced IMO, especially compare to ZF P50.
Funny thing is: I keep telling myself the corner is really a non issue for most of time what I do. I see no reason I must care those four extreme corners, as I won't put any interested stuff there.
There is no much choice fast 50 with M size. I had VC50mm 1.1, but can't love it for its size/performance, other than f1.1.
I visit Marek's flickr page before, I like his portrait shots very much. But those can be done with any 50mm decent lens at f2.8 as well like P50 or ZM P50. My take on it: It is the photographer can make any lens sing. Many times, I see superb photos from particular lens, mostly comes from photographer's skill on lighting, composition, and PP skill. I see tons of soulless shots from Noct f.95, but it has nothing to do with the lens