p.1 #1 · Tell me about the differences between the Zeiss 50P and 50MP
I have the Zeiss 1.4/50 Planar to my D700. 95% of the time I use it stopped down to 2 or below.
I just love how it draws in the 2.8-8 apertures. However I can't help but think I might as well get the 50MP instead as I've heard of it's superlative IQ more akin to the 100MP in style (which I sold for other reasons), and the extra feature of macro work. I am aware that "talk" on internet forums is not always to be trusted, but still I find FM to be a more balanced forum than most.
I'm sure the IQ will not disappoint, but what I am concerned with is the focus ring and in particular the throw. In the 50P it is fast and precise in normal work (which is to be expected as it's a 'normal' lens). Will I be giving up speed and accuracy in this focus range (say 1-5m) for accuracy in the macro region?
A lesser concern is balance and weight on the D700. Right now I find the 50P together with the 85P to be my two lenses of choice when it comes to ergonomics and ease of handling.
Any help (and examples) will be greatly appreciated.
p.1 #2 · Tell me about the differences between the Zeiss 50P and 50MP
The 50MP has noticeably less background blur (deeper apparent DOF) than the 50P throughout the whole aperture range and a bit more harsh bokeh too at longer focus distances. For close-up work the bokeh is top-notch (and better than the Planar), of course.
p.1 #3 · Tell me about the differences between the Zeiss 50P and 50MP
I know you're not asking for this and I have zero experience with the great 50MP. Still I would hesitate to switch the dreamy bokeh I find in the 50P, it's a bit like what I see in the 35/1.4. These are CY's but should be the same.
p.1 #4 · Tell me about the differences between the Zeiss 50P and 50MP
I have both and if you like the Planar, I would not recommend getting rid of it. They are very different, and in general, I prefer the Planar, although the MP is very good for some thing, like portraits, due to its large central DoF with rapid falloff beyond that. The Planar has a more even falloff, leaving it with narrower DoF at a similar aperture. The far corners of the MP are not perfect until maybe f/4, so I don't consider it perfect at all. It is a strong lens, but only for some things.
There has been quite a lot of discussion of this in the ZF/ZE/ZM thread. I recommend due diligence
p.1 #6 · Tell me about the differences between the Zeiss 50P and 50MP
I've owned both, and I've loved both for very different reasons. The 50P represents great value (which is why it still has a place in my bag) as it is small, light, and has a tremendous amount of character. The 50MP is slightly more clinical in nature, but still has that amazing Zeiss color found in the 50P. The MP is just as easy to focus, if not easier, due to the rather short focus throw from infinity to 1 meter. The focus throw does become longer down in the makro territory however. I loved the 2-in-1 nature of the MP. It's a fast normal lens and a makro lens wrapped up into one, which does save you a few lens swaps out in the field. If you don't need the close-focusing abilities though, I'd stick with the cheaper and lighter 50P.
p.1 #7 · Tell me about the differences between the Zeiss 50P and 50MP
Thanks to all.
I did find a comparison made here in FM between the dof fall-off which was apparent, but so was other things (contrast, colors and apparent sharpness all in favour of the MP to my eye).
p.1 #8 · Tell me about the differences between the Zeiss 50P and 50MP
Wideopen, the 100MP is clearly better and gives you better separation because of the focal length. However, I still see them as family of eachother. Bokeh characteristics, color, microcontrast,... all look similar to me and different than the planars. I know some people disagree with this, but I stand by my point
They share the same 'raw' look IMHO.
p.1 #9 · Tell me about the differences between the Zeiss 50P and 50MP
I'll do my token disagree here: I love the boke of the 100MP, but not of the 50MP. Only neutral backgrounds look pleasant to me. The boke is too nervous, especially with foliage. If you can avoid those situations by using the 50P, then it is a great lens for other things.
p.1 #10 · Tell me about the differences between the Zeiss 50P and 50MP
I'd point out that the 50MP @f5.6 trounces the 100MP @f4 across the frame out to the wide edges, so yes, I would say it can 'hold up' very well indeed.
It is so good it has a clinical look that may turn some off. I don't comment on bokeh, but I do find the bokeh at short OOF in Wilhelm's 50P images above look quite etched and a little unpleasant to me. Look for images in the ZE thread to see examples.
p.1 #11 · Tell me about the differences between the Zeiss 50P and 50MP
philip_pj wrote:
Look for images in the ZE thread to see examples.
Yeah, I'm aware I can, but the 709 pages worth of photos of which only a small fraction is the MP (not many people use the MP, why is that?) puts me slightly off. but you're right, there are no shortcuts so I'll make some time.
p.1 #15 · Tell me about the differences between the Zeiss 50P and 50MP
Great shots! You can see in these shots how great the 50MP can be for portraits, how smooth the boke is when you can get sufficient distance between the subject and the background (a lot of my initial time with the 50MP was spent looking for such situations...), and the money shot hints at how troublesome the boke can be with the wrong distance and foliage.
In the giant ZF/ZE/ZM thread, maybe start around page 90 or so, and go forwards. I think there are some comparisons around there, and also around page 200-300 or so.
p.1 #16 · Tell me about the differences between the Zeiss 50P and 50MP
Rodluvan wrote:
I have the Zeiss 1.4/50 Planar to my D700. 95% of the time I use it stopped down to 2 or below.
I'm sure the IQ will not disappoint, but what I am concerned with is the focus ring and in particular the throw. In the 50P it is fast and precise in normal work (which is to be expected as it's a 'normal' lens). Will I be giving up speed and accuracy in this focus range (say 1-5m) for accuracy in the macro region?
Cheers,
R
I am with you on not liking the long focusing throw of MPs. However, if you are looking for accuracy in the macro region, that is the purpose of the long focusing throw.
I also didn't like the 50P wide open at MFD. However, on a different type of sensor, they are quite soft and dreamy. I don't have enough testing samples with it yet as the camera is new and the weather here at the moment is dry and groomy.
p.1 #17 · Tell me about the differences between the Zeiss 50P and 50MP
I have both 50/1.4 and 50/2MP but if I had to stay with just one it would be 50/2 MP.It can do pretty much everything 50/1.4 does and has macro facility.It is simply a better allrounder lens.Unlike 50/1.4,it's performance wo is very good and it does well for close ups,medium distances and infinity.
p.1 #18 · Tell me about the differences between the Zeiss 50P and 50MP
Rodluvan wrote:
Thanks to all.
I did find a comparison made here in FM between the dof fall-off which was apparent, but so was other things (contrast, colors and apparent sharpness all in favour of the MP to my eye).
Thanks for that link! I've spent quite some time looking for that comparison in the past, but couldn't find it because I didn't remember who did the comparison. It's a nice bokeh analysis. I only didn't remember that that was the Contax N Planar, which I think is more similar to the C/Y than the Z*.
p.1 #19 · Tell me about the differences between the Zeiss 50P and 50MP
Note that the foliage in the background is very far away, so the nervousness of the 50MP at certain distances doesn't show up. It has different character at different distances. I also did a comparison somewhere in the ZF/ZE/ZM thread (around 2011 04), and Samuli did some as well.
I do have this one comparison shot of boke amount at identical distances, 50P first, @f/1.4 and then 50MP @f/2. Note just how much more boke the 50MP has, in spite of just one stop of difference:
