Upload & Sell: Off
| p.6 #19 · How bad is Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 ZE Planar? |
I don't understand how the Zeiss 50 mm f/1.4 Planar ZE / ZF.2 can be said to be "tack sharp" and without veiling haze at infinity, wide open.
Who said that? I think your examples look precisely like what I'd expect from this lens at that high pixel density. It can give a very pleasing look albeit with a certain "glow" wide open, but still giving nice colors that I haven't seen from other equal lenses (non-aspherical and/or classic designs).
I think most of the criticism comes from people wanting "perfect" lenses. But there are no perfect lenses. While for example the Sigma 50/1.4 is "much better" (sharper) at f/1.4, it lacks many of the nice unmeasurable qualities of the Planar; both wide open and stopped down.
You have to understand that this is a double nature lens. It is soft wide open, but I and many others like that look. It's also very, very sharp and detailed stopped down, with a color accuracy and "3D" look second to none.
Very convincing color and object definition in that photo, Martin. I like your style.
About "who said that", the "tack sharp" was from the OP on page 5, post 12. I have read numerous times in different threads on this forum that the veiling haze is supposed to be gone at infinity. Thanks for confirming that my copy is as expected.
When you said in your first reply in this thread that the lens is "only soft at short distances, wide open", I may have confused softness with veiling haze.
As for perfomance stopped down at infinity, the CV 58 is sharper than the Planar even at f/4 and with no trace of color aberrations. The most striking difference between those two lenses is the cooler color of the CV. Then there is a lot to like or not to like about the rendering as we move out of the focus plane. I agree than in the right circumstances, the Planar 50 gives a look that few other lenses can.