Upload & Sell: On
| p.10 #17 · How bad is Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 ZE Planar? |
By 'artistic', philippe, I refer to the design intent by CZ; I feel this way about almost all fast lenses, they are simply meant for different purposes, don't you agree? There are so many trade-offs involved, everything from complexity to correction to the need to design in acceptable bokeh...usually anyway..the 50P in ZE is actually a simple enough lens (7/6) same as the CY one.
I in no way equate 'artistic' with image weakness, but mean to point out the higher performance of macro lenses (as an example) regarding corrections for CA, COF, distortion and for all-of-frame performance, it is expressed in CZ's own MTF. They (MPs) won't take good images at f1.4 though ;-)
Scanning back over this admittedly rather strange thread (threads seem to have personalities too!), maybe 60-70% of posted images are clearly aiming for the bokeh look, most likely shot wide open or near to it, no?
Such bokeh from the 50P, esp highlights can look harsh to my eyes and often looks kind of poorly saturated and wishy washy (to get technical, not), and the mid aperture results from the 50MP are much better, also a personal opinion - don't shoot me for having one please, I'm an old school medium format person.
Bokeh from the 50P is very different to what I see from a Summicron-R for example, you really are in doubt what Leica are looking for with most of their 'normal' FL lenses, say 35mm to 50mm, in R anyway - booming centres and soft full-blown bokeh outside that space.
I think all lenses have personalities too. And it is interesting to air different views as it provides insights into what we all see and why we prefer certain renderings.