freaklikeme Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Zeiss ZM 50 f2 Planar vs Zeiss ZF 50 f2 MP | |
One thing to be aware of is that the ZM is prone to develop movement in the front of the lens that people describe as wobble. Word of mouth makes it sound fairly common, but I've never shot with one that had it, so I don't know if it has any ill effects beyond annoyance.
You're partially right about the focus travel on the MP, but the travel for common distances (infinity to .7m) is probably close to the same if not longer on the ZM. There's also a big difference between the two in the way they handle light entering the front element. The baffled entrance on the MP means that, in most general shooting situations, it won't need a hood. Not true for the ZM, and in some scenarios, even with the hood, you'll get higher contrast results out of the MP, particularly if you're using a helicoid adapter or tubes on the ZM for close focusing.
Beyond that, I'd say the biggest draw difference is in the bokeh. At common focus distances, the MP shows more structure where the ZM is a bit softer. Given the price difference, I'd say go with the ZM for general purpose and use the money you save over the MP to purchase a Contax S 60/2.8 macro. Where the MP is native 1:2, needing a tube to go 1:1, the Contax is native 1:1, so it'll give you more range as macro lens.
|