I am planning to acquire a fast lens for low light photography. Have considered the following:
Canon 50mm 1.2L, 50mm 1.4 as well as 50mm 1.8 and Sigma 50mm 1.4, and now with the news that CZ has a 1.4 for Canon mount! I think I can live with non auto focus as in the CZ. The 1.2L is pretty out of the equation price-wise and I can afford a little more than the 1.8; that leaves me with three other options - but then I am inclined towards either Canon 1.4 or CZ 1.4 T* Planar. Image quality aside, the CZ looks better built than 1.4 from Canon; for that matter the Sigma is also better built too.
Your advice and comments will be most appreciated.
You might want to look at the voigtlander 58 1.4 as well. Looking at your list I am assuming that you want to buy a lens that is currently in prodution? If I am wrong, then that opens the doors to many more choices.
Unless you're the kind of Canon shooter who routinely turns off the AF switch on EF lenses because he likes to manual focus even when he doesn't have to, it seems to me AF is a nice plus when comparing lenses that are reasonably close optically (and the lenses you mention are reasonably close, with sample variation often playing as big a role as anything).
tootalew wrote:
You might want to look at the voigtlander 58 1.4 as well. Looking at your list I am assuming that you want to buy a lens that is currently in prodution? If I am wrong, then that opens the doors to many more choices.
I am open and shall check on this lens. For info I already own a Summicron, so I am looking for a lens faster than F/2 and one that will not require an adapter confirm. At this point in time it will be a toss up between the Canon 1.4 and the CZ 1.4 ZE, I am a bit tentative about the Canon as there were much reports through forums with regards to focus accuracy. With CZ coming into the 50mm league will only serve to be a good thing for the consumer in general. Mind you, I think many Canon owners with less than FF will pick up the 50mm for very respectable portraits photography.
tootalew wrote:
You might want to look at the voigtlander 58 1.4 as well. Looking at your list I am assuming that you want to buy a lens that is currently in prodution? If I am wrong, then that opens the doors to many more choices.
Unfortunately it is Nikon mount only and I am using a Canon 5D. Suggestion appreciated anyway. One factor in favour of the CZ is:
"The new ZE lenses from Carl Zeiss transfer all information exclusively via electronic contacts. This means that all exposure modes such as programmed auto exposure, shutter priority, aperture priority and manual setting are supported".
Though manual focus, it has focus confirmation and this sort of compensate for not being an auto focus lens.
My Canon 50 1.4 (and I think this is pretty usual) is pretty soft to about f2. I don't mind that look for low light people shots, but you may not, so you may want to keep that in mind. I don't have that many frames of reference, but I do own a 35L (which someone suggested earlier) and I find that the contrast and color I get from the 50 1.4 don't come anywhere near the 35L which is incidentally extremely sharp wide open.
I know this is the alt gear forum, and my suggestions are anything but, but definitely keep the softness of the 50 1.4 wide open in mind if that's an issue for you (unless I have a bad copy?).
Oh, I'm using a 5D as well.
Sep 24, 2008 at 07:55 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
Edwin Ho wrote:
Unfortunately it is Nikon mount only and I am using a Canon 5D. Suggestion appreciated anyway. One factor in favour of the CZ is:
"The new ZE lenses from Carl Zeiss transfer all information exclusively via electronic contacts. This means that all exposure modes such as programmed auto exposure, shutter priority, aperture priority and manual setting are supported".
Though manual focus, it has focus confirmation and this sort of compensate for not being an auto focus lens.
Are you in a hurry to pick it up? It would not be surprising if the Voigtlander is made in a Canon mount before long. Cosina makes both the Zeiss ZE mounts and the current model Voigtlanders and the even make a Voigtlander 125mm macro in a canon mount. One would not know for sure that a Canon mount is coming, however, and if it were when it is coming.
blackpill wrote:
My Canon 50 1.4 (and I think this is pretty usual) is pretty soft to about f2.
I believe the correct adjective is "dreamy," not soft!
I have the Canon 1.4 also and I like it but I agree it isn't very sharp at 1.4; according to dpreview's recent comparisons - which I'm sure you've read - the Sigma is better at 1.4.
A Canon mount by Voigtlander.... it is all getting very exciting! And of course I am prepared to wait, at least until Photokina is over. I want very much to be equipped with a low light standard lens and I am prepared to take my time to make the right decision. Barring the 1.2L, the rest in the mid-range prices are affordable to me and I may be a able to find one in the used market, perhaps via FM buy/sell section - I have not signed up yet but will do so soon after I have shortlisted the various options. But the Carl Zeiss 1.4 ZE is worth waiting for; there should be reviews coming through forums soon.
RalphJ wrote:
I believe the correct adjective is "dreamy," not soft!
I have the Canon 1.4 also and I like it but I agree it isn't very sharp at 1.4; according to dpreview's recent comparisons - which I'm sure you've read - the Sigma is better at 1.4.
Thanks and I have read the review. At what point do we accept the softness is subjective. Personally, I can accept it in exchange of low light capability at a lower price. Afterall, today's softwares do enable a bit of sharpening.
Voigtlander has made EF-M mount lenses in the past (see the 125/2.5 APO-Lanthar listing at http://cameraquest.com/inventor.htm), so it's likely that they will again in the future.
jcolwell wrote:
Voigtlander has made EF-M mount lenses in the past (see the 125/2.5 APO-Lanthar listing at http://cameraquest.com/inventor.htm), so it's likely that they will again in the future.
well... I like the EF 50/1.8 better than the EF 50/1.4... so *I* would probably get the EF 50/1.8 AND the Planar (or the Sigma if you really want fulltime AF).
I tend to shoot close in and like a little DOF so f1.4 isn't that useful to me... but I do have a Super-Tak on the shelf in case I need f1.4.
I somehow doubt any of the options are really going to be "better" than the Summicron except below f2... closest I have to a perfect lens...
Most CV 50's are a tad harsh... even though sharp, cheap and fast quality peices... my CV LTM 50/2.5 is kind of the exception... but you can't put it on a 5D
mh2000 wrote:
well... I like the EF 50/1.8 better than the EF 50/1.4... so *I* would probably get the EF 50/1.8 AND the Planar (or the Sigma if you really want fulltime AF).
I tend to shoot close in and like a little DOF so f1.4 isn't that useful to me... but I do have a Super-Tak on the shelf in case I need f1.4.
I somehow doubt any of the options are really going to be "better" than the Summicron except below f2... closest I have to a perfect lens...
Indeed it is a hard decision. The Summicron F2 is pretty dear to me and I have no complaints about this lens... my first lens when I bought the R7 years ago. I have no plans to part with it anyway despite that I am searching for a 1.4 simply for occasions that I need a fast lens and will be pretty handy as a one-lens walkabout outfit.
And now news from Photokina has filtered through that Leica will definitely be offering the R10 in the very near future.... that will mean all my R lens are not "dead" yet.
I'm not holding my breath for the R10 since I am sure that I will not be able to justify the cost... whatever it is... probably $5000... who knows... guess I probably should work harder on finding that mint non-asp Summicron-R 90 if I really want one though...
mh2000 wrote:
Most CV 50's are a tad harsh... even though sharp, cheap and fast quality peices... my CV LTM 50/2.5 is kind of the exception... but you can't put it on a 5D
The 58 is a completely different case than the CV LTM and M 50's. The performance is excellent and while not super-smooth for bokeh, it's not in the least bit harsh.
