p.2 #2 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
I'm a little puzzled that Zeiss chose to make the 50 and the 85 their first releases in the ZE mount.
These are focal lengths where the Canon alteratives are very good.
From all I've read, very few are going to find the ZE/ZF 85/1.4 to be superior to the EF 85/1.2L.
And a used 85L mkI is not much more than the ZE lens.
It seems Zeiss should have started right off with the 35/2 in ZE mount. That lens looks to be excellent,
especially compared with Canon's aging EF 35/2.
p.2 #4 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Shooting in MF is tough.
Practice makes perfect. I used to shoot all my weddings w/ manual focus gear. 3-4 months of practice and you will be great. Very nice lokking images and quality blur from that lens. Not suprised and thanks for posting
p.2 #5 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Sorry but I can't get your point, do you like this lens or no? I mean build and balance in hands sounds like nikonians to me what about sharpness/bokeh and overall IQ?
p.2 #6 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
The Planar 50/1.4 is capable of exceptional bokeh. I've rarely experienced a lens more expressive of the color red. But you have to choose your subject and the background well - it's all about making the right move.
Like I said, if you are going for that look, more power to you. It is just very distracting to my eyes. For my taste, that is the exact opposite of what I expect bokeh to convey. I like smooth bokeh; the choppy nature of that bokeh is too distracting.
p.2 #8 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
I own both ZE lenses, 50mm and 85mm. They replaced my Canon 50mm f:1.4 and 85mm f:1.8. I find both of them (particularly the 85) to deliver exceptional IQ. Much better than my Canons, and at least as good as my beloved 35L and 135L. That said, I am not hyper-sensitive to the quality of Bokeh, so I won't comment about that. What I love about them is the sheer amount of detail they deliver, and the overall IQ. Plus great low-light, wide-open performance. MF with my 40D is not such a great obstacle, even though I find autofocus confirm to work in only some 60% of my attempts, meaning I sometimes have to "go over" the focus zone with the focus ring more than once. But once it works, my shots are in focus.
Why did CZ choose to release these 2? Maybe because it seems they are the two most sold focal lengths. I find that the 85 in particular offers much better performance than the Canon 85 f:1.8 for much less money and weight than the Canon 85 f:1.2, so it should find its place in the market. But to each his own...
p.2 #9 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
anandnvi wrote:
The Planar 50/1.4 is capable of exceptional bokeh. I've rarely experienced a lens more expressive of the color red. But you have to choose your subject and the background well - it's all about making the right move.
Neither of this shots having Exif, not sure what is this.
p.2 #10 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
philber wrote:
I own both ZE lenses, 50mm and 85mm. They replaced my Canon 50mm f:1.4 and 85mm f:1.8. I find both of them (particularly the 85) to deliver exceptional IQ.
Maybe, but without samples I believe more to tests made by reputable sites and they are not as good.
p.2 #11 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Samples on the Internet do not have the definition to do any high-end products justice when it comes to IQ. Noise can be seen, bokeh, possibly also, but IQ comes from the rendition -or not- of very fine details, micro-contrast and the likes. Those are not visible with Internet resolution. Reviews are IMHO often contradictory, even though all are written by "reputable" journalists. So my MO is that I try out for myself products which look like they could be interesting. This is the only way to find out if the product works "for me", whatever this means for others. I particularly recommend this with Zeiss ZE lenses because they are likely to be the first MF lenses for some prospective buyers.
That being said, if you want my sample shots and comparisons with Canon lenses, you have but to ask, and e-mail will get you the full resolution
p.2 #12 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Camera: Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Exposure: 0.005 sec (1/200)
Aperture: f/4
Focal Length: 50 mm
ISO Speed: 400
Exposure Bias: 0 EV
Flash: Flash did not fire
p.2 #14 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
me thinks the bokeh is weird...also pics seem soft at least to me anyway looks almost as if you used lensbaby on a couple pics
the white bird is horrid
p.2 #15 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
The sharpness of that pink/green leaf shot above is remarkable, way better than anything I'd see with the Canon 1.4 wide open. The fact that that shot is at ISO 5000 blows my mind...
Wait... I just checked the EXIF in that shot and it says ISO 400, f4, 1/200. The EXIF you posted under the shot is way off.
I'd love to see a comparison of this lens with the Sigma 1.4, both for sharpness and bokeh.
Paolo Dolina wrote:
Can anyone tell me why I am getting purple fringing on the head of the bird?
The bird's crown chakra is wide open.
Or perhaps the lens just exhibits some CA wide open.
In the bird shot, I'd imagine the Sigma 1.4 to have more buttery and pleasing bokeh. It's a relatively tough situation, but there are some harsh artifacts in the background. The text on the guy's shirt as it goes into the OOF area starts to become unattractively smeared.
p.2 #16 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
The OP may be a little overwhelmed with the new lens, getting to grips with MF, a very shallow DOF, and perhaps some of the basics. Although I find the results disappointing, including the bokeh, I'm not yet ready to pass judgement. At this point I'd rather get a 50L instead if I want bokeh, or keep the ol' EF 50/1.4 lens if I want convenience.
p.2 #17 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Thanks for pointing it out. Updated it to reflect actual data. No Sigma on hand unfortunately. Ariel Bravy wrote:
The sharpness of that pink/green leaf shot above is remarkable, way better than anything I'd see with the Canon 1.4 wide open. The fact that that shot is at ISO 5000 blows my mind...
Wait... I just checked the EXIF in that shot and it says ISO 400, f4, 1/200. The EXIF you posted under the shot is way off.
I'd love to see a comparison of this lens with the Sigma 1.4, both for sharpness and bokeh.
p.2 #18 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
All your points are correct. Admittedly I've been using this lens 3-4 times since getting it. It was suggested I try f/4.
What do you mean wide angle shot? rhorta wrote:
The OP may be a little overwhelmed with the new lens, getting to grips with MF, a very shallow DOF, and perhaps some of the basics. Although I find the results disappointing, including the bokeh, I'm not yet ready to pass judgement. At this point I'd rather get a 50L instead if I want bokeh, or keep the ol' EF 50/1.4 lens if I want convenience.
p.2 #19 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Bokeh aside, as it's not really massively important in what i shoot, what is the general IQ of this lens? Sharpness/Detail/Colour etc? Is this the highest resolving EF mount 50mm you can buy now?
what about sharpness/bokeh and overall IQ? 
