So what? I do also give this lens "too much credit" myself,but I admit someone may not share my attitude.Besides,are we here aimed at reaching some certain "constructive poit" starting any thread?It sometimes works,sometimes not.And this is how it should be,more or less.

Peire wrote:
David R. is not the troll makten.He has his right as anyone else to express he's point of view.Be more tolerant,open minded and understanding,please!

why?

I would understand the argument of taking the good with the bad but there seems to be little upside to his posts. mostly just him spouting his opinions as if they were facts. and it is purely opinion, because as has been pointed out by objective measure the 50P is quite good at what it does well.

it's not like this behavior is limited to this thread, either.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating, someone said. Two weeks ago I made an image of a forest using focus stitching with 5 images shoot at f6,3 and tripod+ mirror lock up using my D800E and the P 50 lens. I liked the quality and had it printed 80*120 cm in BW and I got the print last thursday. It is absolutely perfect! I have it on a wall in my office and the colleagues that have seen it are really impressed. It was a test to create a hyper realistic image and it succeeded.

Peire wrote:
Besides,are we here aimed at reaching some certain "constructive poit" starting any thread?

This is a discussion forum and repeating the same thing all the time does not constitute discussion and may very well be called trolling.

Peire wrote:
David R. is not the troll makten.He has his right as anyone else to express he's point of view.Be more tolerant,open minded and understanding,please!

He is a troll. He doesn't share opinions about the lens, but about the people using and liking it. I'm not tolerant with idiots.

redisburning wrote:
Peire wrote:
David R. is not the troll makten.He has his right as anyone else to express he's point of view.Be more tolerant,open minded and understanding,please!

why?

I would understand the argument of taking the good with the bad but there seems to be little upside to his posts. mostly just him spouting his opinions as if they were facts. and it is purely opinion, because as has been pointed out by objective measure the 50P is quite good at what it does well.

it's not like this behavior is limited to this thread, either.



Why not?

Like a post?Good.Don't like it?Ignore.There are usually enough valuable input from other fellows to benefit from.

AhamB wrote:
Peire wrote:
Besides,are we here aimed at reaching some certain "constructive poit" starting any thread?

This is a discussion forum and repeating the same thing all the time does not constitute discussion and may very well be called trolling.

Yes.It may be.Depending on the point of view.

Peire wrote:
redisburning wrote:
Peire wrote:
David R. is not the troll makten.He has his right as anyone else to express he's point of view.Be more tolerant,open minded and understanding,please!

why?

I would understand the argument of taking the good with the bad but there seems to be little upside to his posts. mostly just him spouting his opinions as if they were facts. and it is purely opinion, because as has been pointed out by objective measure the 50P is quite good at what it does well.

it's not like this behavior is limited to this thread, either.



Why not?

Like a post?Good.Don't like it?Ignore.There are usually enough valuable input from other fellows to benefit from.

+1, I have to agree Peire here. I love my Planar, for overall as a standard lens. (price, handling, color, slow down sharpness, Bokeh) but I well notice its flaw. This may be very important for some viewers or owners. So I totally understand some people think its overrated and don't deserve its reputation.

Makten wrote:
Peire wrote:
David R. is not the troll makten.He has his right as anyone else to express he's point of view.Be more tolerant,open minded and understanding,please!

He is a troll. He doesn't share opinions about the lens, but about the people using and liking it. I'm not tolerant with idiots.

It may be a matter of discussion whether David R. is the troll or not,but definitely he is not an idiot by medical definition.If he were one he wouldn't be able to participate the way he did.

In my opinion calling anyone an idiot in such circumstances is not justified and simply not polite.
I understand you may be upset,which is the reason for that kind of verbal expression,but then again.....not appropriate means Martin.

This is how I see it. I have been one of the very first on this forum to post pics with the 50P. It was a love story. Does it mean that it is perfect? Definitely not, its weaknesses are a fact. Does it have virtues, yes, and I have many pics that have been met with praise to prove it.
Where the debate goes off track is when this discussion of weaknesses and virtues veers to one of "you like this lens so much, so that makes you a... (usually very positive or very negative). That I like it very much neither makes me an idiot nor a genius. Nor would it if I hated it. I am, as everybody else, entitled to my opinions.
Davis R's post comes perilously close IMHO to calling those who love the 50P people who just love whatever is in fashion, just because they want to appear hip and don't know better. I don't subscribe to that approach. Does that make David R an irritation? Hardly. He has 47 posts to his credit, and I haven't seen his picture posts yet, so there is not much to be irritated by, if at all.

If this behaviour continues, which I doubt because he sounds articulate and committed, I would resort to the "hide me" button. Life is too short to get irritated by Internet posts. Until then David R, you are welcome in my book, as is everybody else who shares in our delightful hobby.

zhangyue wrote:

+1, I have to agree Peire here. I love my Planar, for overall as a standard lens. (price, handling, color, slow down sharpness, Bokeh) but I well notice its flaw. This may be very important for some viewers or owners. So I totally understand some people think its overrated and don't deserve its reputation.

My impression is that the lens doesn't have a good reputation because its flaws are well known. I've seen many of them being sold 2nd hand, probably by people who didn't know what the strengths of the lens are. I don't see the lens being overrated, TBH.

Well said Phillipe.
I remember a few years back when Paul (Cogitech) brought the Rokkor 58/1.2 to the alt forum and Rokkor mania ensued, there were one or two who thought it was overrated. People are still enjoying the magic of that lens. I don' t pay much attention to those kind of people. They are like the ones who keep saying Zeiss lenses are overrated and they only shoot Canikon lenses.
Not worth responding to those posts. I don't see the majority here in alt forum as being clueless followers.

I don't see the point in being upset. I clicked the "Hide Me" button one more time today, and it did the trick. Now to hide all these reactions...

Peire wrote:
I understand you may be upset...


I'm not upset at all. But very tired of idiots. And Carsten is right; I'm gonna use the "hide me" button next time.

"An idiot, dolt, or dullard is a mentally deficient person, or someone who acts in a self-defeating or significantly counterproductive way."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiot

---------------------

On topic, two photos with this overstated, "fashion", worthless lens that only weak people uses because they don't understand how much better other lenses are.

^ Nice. You really should upload your old D700 shots somewhere - they're awesome.

+1 ! Great stuff, Martin!

Bring back the chair! Bring back the chair!

Yes hooray for the "hide me" button! I respect anyones opinion, but how could David NOT be a troll? Not sharing any own experiences with the lens and only talking about hipsters, fashion, user reviews and other garbage. All this while none of us call it the perfect lens and we all talk about the weak spots.
He's just provoking, not contributing in any way.

Here's one from 50P@f/4 last year that I hold dear. I remember being in awe when I first opened the file, because the lens was able to keep the colors & contrast so accurate to what I saw. This file has only been resized, not edited in any other way. I'm often called names at my local regional forum for being a Zeiss-fanboy or some such, but I don't mind, I know what I like :-)


Keilir by Kiddi Kristjans, on Flickr

I just acquired a 50/2MP for personal keeping last week (my comparisons from before were made with a loaner lens). So I thought I might do a comparison-by-request from someone here? Is anyone interested in seeing something particular? Like a medium-distance object at f/2.8 for example?

kiddik wrote:
I just acquired a 50/2MP for personal keeping last week (my comparisons from before were made with a loaner lens). So I thought I might do a comparison-by-request from someone here? Is anyone interested in seeing something particular? Like a medium-distance object at f/2.8 for example?

I'm the one who's eager to see some side-by-side comparison shots, mmm!
Could you show us (with crops):
1) differences in rendering at mid range distance and at wide-open and slightly closed(2.8-4) apertures (specially in corners);
2) infinity scene details at wide-open and slightly closed apertures.
And could you point out if you would use lenses with hoods/filters?
And thanks in advance.