For those that are interested, just got notified they are on the way. Should be in stock most places next week.

wish they had AF...i would be interested in them then..i can get them for 30% off anything from zeiss

05xrunner wrote:
wish they had AF...i would be interested in them then..i can get them for 30% off anything from zeiss

Can you share how you can get 30% off.

I work with Zeiss in healthcare..and we spend few hundred thousand from them..and the guy i deal with can get me what i want for his cost

i keep saying I wish Canon would get into pathology area. So i can start dealing with them and get some discounts there.
I work with Olympus, Zeiss, Nikon but no canon

Microscopes? distributer, with Cardinal, Fisher, PHS...

Hmmm, That is an interesting idea. I should speak with our Zeiss healthcare rep.

I can't find ZE 50's in stock anywhere! Where are you looking... ?

Also, can anyone find a test between the Sigma 50 and this Zeiss?

Here is a reply I got from Tony Rose at PopFlash. He was quoting Zeiss USA

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

date Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 10:20 AM
subject Re: Zeiss ZE 50/1.4

Philippe,

The Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE will ship to us next week and we will likely receive the delivery after the holidays. In this case, we should be in a position to ship later the week of 12/1.

Thank you,

TR

Does anyone know about how much this lens is supposed to retail for in the US?

maxima302 wrote:
Does anyone know about how much this lens is supposed to retail for in the US?

http://www.popflash.com/index.php?p=product&id=3355&parent=31

It says it is in stock now.

Would a Zeiss C/Y 50mm Planar owner buy this lens, quickly, and tell us the bokeh is good, there is very little barrel distortion, and very little lateral chromic aberrations, over the 50/1.4.

Jim,

I have a C/Y 50mm Planar, the better of two that I bought. It's nice, certainly more pleasing than the Canon 1.4, but not something that makes me smile everytime I think about it.

I recently obtained a ZF 50 makro, and it eats the CZ for lunch, in every way. (although one could almost complain that it's TOO sharp for some subjects) So, I think Zeiss technology has been improving quite a bit lately. (as you would expect.) I am quite excited to check out the ZE 50.

I'm buying into ZE lenses when the Makros are released

bluetsunami wrote:
I'm buying into ZE lenses when the Makros are released

+1 saving up steadily (and will sell/trade/auction to get there)

bluetsunami wrote:
I'm buying into ZE lenses when the Makros are released

oh yes!

i'm looking at the distagon 25, makro-planar 50 and 100.

Cableaddict wrote:
I recently obtained a ZF 50 makro, and it eats the CZ for lunch, in every way. (although one could almost complain that it's TOO sharp for some subjects) So, I think Zeiss technology has been improving quite a bit lately. (as you would expect.) I am quite excited to check out the ZE 50.

Yes, I too am waiting on the ZE50Makro. I hope it doen't grow too much in weight as the ZE85/1.4 did.

ZE 50 Makro is the one I like. It's the sharpest 50mm ever.

JimBuchanan wrote:
Cableaddict wrote:
I recently obtained a ZF 50 makro, and it eats the CZ for lunch, in every way. (although one could almost complain that it's TOO sharp for some subjects) So, I think Zeiss technology has been improving quite a bit lately. (as you would expect.) I am quite excited to check out the ZE 50.

Yes, I too am waiting on the ZE50Makro. I hope it doen't grow too much in weight as the ZE85/1.4 did.

How heavy could it get? The bloody thing doesn't even have a front element!

+1 for the Zeiss 50/2 Makro Planar ZE when it happens. That's the one to have IMO. Too sharp? In this forum - too sharp

+1 for Zeiss 50/2 Makro Planar ZE

Cableaddict wrote:
JimBuchanan wrote:
Cableaddict wrote:
I recently obtained a ZF 50 makro, and it eats the CZ for lunch, in every way. (although one could almost complain that it's TOO sharp for some subjects) So, I think Zeiss technology has been improving quite a bit lately. (as you would expect.) I am quite excited to check out the ZE 50.

Yes, I too am waiting on the ZE50Makro. I hope it doen't grow too much in weight as the ZE85/1.4 did.

How heavy could it get? The bloody thing doesn't even have a front element!


I have the ZF 50/2.0 Makro and it is a bit wider and longer than the 50/1.4, but significantly heavier by 200 grams. The lens is great at all focus distances and has a lovely bokeh. Of course it costs twice as much 50/1.4.

Does it "eat the CZ for lunch"? Hmmm. Not sure what that means In contrast to what such hyperbolic statements might suggest, the differences between this ZF/ZE 50 Makro and the CZ c/y 50/1.4 or ZF/ZE 50/12.5 for that matter, are not particularly large. It's better as close focus distances, and the subjective consensus seems to be that it has a nicer, smoother bokeh. I think you would be hard pressed to significant differences focused at infinity, especially when stopped down. It's probably sharper at f2.0 than the 50/1.4 lenses.

So there are trade-offs. Cost, size, weight and maximum aperture for makro-focusing, nicer bokeh, and somewhat improved performance in certain areas. I like it (and I have all 3 of these 50's), but others may, after assessing the trade-offs and running the numbers, could conceivably and rationally choose the 50/1.4.

Lotusm50 wrote:

I have the ZF 50/2.0 Makro and it is a bit wider and longer than the 50/1.4, but significantly heavier by 200 grams. The lens is great at all focus distances and has a lovely bokeh. Of course it costs twice as much 50/1.4.

Does it "eat the CZ for lunch"? Hmmm. Not sure what that means In contrast to what such hyperbolic statements might suggest, the differences between this ZF/ZE 50 Makro and the CZ c/y 50/1.4 or ZF/ZE 50/12.5 for that matter, are not particularly large. It's better as close focus distances, and the subjective consensus seems to be that it has a nicer, smoother bokeh. I think you would be hard pressed to significant differences focused at infinity, especially when stopped down. It's probably sharper at f2.0 than the 50/1.4 lenses.


Either you have a bad makro, or I have a bad CZ. Mine are significantly different. The makro is sharper, better at infinity, has better bokeh, and just plain makes better looking photos.

The only thing I prefer the CZ for is wide portraits, as it is a little smoother, or richer maybe. The makro is perhaps a bit too sharp or analytical, or something.

Lotusm50 wrote:So there are trade-offs. Cost, size, weight and maximum aperture for makro-focusing, nicer bokeh, and somewhat improved performance in certain areas. I like it (and I have all 3 of these 50's), but others may, after assessing the trade-offs and running the numbers, could conceivably and rationally choose the 50/1.4.


It was my impression the ZF 50/1.4 has moderate barrel distortion and some chromatic aberrations. The ZF Makro 50/2.0 has apparently none of these and continues that high performance into the close range distances. Is that a fair assessment?

JimBuchanan wrote:
Lotusm50 wrote:So there are trade-offs. Cost, size, weight and maximum aperture for makro-focusing, nicer bokeh, and somewhat improved performance in certain areas. I like it (and I have all 3 of these 50's), but others may, after assessing the trade-offs and running the numbers, could conceivably and rationally choose the 50/1.4.


It was my impression the ZF 50/1.4 has moderate barrel distortion and some chromatic aberrations. The ZF Makro 50/2.0 has apparently none of these and continues that high performance into the close range distances. Is that a fair assessment?


"moderate" is a subjective term. One could call it "minor". In most cases, I would not think it is noticeable. The 50 MP also exhibits minor barrel distortion, but only about half as much as the 50/1.4 P.

Further in my own informal tests, the 50 MP also shows minor CA wide open in high contrast situations (strong back-lighting, highly reflective surfaces like metal, etc.), it might be touch less than with the 50/1.4. Stopped down, both lenses are very, very good.. Let's be clear. The ZF/ZE 50/2.0 MP is not an apochromatic lens. You will see some CA in severe conditions.

So, "none of these" is a bit strong. Perhaps "a bit less of these" might be more accurate.

Anyone an idea when to expect the Zeiss 50 mm macro in ZE mount? (I am thinking to go for the Sigma 70 mm macro in the meantime).