C-sonnar!
p.25 #1C-sonnar!
So what are the thoughts on the CV Nokton 50/1.5? I had it once before and never should have sold it. So now, I have a new version arriving today. It has what I call a typical CV look. Sharp, subject separation (3D) but with more muted colors giving it a look of it's own. Can't wait to try this out . . . again!
Nov 28, 2016 at 01:34 PM
p.25 #2C-sonnar!
Got to use the Sonnar some more this past week and I continue to love its unique rendering. Generated some impromptu holiday card photos for family, and some fun shots with my wife and mother in law in San Francisco. For group shots I've been shooting at f/5.6 on the modded A7. I'm mostly wide open or at f/1.8 for solo portraits, great as long as I centrally place the subject and account for cropping the weird corner field curvature bokeh.
Nov 28, 2016 at 02:30 PM
p.25 #3C-sonnar!
uscmatt99 wrote:
Got to use the Sonnar some more this past week and I continue to love its unique rendering. Generated some impromptu holiday card photos for family, and some fun shots with my wife and mother in law in San Francisco. For group shots I've been shooting at f/5.6 on the modded A7. I'm mostly wide open or at f/1.8 for solo portraits, great as long as I centrally place the subject and account for cropping the weird corner field curvature bokeh.
This is what i meant by being aware of its use. Single people in the shot sure wide open or close to it is great but when you get like 3 people in the shot you have to stop down. I failed this at F4 on a shot and saw it and dropped to 5.6 and more . So you have to think about the usage and subject.
Got to use the Sonnar some more this past week and I continue to love its unique rendering. Generated some impromptu holiday card photos for family, and some fun shots with my wife and mother in law in San Francisco. For group shots I've been shooting at f/5.6 on the modded A7. I'm mostly wide open or at f/1.8 for solo portraits, great as long as I centrally place the subject and account for cropping the weird corner field curvature bokeh.
This is what i meant by being aware of its use. Single people in the shot sure wide open or close to it is great but when you get like 3 people in the shot you have to stop down. I failed this at F4 on a shot and saw it and dropped to 5.6 and more . So you have to think about the usage and subject.
Nov 28, 2016 at 02:49 PM
p.25 #4C-sonnar!
rji2goleez wrote:
So what are the thoughts on the CV Nokton 50/1.5? I had it once before and never should have sold it. So now, I have a new version arriving today. It has what I call a typical CV look. Sharp, subject separation (3D) but with more muted colors giving it a look of it's own. Can't wait to try this out . . . again!
Bob, I'm sure you are aware, that's not a sonnar, but a double gauss. I thought it was a sonnar for a long time
It's a fantastic lens. It may be the most used 50 for M/LTM today.
Like the Sony 1.8 (which they claim really is a sonnar design---worth a close look to compare layout) it is great right to the edge, though without a thin filter mod, that performance will show up a few stops down. Centers should be great WO.
I'm curious how turning of lens correction effects the Sony 1.8 on the edges.
I think this the 1937 CZJ, but it's looking more like the Nikkor 5cm f/1.4
DSC06967 by unoh7, Stock A7
Again I think the nikkor 85/2 RF lens is in a class by itself for sonnar performance and bokeh (not what I show above). The 50s true to original design can get quite wild
So what are the thoughts on the CV Nokton 50/1.5? I had it once before and never should have sold it. So now, I have a new version arriving today. It has what I call a typical CV look. Sharp, subject separation (3D) but with more muted colors giving it a look of it's own. Can't wait to try this out . . . again!
Bob, I'm sure you are aware, that's not a sonnar, but a double gauss. I thought it was a sonnar for a long time
It's a fantastic lens. It may be the most used 50 for M/LTM today.
Like the Sony 1.8 (which they claim really is a sonnar design---worth a close look to compare layout) it is great right to the edge, though without a thin filter mod, that performance will show up a few stops down. Centers should be great WO.
I'm curious how turning of lens correction effects the Sony 1.8 on the edges.
I think this the 1937 CZJ, but it's looking more like the Nikkor 5cm f/1.4
DSC06967 by unoh7, Stock A7
Again I think the nikkor 85/2 RF lens is in a class by itself for sonnar performance and bokeh (not what I show above). The 50s true to original design can get quite wild
Nov 28, 2016 at 03:00 PM
p.25 #5C-sonnar!
rji2goleez wrote:
So what are the thoughts on the CV Nokton 50/1.5? I had it once before and never should have sold it. So now, I have a new version arriving today. It has what I call a typical CV look. Sharp, subject separation (3D) but with more muted colors giving it a look of it's own. Can't wait to try this out . . . again!
I've never tried the Nokton 50/1.5 but heard it's a great lens. How about the Nokton 50/1.1 ??
One of the things I like about the Sonnar 50C is the 3D effect from its high micro contrast. I can't get the same look with the 55/1.8. The Loxia 50/2 is the one that comes closest. Here is an example I just took tonight.
So what are the thoughts on the CV Nokton 50/1.5? I had it once before and never should have sold it. So now, I have a new version arriving today. It has what I call a typical CV look. Sharp, subject separation (3D) but with more muted colors giving it a look of it's own. Can't wait to try this out . . . again!
I've never tried the Nokton 50/1.5 but heard it's a great lens. How about the Nokton 50/1.1 ??
One of the things I like about the Sonnar 50C is the 3D effect from its high micro contrast. I can't get the same look with the 55/1.8. The Loxia 50/2 is the one that comes closest. Here is an example I just took tonight.
Nov 28, 2016 at 11:07 PM
p.25 #6C-sonnar!
Fred Miranda wrote:
I've never tried the Nokton 50/1.5 but heard it's a great lens. How about the Nokton 50/1.1 ??
For me it is the difference between nice and small (1.5) and bulky (1.1)
From what I have seen the 1.1 has more whacky and less smooth bokeh, while I really like the 1.5:
But as I like Sonnar rendering as well it seems I have to give the C-Sonnar a shot one day...
Edited on Nov 29, 2016 at 04:51 AM · View previous versions
I've never tried the Nokton 50/1.5 but heard it's a great lens. How about the Nokton 50/1.1 ??
For me it is the difference between nice and small (1.5) and bulky (1.1)
From what I have seen the 1.1 has more whacky and less smooth bokeh, while I really like the 1.5:
But as I like Sonnar rendering as well it seems I have to give the C-Sonnar a shot one day...
Edited on Nov 29, 2016 at 04:51 AM · View previous versions
Nov 29, 2016 at 12:59 AM
p.25 #7C-sonnar!
The Nikkor-H.C 50mm F2 is another sweet 50mm Sonnar design, optimized for close up and near wide open. The LTM version has a minimum focus distance of 18 inches (45cm) and the TAP gets you even closer.
 |
||
 |
||
|
|
||
 |
||
|
Nov 29, 2016 at 04:46 AM
p.25 #8C-sonnar!
Getting further and further off topic, but how does the CZJ 8.5cm f/2 compare to the Nikon 8.5cm f/2? Was the Nikon an improved copy?
uhoh7 wrote:
Bob, I'm sure you are aware, that's not a sonnar, but a double gauss. I thought it was a sonnar for a long time
It's a fantastic lens. It may be the most used 50 for M/LTM today.
Like the Sony 1.8 (which they claim really is a sonnar design---worth a close look to compare layout) it is great right to the edge, though without a thin filter mod, that performance will show up a few stops down. Centers should be great WO.
I'm curious how turning of lens correction effects the Sony 1.8 on the edges.
I think this the 1937...Show more →
uhoh7 wrote:
rji2goleez wrote
So what are the thoughts on the CV Nokton 50/1.5? I had it once before and never should have sold it. So now, I have a new version arriving today. It has what I call a typical CV look. Sharp, subject separation (3D) but with more muted colors giving it a look of it's own. Can't wait to try this out . . . again!It's a fantastic lens. It may be the most used 50 for M/LTM today.
Like the Sony 1.8 (which they claim really is a sonnar design---worth a close look to compare layout) it is great right to the edge, though without a thin filter mod, that performance will show up a few stops down. Centers should be great WO.
I'm curious how turning of lens correction effects the Sony 1.8 on the edges.
I think this the 1937...Show more →
Nov 29, 2016 at 07:55 AM
p.25 #9C-sonnar!
Brian S. was saying Nikon 8.5cm f/2 was similar to Contarex 85mm f/2 which was produced 60yrs ago. CZJ is an improved copy, but Loxia 85mm might be the ultimate one... See for contarex mtf's and a sample (lower contrast then the modern Zeiss):
http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/zeiss_contarex_mtf/00_pag.htm
Mathieu18 wrote:
Getting further and further off topic, but how does the CZJ 8.5cm f/2 compare to the Nikon 8.5cm f/2? Was the Nikon an improved copy?
Edited on Nov 29, 2016 at 10:00 PM · View previous versions
http://www.marcocavina.com/articoli_fotografici/zeiss_contarex_mtf/00_pag.htm
|
||
 |
||
|
Mathieu18 wrote:
Getting further and further off topic, but how does the CZJ 8.5cm f/2 compare to the Nikon 8.5cm f/2? Was the Nikon an improved copy?
Edited on Nov 29, 2016 at 10:00 PM · View previous versions
Nov 29, 2016 at 09:46 PM
p.25 #10C-sonnar!
I used Voigtlanders on the nex and most of the older versions including 1.1 have purple fringing. Nokton 50 1.1 is softer then CV 50mm 1.5 and bokeh wasn't great, might be better on full frame.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I've never tried the Nokton 50/1.5 but heard it's a great lens. How about the Nokton 50/1.1 ??
After ZM experience, I went to Sonetar 1.1 also. These wide open when optimized for the landscapes, very soft and glowy look:
It is better when it is optimized for 1m, then it shifts the focus...
Fred Miranda wrote:
I've never tried the Nokton 50/1.5 but heard it's a great lens. How about the Nokton 50/1.1 ??
After ZM experience, I went to Sonetar 1.1 also. These wide open when optimized for the landscapes, very soft and glowy look:
|
||
 |
||
|
It is better when it is optimized for 1m, then it shifts the focus...
Nov 29, 2016 at 09:58 PM
|
p.25 #11C-sonnar!
I am starting to learn how to use this ZM 50mm Sonnar C 1.5 effectively. Lens size and weight are perfect for the Leica T. Build quality is superb in my estimation. Natasha the Kitty was nice enough to pose for me the other day.
Dec 09, 2016 at 07:55 AM
p.25 #13C-sonnar!
I love the ZM 50 1.5--it's going to get quite some use this Christmas. I wish Zeiss put out a 85mm version...a trio of the 35, 50 1.5 and 85 f2 would be superb.
Dec 09, 2016 at 04:46 PM
p.25 #14C-sonnar!
Hi,
Zeiss did put out a 85mm f2 Sonnar version, but it was discontinued after 600 production units and cost over $3,000 on the used market now.
I actually am fortunate to own a copy, but with that said, when I tested it against the Zeiss 85mm Batis, the bokeh between the two is very similar, but the Batis is much sharper.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I love the ZM 50 1.5--it's going to get quite some use this Christmas. I wish Zeiss put out a 85mm version...a trio of the 35, 50 1.5 and 85 f2 would be superb.
Zeiss did put out a 85mm f2 Sonnar version, but it was discontinued after 600 production units and cost over $3,000 on the used market now.
I actually am fortunate to own a copy, but with that said, when I tested it against the Zeiss 85mm Batis, the bokeh between the two is very similar, but the Batis is much sharper.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I love the ZM 50 1.5--it's going to get quite some use this Christmas. I wish Zeiss put out a 85mm version...a trio of the 35, 50 1.5 and 85 f2 would be superb.
Dec 12, 2016 at 03:32 AM
p.25 #15C-sonnar!
A7SII, Voigtlander Close Focus VM/E adapter, ZM C Sonnar 1.5 50mm
Dec 14, 2016 at 01:39 PM
p.25 #17C-sonnar!
candreyo wrote:
Hi,
Zeiss did put out a 85mm f2 Sonnar version, but it was discontinued after 600 production units and cost over $3,000 on the used market now.
I actually am fortunate to own a copy, but with that said, when I tested it against the Zeiss 85mm Batis, the bokeh between the two is very similar, but the Batis is much sharper.
Yeah, I kicked the tires on that pretty hard, but it seems like it's quite expensive, I didn't think the images I saw merited that price, and it's not esp. light at 400+g, plus there are so many mechanical issues. I would like something like the contarex 85 f2 I use to own, just with modern coatings. The 85 ZM seems to have a flatter more modern and corrected look--but please post some examples! I would love to see more.
Edited on Sep 25, 2020 at 12:12 AM · View previous versions
Hi,
Zeiss did put out a 85mm f2 Sonnar version, but it was discontinued after 600 production units and cost over $3,000 on the used market now.
I actually am fortunate to own a copy, but with that said, when I tested it against the Zeiss 85mm Batis, the bokeh between the two is very similar, but the Batis is much sharper.
nehemiahphoto wrote
I love the ZM 50 1.5--it's going to get quite some use this Christmas. I wish Zeiss put out a 85mm version...a trio of the 35, 50 1.5 and 85 f2 would be superb.Yeah, I kicked the tires on that pretty hard, but it seems like it's quite expensive, I didn't think the images I saw merited that price, and it's not esp. light at 400+g, plus there are so many mechanical issues. I would like something like the contarex 85 f2 I use to own, just with modern coatings. The 85 ZM seems to have a flatter more modern and corrected look--but please post some examples! I would love to see more.
Edited on Sep 25, 2020 at 12:12 AM · View previous versions
Dec 14, 2016 at 04:14 PM
p.25 #18C-sonnar!
candreyo wrote:
Hi,
Zeiss did put out a 85mm f2 Sonnar version, but it was discontinued after 600 production units and cost over $3,000 on the used market now.
I actually am fortunate to own a copy, but with that said, when I tested it against the Zeiss 85mm Batis, the bokeh between the two is very similar, but the Batis is much sharper.
The ZM 85/2 was a great lens as you wrote, but was not very sharp wide open and not as good as the Leica 90/2 AA controlling aberrations, especially LoCA.
I do wish my ZM 85/4 was a f/2.8 though.
Hi,
Zeiss did put out a 85mm f2 Sonnar version, but it was discontinued after 600 production units and cost over $3,000 on the used market now.
I actually am fortunate to own a copy, but with that said, when I tested it against the Zeiss 85mm Batis, the bokeh between the two is very similar, but the Batis is much sharper.
nehemiahphoto wrote
I love the ZM 50 1.5--it's going to get quite some use this Christmas. I wish Zeiss put out a 85mm version...a trio of the 35, 50 1.5 and 85 f2 would be superb.The ZM 85/2 was a great lens as you wrote, but was not very sharp wide open and not as good as the Leica 90/2 AA controlling aberrations, especially LoCA.
I do wish my ZM 85/4 was a f/2.8 though.
Dec 14, 2016 at 04:29 PM
p.25 #19C-sonnar!
Fred Miranda wrote:
Zeiss did put out a 85mm f2 Sonnar version, but it was discontinued after 600 production units and cost over $3,000 on the used market now.
I actually am fortunate to own a copy, but with that said, when I tested it against the Zeiss 85mm Batis, the bokeh between the two is very similar, but the Batis is much sharper.
The ZM 85/2 was a great lens as you wrote, but was not very sharp wide open and not as good as the Leica 90/2 AA controlling aberrations, especially LoCA.
I do wish my ZM 85/4 was a f/2.8 though.
For that there is the C/Y 85/2.8, which is not far behind the ZM 85/4 both in IQ and compactness.
Rob
candreyo wrote
Hi,Zeiss did put out a 85mm f2 Sonnar version, but it was discontinued after 600 production units and cost over $3,000 on the used market now.
I actually am fortunate to own a copy, but with that said, when I tested it against the Zeiss 85mm Batis, the bokeh between the two is very similar, but the Batis is much sharper.
nehemiahphoto wrote
I love the ZM 50 1.5--it's going to get quite some use this Christmas. I wish Zeiss put out a 85mm version...a trio of the 35, 50 1.5 and 85 f2 would be superb.I do wish my ZM 85/4 was a f/2.8 though.
For that there is the C/Y 85/2.8, which is not far behind the ZM 85/4 both in IQ and compactness.
Rob
Dec 16, 2016 at 06:36 AM
p.25 #20C-sonnar!
robgo2 wrote:
Zeiss did put out a 85mm f2 Sonnar version, but it was discontinued after 600 production units and cost over $3,000 on the used market now.
I actually am fortunate to own a copy, but with that said, when I tested it against the Zeiss 85mm Batis, the bokeh between the two is very similar, but the Batis is much sharper.
The ZM 85/2 was a great lens as you wrote, but was not very sharp wide open and not as good as the Leica 90/2 AA controlling aberrations, especially LoCA.
I do wish my ZM 85/4 was a f/2.8 though.For that there is the C/Y 85/2.8, which is not far behind the ZM 85/4 both in IQ and compactness.
Rob
It could be a good option Rob. Have you tried it at infinity distances?
I trust Zeiss MTF graphs and according to it, the ZM 85/4 is superior towards the edges. The C/Y 85/2.8 does very well in the center. They both have 5 elements but the ZM has a 10-blade aperture.
See the MTF wide open and 2 stops down for each lens:
ZM 85/4
CY 85/2.8
Fred Miranda wrote
candreyo wrote
Hi,Zeiss did put out a 85mm f2 Sonnar version, but it was discontinued after 600 production units and cost over $3,000 on the used market now.
I actually am fortunate to own a copy, but with that said, when I tested it against the Zeiss 85mm Batis, the bokeh between the two is very similar, but the Batis is much sharper.
nehemiahphoto wrote
I love the ZM 50 1.5--it's going to get quite some use this Christmas. I wish Zeiss put out a 85mm version...a trio of the 35, 50 1.5 and 85 f2 would be superb.I do wish my ZM 85/4 was a f/2.8 though.
Rob
It could be a good option Rob. Have you tried it at infinity distances?
I trust Zeiss MTF graphs and according to it, the ZM 85/4 is superior towards the edges. The C/Y 85/2.8 does very well in the center. They both have 5 elements but the ZM has a 10-blade aperture.
See the MTF wide open and 2 stops down for each lens:
ZM 85/4
CY 85/2.8
Dec 16, 2016 at 09:44 AM