p.3 #1 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
philber: what do you use your CZ with?
Camera: Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Exposure: 0.003 sec (1/320)
Aperture: f/4
Focal Length: 50 mm
ISO Speed: 100
Exposure Bias: 0 EV
Flash: Flash did not fire
p.3 #3 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
philber: when you used it on those bodies do you notice a power fluctuation or electrical noise when the 50's attached?
Camera: Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Exposure: 0.004 sec (1/250)
Aperture: f/5
Focal Length: 50 mm
ISO Speed: 1600
Exposure Bias: 0 EV
Flash: Flash did not fire
p.3 #5 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
It may mean I have a bad copy or shouldn't be holding the lens like a 70-200.
Camera: Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Exposure: 0.002 sec (1/500)
Aperture: f/1.4
Focal Length: 50 mm
ISO Speed: 100
Exposure Bias: 0 EV
Flash: Flash did not fire
p.3 #6 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Nice epidendrum orchid Paolo but at f/1.4 plane of focus is very thin and very difficult to nail critical focus. Bokeh seems okay but I'm no authority on the
subject while the red seems more orangey to me (on my screen) and seems
nice enough.
Dec 20, 2008 at 08:50 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #7 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Breitling65 wrote: philber wrote:
Maybe, but without samples I believe more to tests made by reputable sites and they are not as good.
Well, both the Zeiss lenses test very well. Although Zeiss has made significant changes to some of the lenses they have brought out as Z (i.e. ZF, ZK, ZM, ZE) lenses, these two lenses are very similar to the Contax/ Yashica (CY) mount Zeiss lenses. In the old photodo tests the CY 50mm f/1.4 got a 4.5 and the CY 85mm f/1.4 got a 4.6. If you know much about these tests there are only a handful of lenses that were ever tested with higher scores than these. For comparison the Canon 50mm f/1.4 got a 4.4 and the 85mm f/1.8 got a 4.1 (still very good scores) and the 85L only tied the Zeiss with a 4.6. So the old photodo scores do not suggest the Zeiss lenses are lagging behind. Similarly if you look at the ZF lenses (which optically are identical to the ZE lenses) as tested on photozone both the 50mm f/1.4 and the 85mm f1/4 are highly recommended--by the way so are the Canon 50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.8, and 85L. So really, IMO, the tests indicate that all these lenses are very good. The decision to get the Zeiss lenses should probably fall to whether you like the exceptional build quality and whether you like or dislike the manual focusing.
Personally, I also agree with those who are critical of the bokeh of the Zeiss lenses. I think it can be nervous or edgy. Some people like this, others don't, and other don't care. I also think that the performance at f/1.4 on both these lenses is less than stellar, but that is certainly true of the Canon 50mm f1.4 too and of course the Canon 85mm f/1.8 is terrible at f/1.4. The 85L delivers better wide open performance, but IMO the 50L does not. Both the 85L and 50L in my opinion deliver better bokeh. So, IMO what we have here is lenses that are slightly better than the Canon non-L's and a bit worse in at least some ways from than the Canon L's and priced in between these lenses as well. As I said above, however, I think a primary consideration in your decision to get them should come down how much you appreciate the build quality and how much you like/dislike the manual focus.
p.3 #8 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
philber wrote:
Here are a couple of shots with CZ ZEs + 40D. The BW shot is [email protected] and shows front and back bokeh. The colour shot is ZE 50mm
How did you shoot it?
p.3 #9 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
40D, Tv mode, ISO 400, 1/125th, f:14, handheld for the colour shot. I was looking for possible diffraction.
40D P mode, 800 ISO, 1/80th, f:1.4 handheld for the BW shot with CZ ZE 85mm
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #13 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
And if you read the last line of the review in which that comparison came from you will see this quote:
"It is at this point where I'm going to interrupt this review until I receive another copy of this lens. I'm optimistic that the next one will deliver far better image quality - Image quality that matches the build quality."
Obviously the reviewer thought there was something wrong with the particular lens he received, so that comparison is probably not the most relevant one. Every company makes a few lemon lenses (Canon surely does) and basing an opinion on a lens that is being sent back to the manufacturer because it is a lemon is probably not the way to go.
p.3 #14 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Steve Spencer wrote:
And if you read the last line of the review in which that comparison came from you will see this quote:
"It is at this point where I'm going to interrupt this review until I receive another copy of this lens. I'm optimistic that the next one will deliver far better image quality - Image quality that matches the build quality."
Obviously the reviewer thought there was something wrong with the particular lens he received, so that comparison is probably not the most relevant one. Every company makes a few lemon lenses (Canon surely does) and basing an opinion on a lens that is being sent back to the manufacturer because it is a lemon is probably not the way to go....Show more →
p.3 #15 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
I think it's horses for courses with lens choices for bokeh really. I find If I'm shooting subjects where I want a smooth, more gaussian background blur, I tend to use my Canon lenses. My Zeiss lenses all have great contrast and sharpness, but they do suffer from a much harsher, double edged bokeh. Whilst this can be used creatively in some circumstances, a lot of people do find it distracting and unpleasant to the eye.
I remember reading somewhere that this type of (Nisen?) bokeh is attributable to spherical aberration overcorrection. A lens with undercorrected spherical aberration is associated with a smooth background blur and a harsh foreground blur; the situation is reversed for a lens with overcorrected spherical aberration.
p.3 #16 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Johno wrote:
I remember reading somewhere that this type of (Nisen?) bokeh is attributable to spherical aberration overcorrection. A lens with undercorrected spherical aberration is associated with a smooth background blur and a harsh foreground blur; the situation is reversed for a lens with overcorrected spherical aberration.
p.3 #17 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Their main complaint about the Zeiss is that it didn't perform well at f/1.4
Sorry but that is why I need this lens, not sure why would I need to compare F4 or even F2.8.
Dec 20, 2008 at 11:14 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #18 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Sorry I had made a typo in my post (I corrected it now). Those charts are from f/1.4 and the Zeiss even though it doesn't perform very well does do a little better than the Canon. Almost all 50mm lenses suffer from a large loss of contrast and veiling flare at f/1.4 and there are very few that could be considered to perform well. To get clearly better than the Zeiss ZE 50mm you will have to consider the Leica R 50mm summilux (latest version with 60mm threads) or one of the 55mm Anniversary Zeiss f/1.2's or consider a lens that will need some converting like the Minolta MD Rokkor 50mm f/1.4 or the Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2 (but note this lens has some pretty funky bokeh). You might want to look at the new Sigma 50mm f/1.4 too. It seems that it may be a little sharper at f/1.4 than either the Zeiss or Canon and has nice bokeh (but a number of people have had autofocus problems as well). None of these lenses, IMO, however, will give you the wide aperture performance of some of the great 85mm lenses like the 85L. So if you really need significantly better f/1.4 performance you should think about going with a longer focal length.
p.3 #20 · Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 ZE on a Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Steve Spencer wrote:
None of these lenses, IMO, however, will give you the wide aperture performance of some of the great 85mm lenses like the 85L. So if you really need significantly better f/1.4 performance you should think about going with a longer focal length.
+1
I confirm that the CZ ZE 85mm is better wide open than its sibling 50mm. I also confirm that the 50mm is better than the Canon f:1.4 when both are wide open. Whether that "better" is good enough is up to individual needs and choices.
Remember also that almost no lenses, whether primes or zooms, are at their absolute best when wide open. So fast primes retain a significant advantage over zooms, which often are not that great at their rated f:2.8.
