Right now, one of my favorite lens among my 50s (EF 1.4, EF 1.8 MkI, CZ 45/2.8). I have a Japanese MM.
In a nutshell:
- Resolution >= CZ 50 1.4 (read it, not tested it). Better than any EF.
- Probably more a f/1.5 than a f/1.7
- Less gloomy than EF f/1.4 at wide aperture (hate it on the EF)
- Easier to focus than CZ Tessar 45/2.8 (rubber ring larger & more comfortable)
- Compact & light
- A joy to focus (CZ Mfg was great)
- Great colors
- Quality/Price very high (got mine for $150)
Is this the one where you have to sand down the rear of the lens mount for 5d? I don't know exactly how it is or if I'm thinking of the same lens. I 'm deliberating on one of these for 5d and it will be used with any random c/y ebay adapter and a separate af chip or something.
I used it on my 5D as part of my landscape kit -- its an awesome lens and I had no trouble on my 5D. A few people seem to have seemingly random problems with the 5D and certain lenses, and its possible that you may be one. Adapter thickness is one possible cause, though, I've heard that variablitly in the 5D mirror's path may also be a cause. My worked flawlessly, but I had some trouble with my 2.8/28mm Distagon -- go figure.
Paul
I may have said this before. Here is a photo of my EOS converted CZ 50/1.7 without the focus grip replaced, yet. That following weekend, I loaned it to a friend and have yet to get it back. Look forward to using it some... There was some rear element cowling that had to be removed for 5D clearance on my camera. http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3505/3814049690_7c137ca058.jpg
I use this combination but the first adapter I tried (a cheapie bought on eBay) caused the mirror to hang. Using a Fotodiox adapter it works fine. If you have clearance issues try another adapter before modifying the lens.
It's still my favorite prime. Alex' images show what it can do very well.
I have no hesitation to recommend this lens. Compared to majority of 1.4 lenses one big benefit is that there seems to be no focus shift where in every almost all 50/1.4 seem to have. Little soft wide open but "perfect" starting from f/2.5 (aperture between f/2 and f/2.8). Excellent 3D rendering, micro-contrast and Zeiss-colors. At f/1.7-f/2 bokeh may have some strange ugliness, chatacter of bokeh gets better when closed down more (maybe uncorrected spherical aberrations at f/1.7 and f/2?).
Mine didn't need any shaving with HappyPage (see eBay) high quality adapters with 5DmkII. But it's commonly known that tolerances in 5D and 5DmkII mirror chamber vary a lot.
Just brilliant, but can be hard on "difficult" bokeh situations at apertures close to wide open. Ridiculously sharp, better than the 50F/1.4 Zeiss, Nikon, Canon in this regard. What really stands out is the mikrocontrast at medium apertures, from F/2.8-5.6. I usually use it at F/2.8... Some PF, some noticable LoCA - but definitely not worse than any of the other 50's... The only 50 I would rather have is actually the ZF50F/2 macro.
I added some grooves in the aperture ring so that I had hard "halfstops" from F/2 to F/5.6 also, this makes the full-manual use a bit easier i think. I didn't use mine on a 5D, but on Nikon crop and D700 cameras - but my findings should be valid for the 5D too.
I'm basically 100% set on one of these now. Wish to get one before new years eve to use it. I wanted something "affordable (expendable)" and durable that I know will last the fifteen-hour hustle & bustle in freezing temps at times square. Hopefully after surviving that it can be a nice unobtrusive thing to always keep in the pocket.
I looked online and realized that the most likely culprit of the 5D fit issue is the adapter quality. The happypagehk one will never get here on time, so I am left with 2 fotodiox ones, the ~28 dollar one and the ~90 dollar "pro" one. I'm assuming the one Steve Plavick and others use is the pro one? Maybe the 28 dollar one is just a re-branded cheapo with the fotodiox name on it? It would be very nice to know if anyone had success with the non -pro fotodiox.
400TMY wrote:
I looked online and realized that the most likely culprit of the 5D fit issue is the adapter quality. The happypagehk one will never get here on time, so I am left with 2 fotodiox ones, the ~28 dollar one and the ~90 dollar "pro" one. I'm assuming the one Steve Plavick and others use is the pro one? Maybe the 28 dollar one is just a re-branded cheapo with the fotodiox name on it? It would be very nice to know if anyone had success with the non -pro fotodiox.
Personally would stay as far away as possible from Fotodiox, maybe I have had bad luck with them but here is my personal experience of Fotodiox adapters:
- cheap: too thick did not focus to infinity without adjusting the lens (tested with 20D, 40D, 5D or 1DmkIII - which ALL must have tolerances off to same direction OR then Fotodiox just was too thick, make your own conclusion...)
- expensive: 1) mechanical quality wasn't so good, the glued metal ring wasn't so well glued and came off, 2) too thick as well as the cheaper one, 3) at this price if you don't get exif chip you are getting ripped off
If adapter is too thick or your mirror box tolerance is bad then you can adjust most of the lenses which do not have floating elements: http://www.vahonen.com/photo/equipment/lenses/adapters/
(this will of course cause infinity being off on camera/adapter combo which has correct tolerances)
I picked one up a few weeks ago. The seller threw in an unknown adapter with confirm chip.
The aperture lever got hung up once in awhile but I shaved the lever slightly and it works perfectly now. I do get infinity focusing and, although I recall the mirror getting hung up twice, it hasn't happened since. I've run the focus ring from inifinity to the other end firing the shutter a number of times since then, so I don't know what was going on with the mirror before. This is on a 5DII.
As far as the lens. I haven't used it very much, yet, but it is extremely sharp wide open and the colors and contrast are very good also. I got mine in lnib condition with adapter for $125CDN.
How exactly did you remove the rubber focussing ring - and how put it back on?? I can not see how this could be done...
Thank you - Hening.
This was intended especially as a question to Jim Buchanan, but all advice is welcome...
I believe Jim meant he replaced the rubber grip. The focusing ring is still there. If you try to pull the ribbed focusing rubber, you will notice that it can be easily removed.
The special thing about Jim's lens is that he replaced the CY with a native EF mount.
i've been meaning to look this up for a while but figured i'd just ask here now: what is the difference between the T* coated and T* MM coated contax lenses?
Thank you for your reply, MeanWearPants. I had understood it the way that it was the rubber that was removed, not the focussing ring itself, sorry for my misleading phrasing. - I don't have the 50 mm at hand, but an 85 Sonnar, and on that, I can not see how to remove the rubber - and get it back on. I'll see to it again when I have got the 50 which I have just ordered.
@ sebboh:
The MM has nothing to do with coating. It's the abbreviation for "Multi Mode", meaning that the lens can operate both in manual and automatic mode. - These lenses are still serviced by Zeiss Germany, whereas the non-MMs are not.
It's an awsome lens only let down by it's nasty Bokeh at 1.7 but this becomes very nice at 2.8. They used to be cheap but now seen to demand big money on E-bay. If you read my report of drastic fall of in sharpness after F8 on another thread ignore it - yes sharpness did fall off in my tests after F8 but not through diffraction - simply camera shake
