Erwin's writing is confusing (to me) at best. He's mixing so many different lenses into those paragraphs that I have a hard time following which comments belong to which lens. Anyway, what you quoted echoes my experience - "stopped down the performance increased substantially". In my limited experience with the Contax 50N and Leica 50R (E60), wide open both lenses have their good and bad moments. At mid apertures like F2.8, it's a toss-up. At F5.6 and thereabouts, I think the Leica has the edge in resolution. Does it matter? For pictures like the portrait Andi posted, no. For the die-hard landscape shooter who wants every last possible detail, then the Leica may be worth the money. Heck, at F5.6 the Canon 50mm F1.4 may even be a decent competitor. Not my favorite lens, but it's only $350'ish US.
Where I'm mostly interested in these lenses is at F1.4 to F2.8, and more so at F1.4. The Leica 50mm F1.4 Summilux-M ASPH is exceptional at F1.4. The M has a floating element, so its going to have an edge, especially in the 1 meter areas. If Zeiss had incorporated a FLE in the new Zeiss 50mm f1.4 ZE, I think they would have had a real winner on their hands. Instead the FLE went to makro-planar, but that's F2 and rather bulky due to macro capabilities. And for landscape work the 50/2 ZE is not the sharpest lens around. Plus, a F2 lens isn't F1.4. At this point I'm done with the ZE's in the 50mm focal length.
I'll probably end up keeping both the 50N and 50R Lux, but ironically, that doesn't save any money compared to the 50mm Lux-M ASPH. The M lenses do an amazing job in gathering light. They seem to have better transmission properties. Finding a SLR lens that can replace the 50 Lux-M ASPH is a very difficult task... The Contax 50N will probably end up being the practical choice because "nailing focus" with a manual lens is getting harder and harder (M9 included). My eyes are aging, so auto-focus is becoming a necessary crutch. Thank heavens for live view. Two, three years ago I thought live view was a stupid feature, I've totally changed my opinion on that one!
I disagree with your statement that "And for landscape work the 50/2 ZE is not the sharpest lens around."
which makes it sound like a bad lens for landscape work. I have both the Contax N 50 and the ZE 50/2 MP and find the 50 MP much better than the N 50 for landscapes where you are stopped down and want maximum sharpness front to back in the scene and across the frame. The N 50 sharpness drops off faster from pt. of focus towards the background and thus is better for landscapes or portraits where you want to have more separation between the foreground subject and the background, even when stopped down. I have never seen a stopped down landscape comparison between any Leica 50 "cron or "lux which shows one to be superior. I have heard some Leica-philes claim the Leica 60 Macro blows away the competition but have never seen the comparison shots to show/prove this.
BTW, the C/Y 35/1.4 has the FLE and the aspherical element, a combination which makes it so great for wide-open close portrait shooting. I wish the ZE 50/1.4 and 85/1.4 had also been designed the same way. Instead I had to go for the N 85/1.4 which was designed for portrait shooting with great performance up close wide open and nice smooth bokeh.
I don't know Wayne, I'm not feeling the love for the 50/2 ZE anymore. The 50/2 ZE is awesome for near focus macro work and the bokeh it produces is wonderful. But for the landscape stuff, my 50N and Leica 50 Lux R out perform the ZE (F5.6 and F8 apertures). I have not compared extreme corners, and certainly not at 100%. So long as the corners don't look smeared and there is no double-image wonkyness, I'm pretty easy going on corners. I certainly don't mean to imply the 50/2 is a "bad" lens, but I'm not interested in owning one again.
Andi and I are probably on the same page with the 50N when it comes to ease of use. Auto-focus is a very helpful feature for my needs. Repeated testing has proven I suck at [manually] focusing these things at F1.4! The Contax 50N is focusing very accurately on the 1Ds3, so I'm trusting it more and more. Whatever the 50N may be lacking in optical performance, it's making up for in utility.
I briefly tried the 35 F1.4 Distagon and 35mm really isn't my taste. I don't like 35mm much on the M9 either. The 35 Distagon has a nice draw to it, but it wasn't a lens I would use alot. In this focal length, the 28mm ZE is more my taste, but that is a very low use focal length for me. When it comes to 24mm, 28mm and 35mm, I'm happy with the 24-105L. It doesn't have the resolving power of the primes, but it does okay.
John,
When you say outperform I assume you are talking about resolution and not drawing style issues.
Have you done head to head comparison shots of your N 50 vs. the 50 MP? I have so, that is why I disagree. I understand your preference for the AF and I know not everyone cares about the better resolution difference of the 50MP and some like the drawing style of the 50/1.4 better for their style of shooting but when you say the N 50 outresolves the 50MP then I just haven't found that to be true with my copies of the lens. Maybe you have a comparison shot which shows this? I would also like to see any comparison shots between the Leica 50 'lux and the 50MP or N 50.
Wow, I haven't used my 24-105L in years. It is such a slow lens at f4 and Zeiss drawing style is so much better than Canon for most things.
Hi everybody, I am from Saigon (Ho Chi Minh City ) here are some Pics from my N28-80 on 5DMII, I do conversion this lens by myself with the help of a CNC-mechanic.It works like other AF canon lenses and Macro function works too (autofocus and aperture are controled by canon body ).The last pic shows the original N mount is modified to EOS mount.
Hi everybody, I am from Saigon (Ho Chi Minh City ) here are some Pics from my N28-80 on 5DMII, I do conversion this lens by myself with the help of a CNC-mechanic.It works like other AF canon lenses and Macro function works too (autofocus and aperture are controled by canon body ).The last pic shows the original N mount is modified to EOS mount.
Manwearpants wrote:
That spells competition for Bo-Ming.
It sounds like a praise for me !. I know that there are somebody can do this conversion (from N to others) but as they did never disclose their "greybox", so we cann't understand what trully happened.Among them conurus is the most open-minded, he shows that he created a totally new PCB, that plays a role as a mediator-translator standing between 2 languages, that's all I knew about his works.My approach is different-only 1 language is used, what I do is interfere to the lens PCB, make it understant the body language, and result in faster information send-in and out.My approach also allows me do this with any camera beside canon, I will try with nikon if I have chance.
contas wrote:
Manwearpants wrote:
That spells competition for Bo-Ming.
It sounds like a praise for me !. I know that there are somebody can do this conversion (from N to others) but as they did never disclose their "greybox", so we cann't understand what trully happened.Among them conurus is the most open-minded, he shows that he created a totally new PCB, that plays a role as a mediator-translator standing between 2 languages, that's all I knew about his works.My approach is different-only 1 language is used, what I do is interfere to the lens PCB, make it understant the body language, and result in faster information send-in and out.My approach also allows me do this with any camera beside canon, I will try with nikon if I have chance....Show more →
Please try with Sony, Pentax or one of the 4/3. I will like to use N70-200, N70-300, N100 with IS.
On the other note, your change is irreversible as you modify the lens mount and change the program directly. Since you have access to CNC, why don't you fabricate the entire mount.
So is your intention to go commercial or just doing it for your own pleasure?
@manwearpants:
I hope some day will make it for other brand name cameras but not sony alpha - there are already zeiss AF lenses for sony- so do it may become meaningless.
If do new mount , it's harder works for the mechanic (you have to do a pressing metal mold and cast-or some thing like that ).I decided at first, re-use this mount and next time I will use all the measurements for totally new hybrid N-EOS mount.Commerce is good for me and all.
contas wrote:
@manwearpants:
I hope some day will make it for other brand name cameras but not sony alpha - there are already zeiss AF lenses for sony- so do it may become meaningless.
If do new mount , it's harder works for the mechanic (you have to do a pressing metal mold and cast-or some thing like that ).I decided at first, re-use this mount and next time I will use all the measurements for totally new hybrid N-EOS mount.Commerce is good for me and all.
I understand the flange distance may be a problem. If you do find a way to workaround a camera with built-in IS, I'll be gunning for the telezooms. Keep us all informed.
@manwearpants: No N-lens has IS-and there is no room to build it in N lens-sorry.You can use canon IS lens for that purpose.Here already to shoot N lens on 5DMII, (N 24-85 is just arrived).
contas wrote:
@manwearpants: No N-lens has IS-and there is no room to build it in N lens-sorry.You can use canon IS lens for that purpose.Here already to shoot N lens on 5DMII, (N 24-85 is just arrived).
The Sony camera's have IS in the body (sensor shift). Of course he was not suggesting to build IS in the lens (which would be impossible).
AhamB wrote:
The Sony camera's have IS in the body (sensor shift). Of course he was not suggesting to build IS in the lens (which would be impossible).
Yes, I am refering to making use of the IS in the camera body. I already have N17-35, N24-85, N50. What is stopping me further is the lack of IS for the telezooms. So if you have a solution in the near future, I will rid of my Canons and stock up on the Ns (before the price goes up further)
