I am torn between Classic Planar, Milvus, and to be honest, three other lenses by other manufacture. - Nikon 50 1.2 AIS, Nikon 58mm f1.4, Sigma Art 50.
I love the Planar rendering. ( I had CY 50 1.4, now broken ) It is light weight, and great color, and quite superb after F4 for landscape type of shots, but wide open use and closer range is more of a 'specialty' type of lens with aberrations and flares.
I am impressed by Milvus rendering and its clean images I have seen so far.
However, 50mm is sort of a focal length for me that gets multiple use from landscape / streetscape to snap shots of people. From that, I am also interested in the two AF lenses. Planar, I still love the rendering. ( Let's see how many times I say this ) But, I don't have anything brighter than 1.4, so Nikon 1.2 is also interesting.
So, that is where I am with 50. I liked MP rendering from few members here. ( one of them was Ants ) Bookeh in close up range looks very lovely, but seemingly deeper DOF at the same f-stop in comparison to Planar seems to lack the spacial rendition I enjoy with planar, and more clinical rendering are sometimes, not my cup of tea. The clinical tendency of modern Zeiss is also the reason why I have not bitten the bullet on Milvus. It looks nice, but if it is too clinical, then I may not quite like it. At the same time, I am very pleased with 135 Apo, so may be I am putting too much weight on 'clinical'.
OlafSiebert wrote:
I need your help. At the moment I have two lenses only 35/1.4 and 85/1.4 (plus the GR). This cover most of my needs but I'd like to have a 50mm as well. But which one?
- the 'classic'? it is half price of the Milvus.
- Milvus 1.4
- Milvus 2.0 macro
If it was you, which would you buy and why? Thanks.
-----------------------------------------
Alpha_Geist wrote:
The Milvus 2.0 Macro in ZF mount.
So I can adapt it to my A7II and use on my Nikon F2A & FM3A SLRs.
When I owned the classic 50 makro 2.0 in ZE mount, I took it with me everywhere adapted to my A7 Mk I with the E to EF metabones adapter. Why? Because I loved that little lens more than the classic 50mm 1.4 Planar ZE. I had a 9:1 ratio of 50 makro to 50 planar shots when looking back on my catalog. I'm a bit biased.
Ok...just broke down and bought the Milvus 50mm f/2.0 Macro ZF.2. It should be blessing my Nikon F2A, FM3A and Sony A7II next week Tuesday.
Ok...just broke down and bought the Milvus 50mm f/2.0 Macro ZF.2. It should be blessing my Nikon F2A, FM3A and Sony A7II next week Tuesday.
Would be interesting to hear (or see) if you think that the Milvus is an improvement over the ZE. Supposedly just newer lens coatings, but might be warmer or such.
carlitos wrote:
Would be interesting to hear (or see) if you think that the Milvus is an improvement over the ZE. Supposedly just newer lens coatings, but might be warmer or such.
From my understanding the only two lenses that have significantly changed (outside the new ergonomic build design) are the 50/1.4 and 85/1.4 lenses. Their optical formulas changed from their Classic counterparts. All Milvus lenses have had their T* coatings (maybe some more internal coatings?) improved. I don't forsee any major differences between the Classic and Milvus 50/2 Makro Planar lenses. The Milvus may have more flare resistance and possible a slight increase in contrast due the improved coatings... as well as likely weighing a bit more too.
Either way, the 50/2 Makro Planar ZE was my most used lens when I owned it. If I didn't switch systems so often, I would have kept it today! At least I will have the opportunity to shoot with it again in its new re-birthed glory!
Oh, and I'll be sharing images here in this thread when it arrives...in both digital and film.
akul wrote:
I am torn between Classic Planar, Milvus, and to be honest, three other lenses by other manufacture. - Nikon 50 1.2 AIS, Nikon 58mm f1.4, Sigma Art 50.
I love the Planar rendering. ( I had CY 50 1.4, now broken ) It is light weight, and great color, and quite superb after F4 for landscape type of shots, but wide open use and closer range is more of a 'specialty' type of lens with aberrations and flares.
I am impressed by Milvus rendering and its clean images I have seen so far.
However, 50mm is sort of a focal length for me that gets multiple use from landscape / streetscape to snap shots of people. From that, I am also interested in the two AF lenses. Planar, I still love the rendering. ( Let's see how many times I say this ) But, I don't have anything brighter than 1.4, so Nikon 1.2 is also interesting.
So, that is where I am with 50. I liked MP rendering from few members here. ( one of them was Ants ) Bookeh in close up range looks very lovely, but seemingly deeper DOF at the same f-stop in comparison to Planar seems to lack the spacial rendition I enjoy with planar, and more clinical rendering are sometimes, not my cup of tea. The clinical tendency of modern Zeiss is also the reason why I have not bitten the bullet on Milvus. It looks nice, but if it is too clinical, then I may not quite like it. At the same time, I am very pleased with 135 Apo, so may be I am putting too much weight on 'clinical'. ...Show more →
looks like we have the same problem ...
I love the 85/1.4 and therefore the classic 50/1.4 will be my choice ...
though the MP is not bad either, at the contrary ...
(I solved my AF problem by buying the cheapest Nikon: 50/1.8 D)
Well, I do have 50 1.4D which tends to flare quite easily. CY 50 did flare, but I feel it was not as easily. Old Nikon's coatings are probably less efficient than the old Contax using T* coating. So, my recent 'cheap' band-aid was to finally buy a hood for it. To be fair, 50 1.4D is pretty ok at f4 on, and super light weight, which I am sure 1.8D is the same that way.
OlafSiebert wrote:
I need your help. At the moment I have two lenses only 35/1.4 and 85/1.4 (plus the GR). This cover most of my needs but I'd like to have a 50mm as well. But which one?
- the 'classic'? it is half price of the Milvus.
- Milvus 1.4
- Milvus 2.0 macro
If it was you, which would you buy and why? Thanks.
Thanks for your comments. I found a dp2m, so my need for 50mm is covered. I know it is not the same though.
