adamdewilde wrote:
Hi Makten, thanks for chiming in... Sorry I thought I remembered you had the MPZE.
I do have the ZF 50/1.4 Planar, which of course also is interesting to compare with. In that case the difference might be even greater. While the Planar kind of sucks wide open and close to MFD, it\'s incredibly sharp and detailed from f/2.5 and a few meters away. I think \"detail\" is the key word here, because the Sonnar is more coarse and brutal than the delicate Planar. Bokeh is worlds apart between them and I like both.
I\'m seeing a lot of positive stuff from the 55 1.8, but then I\'ll happen upon a few bad pictures (not compositionally) but like really soft, or flat, lack of color, kinda dull.. So always good to hear from people who own the lens.
I\'d say that comes from people that should try to learn more about PP. You can make the best lenses in the world look like shit if you stick to \"straight out of camera\" (or even worse; \"straight out of raw converter\") and downsample in one single step without sharpening at all.
Just so make you see what I mean, this is what one of my images would have looked like with \"no PP\" or simply raw:
Looks good, no? And the same photo PP:d (and a bit oversharpened by Flickr at the same size)...
And the same photo PP:d (and a bit oversharpened by Flickr at the same size)...