i Love C-Sonnar 50/1.5

I bought this lens a couple weeks ago, my first modern Zeiss lens. These are straight JPEGs from a NEX-7.


DSCN0629PP.JPG




DSCN0531PP.JPG




DSCN0563PP.JPG




DSCN0594PP.JPG
 
If Zeiss introduced a new 50mm f/1.4 Planar, with little or no focus shift, would the C-Sonnar still be loved and appreciated, or would be be abandoned?
 
sleepyhead said:
If Zeiss introduced a new 50mm f/1.4 Planar, with little or no focus shift, would the C-Sonnar still be loved and appreciated, or would be be abandoned?
Click to expand...

That would be a different lens. Focus shift with the Sonnar is overemphasised. The character of the lens is what it is, and is different to other lenses. It will remain.
 
sleepyhead said:
If Zeiss introduced a new 50mm f/1.4 Planar, with little or no focus shift, would the C-Sonnar still be loved and appreciated, or would be be abandoned?
Click to expand...

It would still be appreciated for its unique signature. However, I'd rather have the lens with no shift.
 
jsrockit said:
Perhaps you use it at its optimized aperture only or stop down so depth of field covers it because it shifts massively on digital M cameras.
Click to expand...

Maybe I've been a photographer for 42 years and little things like its minor focus shift don't phase me anymore? I shoot it on an M9-P and the shift is inconsequential. I use it at all apertures, without a problem. I think the internet has amplified a tiny quirk into a "problem."
 
maggieo said:
Maybe I've been a photographer for 42 years and little things like its minor focus shift don't phase me anymore? I shoot it on an M9-P and the shift is inconsequential. I use it at all apertures, without a problem. I think the internet has amplified a tiny quirk into a "problem."
Click to expand...

Hey, I'm sorry. I wasn't trying to make it sound like you don't know what you are doing. However, the shift is real with this lens and isn't really blown out of proportion. I mean even Zeiss has confirmed it. I understand it not bothering you, but that doesn't mean it isn't there. Depending on one's style or what they expect from their equipment, shift could make or break a lens for someone, so I believe it is important to be honest about this. I've been photographing for 20 something years and it still bothers me and always will. I like exact focus most of the time though.
 
My first copy of the CV Nokton Classic 35 had terrible focus shift problems (bad enough to send it back for an exchange. thankfully the second copy, not so much), and the Sonnar doesn't even come close to that lens for focus shift problems. That said, I suspect my copy of the Sonnar is optimized for 1,5 and not 2,8- making any shift such a minor problem on my copy. I probably unconsciously compensate for it now.

We're all good here, just sharing that I've not noticed it with my lens.
 
maggieo said:
My first copy of the CV Nokton Classic 35 had terrible focus shift problems (bad enough to send it back for an exchange. thankfully the second copy, not so much), and the Sonnar doesn't even come close to that lens for focus shift problems. That said, I suspect my copy of the Sonnar is optimized for 1,5 and not 2,8- making any shift such a minor problem on my copy. I probably unconsciously compensate for it now.

We're all good here, just sharing that I've not noticed it with my lens.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I can understand that.
 
As alluded to, I believe there are sample variations, and there are certainly shooter variations. :) My C-Sonnar was originally set to be "on" at f/2.8 and that was ok with me, as I noticed focus shift from f/2 to f/1.5 and I used a couple of ways to compensate effectively.

Then I sent the lens to DAG for 6-bit coding, and as usual asked for a general check-over including focus point. He adjusted the focus but left it to me to figure out what had changed. In field tests it seemed the focus was now "on" at about f/2, very slightly off at f/1.5 and f/2.8, and close enough at smaller apertures for DoF to enclose the error. Some have suggested that this is what setting it to f/1.5 is like.

So now it seems "better" to me and I don't try to make any compensation. There's also my own "user error" in focusing. But then I seldom shoot wide open, and I have not made large prints for a while. So I may be fooling myself...
 
My experience is just the same as Doug's. I bought a used one recently and tested it, finding that the optimal close focus, on my particular M9 body, is f2.2 (the first third of a click after f2). I've been using it at f2 and f5.6, which I believe are the two optimal apertures.

I also have one of the 50 Sonnars in S-mount, all of which were supposed to have been calibrated for f1.5. Wide open at closest distance, it's perfect on Nikon RF bodies and only a cm or so off, using M9 with Amadeo adapter.

With both lenses I've avoided any focus problems simply by skipping over the 'focus-shift apertures.'

before I 'learned to worry' about Sonnar focus shift, I used a 1930s Sonnar and a 1950s Sonnar-type Nikkor without compensation for focus shift; and like Maggie, I just didn't notice whatever shifts might have occurred.

BTW, I really wouldn't want a 50 Planar. I have a 50mm Millennium Nikkor which is a Planar design, and it lacks the 'classic' look of the 30s, 50s, and modern Sonnar designs. The bokeh isn't as nice, and it's a bit more contrasty. (As is the 2007 Sonnar at f8.)
Kirk
 
Glad to know I'm not the only one who has the same experience with this lens. Maybe it's working with my 1974 Jupiter-8 (with no observable problems)for so long that made my experience so trouble-free.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top