SLR C Sonnar 50/1.5 equivalent

@Phil F NM
I have a Nikkor 45/2.8 P, which , I suspect is in reality the same lens as the Zeiss Tessar, and moreover I have also bought the Contax Sonnar 85/2.8.
@wintoid
This shot is quite remarkable - do you remember at which aperture have you done it?
 
If you were using the EF mount -5DII for example- then it would be easy.. 50/1.2L or 85/1.2L (especially!) have the smoothest bokeh known. (Or, a Nex-5N with the FD versions of these lenses, not so expensive..:) )
 
nikkor 50/1.8, bw400cn:

U35015I1301760637.SEQ.0.jpg
 
Could anyone please post some c-sonnar shots which dont look just like any other fast 50mm? I seriously doubt anyone could blind pick the sonnar from random samples.

Aperture, focus, distance, lighting, type of background ... all that matters far more than brand or formula. No?
 
This has been shot at F8.0, yet there is some special roundness and luminoaity to this picture:

07111705 by mfogiel, on Flickr

F 3.4

07111504 by mfogiel, on Flickr

f4.0 with flash

R.V. by mfogiel, on Flickr

same:

A.& M. by mfogiel, on Flickr

wide open:

ASPETTANDO LA METRO' by mfogiel, on Flickr

F 5,6

MILANO CHE LAVORA by mfogiel, on Flickr

F 4.0

DOG FOR SALE, SARLAT by mfogiel, on Flickr

wide open:

ON MY RAINY WAY TO WORK by mfogiel, on Flickr

f 4.0

M.S. by mfogiel, on Flickr

f 2.8

20094408 by mfogiel, on Flickr

wide open

07110512 by mfogiel, on Flickr

wide open

07120711 by mfogiel, on Flickr
 
Some more:
F 2.8

2008100504 by mfogiel, on Flickr

F 4.0

20092008 by mfogiel, on Flickr

F 2.8

20092102 by mfogiel, on Flickr

F 2.8

F2,8 by mfogiel, on Flickr

F 5.6

20092331 by mfogiel, on Flickr

wide open

"FRIEND'S HOUSE#1" by mfogiel, on Flickr

F 5.6

2008020307 by mfogiel, on Flickr

wide open

07120608 by mfogiel, on Flickr
F 4.0

M.K. by mfogiel, on Flickr

wide open

20092935 by mfogiel, on Flickr

F 3.4

2008080312 by mfogiel, on Flickr

F 2.8

2008080401 by mfogiel, on Flickr

F 2.8

20090322 by mfogiel, on Flickr

F 8.0

FALLING by mfogiel, on Flickr

wide open

POWAZKI #18 by mfogiel, on Flickr

There is a turning point around F 5.6, and by f 8.0 this lens becomes very sharp, but never in a manner comparable to a Makro Planar for example. At wider apertures, the unsharpness gradient becomes absurd - at f 2.8 from 1.5 meters you get a background blur like shooting at f 1.4. Then, there is this mix of soft and contrasty, as if you were using a softar, but without the highlight bleeding. This lens is simply unique for portraiture.
 
sooo much 3D here. zeiss are known for it, but that lens has plenty of it.
and nice examples of what the sonnar is capable of :)
 
Well, I can say that the lens I suggested (sonnar Takumar f2/58mm in m42 mount) will not give you results like the photos below. The C sonar does for my eye render more like a DG than an old classic Sonnar. Look for a Zeiss 50 f1.4 for this sort of crisp 3D rendering and contrast.

These are Beautiful!
2832801348_b54fcbd207_b.jpg


2080930169_a8d022bd1f_b.jpg
 
Lovely pictures! I have this lens and it is the one lens that keeps me on the M system.

How do you remember the exact aperture on all of this stuff? I can only make out wide open or stopped down. Not f/4 vs. f/3.4.

mfogiel said:
Some more:
There is a turning point around F 5.6, and by f 8.0 this lens becomes very sharp, but never in a manner comparable to a Makro Planar for example. At wider apertures, the unsharpness gradient becomes absurd - at f 2.8 from 1.5 meters you get a background blur like shooting at f 1.4. Then, there is this mix of soft and contrasty, as if you were using a softar, but without the highlight bleeding. This lens is simply unique for portraiture.
Click to expand...
 
mfogiel said:
@wintoid
This shot is quite remarkable - do you remember at which aperture have you done it?
Click to expand...

I don't seem to have a record of the aperture, unfortunately. I almost exclusively keep this lens at f/2 but it doesn't really look like f/2 to me.

TMY2 did a good job here though, almost looks like digital right, but with better dynamic range.
 
f16sunshine said:
There is the Sonnar Takumar f2/58mm. It's an M42 lens and quite tiny.
I have one I bought for about $200 on an old Pentax which is quite a bit for an old Reflex "normal". It definitely has that sonnar "look".
It is the only reflex Sonnar "Normal" lens. Rare but not impossible to find.
I don't have any sample photos online. Mine has a stiff Focus and needs cleaning. Here is a flickriver.

http://www.flickriver.com/search/sonnar+takumar+58mm/
Click to expand...

Some months ago I saw that so-called "Sonnar Takumar" (+ an unremarkable, common camera body) go for about USD 550 on shopgoodwill.com. I think the days of getting it for USD 200 are past, unless you unbelievably luckily stumble upon one being sold by someone who's got no clue at all what it is.
--Dave
 
It looks, like I have resolved the issue in an unexpected way: in a fit of GAS, I have bought the whole Hasselblad F system, in order to use it mainly with the Planar 110/2.
Will post some images in a few weeks, once everything arrives and I will have the time to test drive this...
I'd hope, to be able to do something comparable to this:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/magda_andrzejewska/sets/72157627416191511/show/
although I am sure, I won't have such beautiful models...
 
I don't think there is a lens like the Sonnar 50/1.5 for SLRs. But if you are looking for a lens that has strong characteristics and is really good for portraiture you should definitely try a Helios 44, they are dirt cheap and awesome!

that said .. I prefer my ZM c-sonnar over my Helios 44m (and my M2 over my pentacon)
 
The closest lens I can think of for an SLR to what you're talking about is the Rokkor 58mm f/1.4. (I have no knowledge of the religiously worshipped f/1.2 version...). Another lens that, as you stop down, sharpens considerably from a dreamy wide aperture look is the Ai-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.2. I love that lens. Of course now you have a Hasselblad so fugget about it.
 
I've had a few 203FEs. Great camera, but i never fell in love with the 110/2. It's sort of a semi-legendary lens, but i didn't like my results with it. A little soft and the bokeh wasn't as consistently good as i would have expected. I do have a framed print by Hiroshi Watanabe though, shot with the 110. He's a great photographer who mostly shoots with the 110.

I think you might really be happy with the 150/2.8 FE Sonnar, though. THAT is a nice piece of work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top