Zeiss 50mm F2 Planar - Viewfinder obstruction

[}{B]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm currently using a 50mm Elmar M with a maximum aperture of F2.8 and I'm considering buying a second faster 50mm lens. The Planar has caught my eye with its combination of quality and price but not having had the chance to try an example I don't know how much of the Leica M viewfinder is obscured by the hood.

 

I've carried out a search of forum threads but I've not seen this aspect covered and I wondered if any forum members had any experience with this lens. My M bodies are M2,M3 and M4P.

[horosu]

In my experience you don't need a hood with the Planar or most ZM lenses. They are extremely resistant to flare. I had the Planar and newer used the hood for that reason. There is no viewfinder obstruction when using the lens this way. Now I have a 50 Summilux ASPH that I also use without its hood (its the LHSA version, which has a separate clip-on hood).

 

Hope this helps, Horea

[}{B]

Thanks for your quick reply, your comments about not needing a hood and the lenses flare resistance is very useful.

 

I've always tended to use hoods and so I'd be equally pleased to here from someone who has used the Planar with a hood on a Leica body.

[MEB]

Howard,

 

I have the Zeiss 50/Planar. It is an outstanding lens with incredible sharpness. Viewfinder obstruction is almost non-existent. The lens hood for this lens is vented all the way around and when you see it in the viewfinder it appears as a thin black curved line that has no impact on your ability to assess the scene. The only real criticism of this lens is the terrible objective lens cover. It is difficult to handle and should have been redesigned long ago.

 

Mark Blumer (East Lansing, Michigan)

[}{B]

Thanks that was what I was hoping. It's clear from these two posts that with or without a hood it will do the job.

[wilfredo]

Howard,

 

I think you will be very pleased with it. I own a 50mm Summilux ASPH but had a chance to try the 50mm Planar and found it to be an exceptional value. If it were not for the LUX, this lens would be my 50mm choice.

[wlaidlaw]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It is always difficult taking pictures through a viewfinder without a table and a pair of the correct sort of tripods. Below is my best handheld effort. I think this somewhat exaggerates the amount of the VF blocked by the Planar hood, as you can easily see, I am not quite centered on the VF. Also a photo in the reverse direction, which shows that not a lot will be blocked.

 

I do like this lens but would comment that due to its extreme sharpness and very high contrast, it is a "things" rather than people lens. It is not very kind to skin textures and you may end up having to use the selective blur sponge tool quite a bit. For people pictures, I prefer my late 1950's Zeiss Opton Sonnar 50/f1.5, which is very good, as long as you can live with its slightly curved field of focus. If you are taking a group of people, you have to ask the ones at the edges to move slightly closer - not quite arc of a circle but close.

 

The hood is a definite requirement if you are using the lens with an M8 and UV/IR filter or you are highly likely to get pink circles. Although the Planar is pretty flare resistant, if you can put with the small amount of blocking the hood causes, it is still a good safeguard on the M9.

 

In comparison to the 50 Summicrons I have had, I would say it is at least as sharp and definitely higher contrast. The focus is smoother than any recent Summicron I have tried. On the earlier version like mine, there is a screw hole just where you want to code. I have tried filling it in but code still does not want to pick up. This is of course, less of an issue with the M9.

 

Wilson

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[}{B]

Thank you for taking the trouble to post those photosWilson, it does look as though there will be little obstruction. I've ordered one which should arrive tomorrow, not new but a mint demonstrator that comes with the Zeiss two year warranty.

 

I'm going to use it with my film bodies and rather than work at F5.6 or F8 as I would do with my Elmar I'm going to try isolating objects at F2 for a different look.

[wlaidlaw]

Thank you for taking the trouble to post those photosWilson, it does look as though there will be little obstruction. I've ordered one which should arrive tomorrow, not new but a mint demonstrator that comes with the Zeiss two year warranty.

 

I'm going to use it with my film bodies and rather than work at F5.6 or F8 as I would do with my Elmar I'm going to try isolating objects at F2 for a different look.

 

It is wonderful lens for technical B&W photos. It spends most of its time sitting on my M4, with Rollei 100 ASA in it. If you are using B&W film and getting it developed by others, like I do, if you can opt for lower contrast it is a good idea or you may find that the negatives are a little orthochromatic. In France I use Picto, who are excellent.

 

Wilson

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Howard,

 

Please rmember, the primary reason for using a correct rigid lens hood is impact protection when (more likely than IF) necessary. It is much easier to replace a lens hood than a lens element or focussing mount. Also a correct rigid hood may lessen or entirely absorb the force of an impact.

 

Regardless of whether obstruction of vision or flare are issues or not.

 

After saying the above, there are times when lens hoods are not do-able. Then, as when any of us goes outside for a newspaper, Leben wird ein roll von den Kosmische Wurfel..

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[}{B]

Thanks for all the advice. The lens arrived today and I'm impressed by the quality feel of it. There is no obstruction in the viewfinder without the lens hood but I've been unable to assess it with the hood as the supplier now tells me they are out of stock and it will be a week before I receive it. Disappointing, but as we are in the middle of a rainy spell of weather I can wait.

 

I appreciate the point about the hood defending the lens in case of an accident. The hood mount is a substantial bayonet fit and with the hood itself being metal it should offer greater protection than a plastic clip on hood. Fingers crossed I never need to test it.