50mm Leica Summilux ASPH and 50mm Zeiss C-Sonnar simple comparison

[Double Negative]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The C Sonnar gets a bad rep, whether it's focus shift or "optimization" (tuning) at f/1.5 or f/2.8. It's a classic lens design, so any "defects" are there "on purpose." It's what gives the "Sonnar look" all that character.

 

I don't think twice about or during shooting of the C Sonnar. I instinctively nudge the focus a bit close in and wide open. Hasn't let me down yet, and the results, IMO - are worth it. It's not everyone's cup of tea, but I love mine (it's tuned for f/2.8).

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[jaapv]

We've been out shopping this morning and I have taken a few real world shots at f1.5 on the M9 which some may find useful. I like the lens because of its small size and lighter weight than the 50mm Summilux but it does show considerable blue fringing around specular highlights although this might be sensor overload? Anyway I'll almost certainly convert a lot of of the images to B&W. The images can be seen here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/other/217239-zeiis-c-sonnar-test-shots-m9.html

 

Note to Mods: I would rather post them here in the customer forum, but I know you will get uptight over it.

 

Jeff

 

No problem - as long as they are illustrative of the topic - we get uptight about people using the technical forums as an exhibition space

[delander †]

I just coded my C-sonnar as a 50 Summilux ver2, just a couple of black marks with a marker pen in the right place, doesn't seem to rub off as the Sonnar has a circular recess in the mount surface.

 

I looked at the lens design of the Summilux and Sonnar, they are similar but not the same, is the Summilux a derivation of the Sonnar?

 

Jeff