Rick in CO Posted March 9, 2014 Share #21 Â Posted March 9, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Pertaining to the Zeiss 'C' designated ZM lenses, what are their characteristics in general?I remember reading about the very first one (50mm/1.5) being soft but what are your feelings about them in your own experiences? Â I'm looking for these: image tonality image bokeh contrast color 3D feel strengths: what areas are they strong in? do they match well with the M9 and M240 sensors? Â Here are the lenses I have in mind regarding these questions: C Biogon T* 4,5/21 ZM C Biogon T* 2,8/35 ZM C Sonnar T* 1,5/50 ZM Erwin Puts reviewed some of these lenses a few years ago, he has deleted them from his site but allowed me to post a summation of his reviews on my website (Ricks Calssic Camera Page). The bottom line is that the 21mm C Biogon is not readily usable on digital (as is well-explained in the comments above), the 35 C Biogon is probably even better than the 35 Summicron, but you lose a full f-stop, and the 50 C Sonnar has its focus-shift tendencies. As to the Zeiss "look", Erwin Puts relates that since the Contarex series of lenses Zeiss has gone for a contrasty medium format style of expression in their 35mm lenses, similar to the Zeiss Hasselblad lenses and similar to the lenses Zeiss made for the Linhof cameras. Having used both those medium format systems with film and a selection of the ZM lenses on the M8 & M9, I agree with him. As to "bokeh", its largely a matter of taste. I see some online demonstrations of "good bokeh" which I think are ugly. You just have to test a lens to decide for yourself. I have not used the lens but apparently it is a strong point of the 50 C Sonnar. Hope that helps. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 Hi Rick in CO, Take a look here 'C' Zeiss ZM lenses. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lct Posted March 9, 2014 Share #22 Â Posted March 9, 2014 ...My December 2010 C-Sonnar has f/2.8 calibration. Purchasing or making date? I bought mine in 2014 (# 159339**) but i could not tell it's actual making date to be honest. Anyway you may wish to take a look on what Roger Hicks wrote here: Sonar first look Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted March 9, 2014 Share #23  Posted March 9, 2014 I've heard this on the forums but also counter claims saying that all current lenses are still calibrated at f/2.8. My December 2010 C-Sonnar has f/2.8 calibration.  You may be correct.  I tried one at the NEC Birmingham last week and it was OUT OF FOCUS at f 1.5 and 2  Didn't check 2.8 as I was doing comparison with the 50/2 planar and the lux 50/1.4 wide open ....... which were both spot on ..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthury Posted March 9, 2014 Author Share #24  Posted March 9, 2014 I've heard this on the forums but also counter claims saying that all current lenses are still calibrated at f/2.8. My December 2010 C-Sonnar has f/2.8 calibration.  I guess that can verified with Zeiss. Thanks for the info. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthury Posted March 9, 2014 Author Share #25  Posted March 9, 2014 Purchasing or making date? I bought mine in 2014 (# 159339**) but i could not tell it's actual making date to be honest. Anyway you may wish to take a look on what Roger Hicks wrote here: Sonar first look  Thanks for the Sonnar first look article. It's an interesting reading. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted March 9, 2014 Share #26 Â Posted March 9, 2014 I bought my C-Sonnar used and haven't checked its date of birth, but it is clearly calibrated for f/2.8. I guess this is just a matter of preference an what you can get used to. I am now accustomed to leaning forward an inch at f/1.5. At smaller than f/2.8 I hardly notice the shift, which is probably swallowed by the DoF. If mine had been calibrated for f/1.5 I would probably have adjusted for that as well. I agree it's a great people lens, though you have to watch for flare as well as focus softness/shift. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougg Posted March 9, 2014 Share #27 Â Posted March 9, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I bought my C-Sonnar used and haven't checked its date of birth, but it is clearly calibrated for f/2.8. I guess this is just a matter of preference an what you can get used to. I am now accustomed to leaning forward an inch at f/1.5. At smaller than f/2.8 I hardly notice the shift, which is probably swallowed by the DoF. If mine had been calibrated for f/1.5 I would probably have adjusted for that as well. I agree it's a great people lens, though you have to watch for flare as well as focus softness/shift. I agree with Paul... I bought my new C-Sonnar late 2006 from PopFlash, and it was spot-on at f/2.8. Shift at f/1.5 can be addressed by either leaning forward slightly at short range or twitching the focus ring leftward so the distance mark moves about half-way to the f/4 dof mark. Â In late 2009 I sent it off to DAG for coding as a Summilux 11891, code 100000. As best I could make out in casual testing, he adjusted it to correct focus at about f/2 as a compromise. Still a little bit of front-focus at f/1.5 and equally a bit of back-focus at f/2.8 and 4. In normal use I just don't see any focusing error to be blamed on the lens! Â Doug Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthury Posted March 10, 2014 Author Share #28 Â Posted March 10, 2014 What lens profile did you use when you mated your 50mm/1.5C with your m9 and the M240? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted March 10, 2014 Share #29 Â Posted March 10, 2014 What lens profile did you use when you mated your 50mm/1.5C with your m9 and the M240? None on both M8.2 and M240. Just hand coding the lens like a Summilux 50/1.4 pre-asph v2 (000101). Better getting a current version with a groove in the flange if you don't want to send the lens in for hard coding though. Beware that the lens will be calibrated for f/1.5 then if it is like my current sample. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
horosu Posted March 10, 2014 Share #30 Â Posted March 10, 2014 Just one example of the C-Sonnar +EVF on the M240. Wide open (sample optimized for 2.8). I find the focus area exact, yet not 'clinical', wide the fall-off is steep, and thus contributes to the 'pop' of the desired area. Â Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthury Posted March 10, 2014 Author Share #31  Posted March 10, 2014 Just one example of the C-Sonnar +EVF on the M240. Wide open (sample optimized for 2.8). I find the focus area exact, yet not 'clinical', wide the fall-off is steep, and thus contributes to the 'pop' of the desired area.  Thanks for the link. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted March 10, 2014 Share #32 Â Posted March 10, 2014 Just one example of the C-Sonnar +EVF on the M240. Wide open (sample optimized for 2.8). I find the focus area exact... Did you focus on the eyes or the lips? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
horosu Posted March 10, 2014 Share #33 Â Posted March 10, 2014 I focused using the EVF on the right eye. Â My lens is perfect at 2.8 and very good at f2, but at 1.5 I need to use the EVF for perfect focus. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthury Posted March 10, 2014 Author Share #34  Posted March 10, 2014 I focused using the EVF on the right eye. My lens is perfect at 2.8 and very good at f2, but at 1.5 I need to use the EVF for perfect focus.  Nice, thanks! It looks like her left shoulder is in (or very close to) the focused plane as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted March 10, 2014 Share #35 Â Posted March 10, 2014 Ref coding of the ZM Sonnar 50, I did the same as lct - called it a Summilux. Eventually I'll try hand coding it, just to get the EXIF set correctly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthury Posted March 18, 2014 Author Share #36 Â Posted March 18, 2014 Thanks, everyone, for all the contributions and help with sharing your experiences about these 'C' Zeiss lenses; especially, about the 50mm Sonnar. Â I have bought one and am pleasantly enjoying the images... it reminded a little of the old pre-ASPH Noct at f/1.4. Wow, the 50mm Sonnar is really small physically. The bokeh is impressive. Overall sharpness is not as bad as people said when I focused it using EVF2. Using the rangefinder, I need to turn a it little more clockwise. Â M240 + 50mm/1.5 Sonnar ZM, f/1.5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthury Posted March 19, 2014 Author Share #37 Â Posted March 19, 2014 Focusing is also fine on the M9 Â Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthury Posted March 24, 2014 Author Share #38 Â Posted March 24, 2014 Considering that this is an archaic lens, I think it's performance has more than satisfied me. Thanks to all who recommended it. Â This was shot at f/5.6, ISO 200, on a Leica table-top tripod, M240 body Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.