Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
dsedov

50mm Planar ZM review. I love this lens

Recommended Posts

I have both and both are excellent - the biggest difference is color rendition, which is, of course, irrelevant if you only shoot with the Monochrom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for fixing the link. I can't seem to find how to edit the post after it has been published =(

 

Would there be any advantages if compared with APO lens? Or is it a moot discussion for a black and white camera? I'm assuming that if different wavelengths of light focus at different planes then it results in a blurry black and white image. Doesn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice impressions, Dennis. The Planar is my main lens on the MM. I've also owned Voigtlander and loved the 50 1.5. But the Planar is a perfect all-rounder 50.

 

And I prefer the Zeiss focus bump over the concave tab design. In fact, when I decided to add a 35, I chose the Biogon 2.8 to keep the same ergnonmics. Another marvel.  

 

I can't compare it to the Summicron, but the Planar is plenty good enough for me. 

 

Joh 

Edited by johnwolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am one of the weirdos to switch from the simply excellent planar (and 35mm Biogon) to Leica's Summicron equivalents. I had absolutely zero complaints about either one of those excellent lenses, and if I had to give up my Summicrons I would re-purchase them in a heartbeat. 

 

Fantastic crisp rendering, minimal distortion and a really nice level of contrast overall. 

 

For whatever reason, the Leica equivalents offer something different, not better or worse, just different. I'm also weird in that I actually do like focusing tabs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've seen few picture comparisons in various on-line reviews between Summicron and Planar. Honestly, I can't see any difference. They look just slightly different, and if someone where to ask which is which - I wouldn't be able to answer that question. In black and white photography (which is the only photography I do) the differences become even less relevant I guess. Add LR post-processing - and this becomes a moot discussion =) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love this lens so much that I actually stop to use my Summilux 50 A.

 

Can I ask what do you like more about the Planar than the Summilux 50 ASPH?

I am asking because I have compared the Zeiss Biogon ZM 35/2 with my Summilux 35 ASPH FLE, and I absolutely love how the Zeiss renders the pictures, whereas the Summilux looks kind of plain and transparent compared... Which makes me think that I would maybe see the same difference with a Planar 50/2 vs my Summilux 50 ASPH.

Edited by indergaard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I did switch from the Planar, but not from the usual path. I've used a V3 Summicron on film Ms from 1969 to 2009 and was happy with it. When I got an M9 and started pixel peeping, I wondered if a newer design would really be "better" - and the focus on my old v3 had stiffened as the grease had dried. Having read about the differences in Planar rendering, I found a nice used Planar, and could see the added contrast, different coloration to fringing, and very good sharpness wide open. I did find the focus damping too light for my tastes, and eventually bought a new Summicron V5 - my first new M lens since the '70s. The focus was somewhat tight and a bit rough, but the images wide open just seemed more to my taste. As I would switch back and forth between the three, I realized how good they all were. The new Summicron focus feel gradually worked "in" and became free, smooth, and perfectly damped. I like that better than the Planar.

I started shooting film a lot more, and the Planar now resides on my Zeiss ZM, where it is a good match. After I disassembled the v3 focus mount, cleaned and re-lubed, it is now back on film Ms. After another attack of curiosity, I usually have a 2.5 Summarit on the M9, as the images match the v5, and I like the size and handling.

All of the are great lenses, if I wasn't an old retired guy with too much time and curiosity, I could be happy with any one of them.

Edited by TomB_tx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I ask what do you like more about the Planar than the Summilux 50 ASPH?

I am asking because I have compared the Zeiss Biogon ZM 35/2 with my Summilux 35 ASPH FLE, and I absolutely love how the Zeiss renders the pictures, whereas the Summilux looks kind of plain and transparent compared... Which makes me think that I would maybe see the same difference with a Planar 50/2 vs my Summilux 50 ASPH.

 

I think it's down to a few factors, compare to me Summilux 50A, I found the zeiss renders a richer colour, not more saturated but pleasing in my taste, especially in Blue and green, while the Lux renders more neutral colour, and more transparent indeed. Also I actually prefer the weight of the planar, I hate heavy lens, and the look of the planar with Zeiss lens shader really look fantastic.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...