Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Planar or Summicron?
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 8:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

memetph wrote:
About Rollei ,many people say that the Rollei Planar HfT 50 1.8 also sold under Voigtländer Ultron is the best Planar of those times , better than the C/Y. Difficult to judge such statements. This lens is not difficult to find.


I have just CLA'ed one of this lens this weekend. For what I can see in few test shots, is a very sharp lens with beautiful colors. Have to test more deeply for a better opinion,

Renato


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 8:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kds315* wrote:
Well, let me say something "undiplomatic": get any of the lenses, as it does not depend of them
- it does depend on YOU and your skills in using them. Both lenses are far better then any average
user will ever be able to get out of it. So get any one, don't look back and show what you are able to do
with it. 99% it is never the lens that fails... Wink


true, but as many of us we're here also beacuse we love to have and try differente lenses isn't it? Razz


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 8:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rick1779 wrote:
kds315* wrote:
Well, let me say something "undiplomatic": get any of the lenses, as it does not depend of them
- it does depend on YOU and your skills in using them. Both lenses are far better then any average
user will ever be able to get out of it. So get any one, don't look back and show what you are able to do
with it. 99% it is never the lens that fails... Wink


true, but as many of us we're here also beacuse we love to have and try differente lenses isn't it? Razz


Yes, and it is the wrong route. The skills are not in the lens, but in the photographer, despite what all the industry tries to tell us.
But it is so much easier to blame the lens, right?

You're from Italy, so allow this example: give a Lamborghini or Ferrari to any average driver and see what they will do with it.
Do you expect excellent driving results? Of course not, they rather wreck these wonderful cars. But with lenses everybody thinks
they can - funny, isn't it? Just the danger and damage is quite less Twisted Evil

But I should be quiet, this is not what people like to hear...


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 8:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree Klaus, learning to enjoy the finer things in life isn't done overnight. I like expensive single malt whisky, it's taken a long time to fully appreciate it. I'm still practising with wine and lenses. Laughing


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 8:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kds315* wrote:
Well, let me say something "undiplomatic": get any of the lenses, as it does not depend of them
- it does depend on YOU and your skills in using them. Both lenses are far better then any average
user will ever be able to get out of it. So get any one, don't look back and show what you are able to do
with it. 99% it is never the lens that fails... Wink

+1

I had both lens I think, and Summicron 1.4 too. I kept Planar , Planar did over perform well f2.0 Leica, 1.4 Leica cost was 1000 USD for same or may little better performance than Planar which is 300 USD max , my Planar was 30 USD due fungus ...


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 9:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I chose my lenses based on character more than anything else. My favourite 50's are the Sonnar 1.5/50, Sonnar 2/50, Biotar 2/58, Xenon 1.9/50, Topcor 1.8/58, Hexanon 1.4/57, Zenitar M2s 2/50, Pancolar 1.8/50, Primotar 3.5/50. Each of these has it's own unique character. If I had to pick a favourite it would be the Sonnar 2/50, it isn't the sharpest but it has the best character (to my eyes).


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 9:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Few years ago, when I faced the same choice, I've chosen the first version of the Summicron R. The way it renders the image was more on my taste than the other options. I liked it more then the newer (and sharper) versions of the Summicron R, too. As you have already had one, you know what I mean. I don't have the Planar but the Summicron does it's job so nicely well most of the time that I don't feel like needing another 50mm. I have (and play with) a lot of other 50 mm lenses but when I only need to take one with me it always is the Cron.
Probably the Planar owners feel the same about their lens.
Both lenses are very nice, none will disappoint you, chose the one that renders nicer to your eyes.

If I was in your situation, with a stolen Cron, I'd get the Planar for a change and sell it latter if I feel that the Cron rendering was better.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 10, 2014 10:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Don't confuse the two Lloydy,you'll break your teeth. Very Happy

Using a lens is about the enjoyment it gives,the wonder of how it will treat the image,the challenge of capturing the image,mastering the camera and the lens to acheive the look you want....by intention not mistake... Very Happy It takes time and effort, trial and error,I would try both lenses,if you have the funds for both go for it.


PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2014 3:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rick1779 wrote:
calvin83 wrote:
My friend go for a Zeiss Planar HFT 50/1.4 .


hft? the one in rollei mount? why?

Yes. The HFT version is pretty similar to the Contax version with less saturated color.

kds315* wrote:
Rick1779 wrote:
kds315* wrote:
Well, let me say something "undiplomatic": get any of the lenses, as it does not depend of them
- it does depend on YOU and your skills in using them. Both lenses are far better then any average
user will ever be able to get out of it. So get any one, don't look back and show what you are able to do
with it. 99% it is never the lens that fails... Wink


true, but as many of us we're here also beacuse we love to have and try differente lenses isn't it? Razz


Yes, and it is the wrong route. The skills are not in the lens, but in the photographer, despite what all the industry tries to tell us.
But it is so much easier to blame the lens, right?

You're from Italy, so allow this example: give a Lamborghini or Ferrari to any average driver and see what they will do with it.
Do you expect excellent driving results? Of course not, they rather wreck these wonderful cars. But with lenses everybody thinks
they can - funny, isn't it? Just the danger and damage is quite less Twisted Evil

But I should be quiet, this is not what people like to hear...

Picking the right equipment at the right time is an important skill for a photographer. Lenses are pretty like my companions IMHO. They have different personalities. The right companion can help me to get the result I want. If the result is not good, it is the sole responsibility of the photographer. If the result is good, the honor goes to both the photographer and the lens.


PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2014 6:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There have been some lenses I've owned that weren't capable of producing an acceptable image (Viv S1 2.3/135, Komuranon 3.5/200 spring to mind) but those had faults and the vast majority of lenses I've owned were quite capable.

Besides, technical qualities are secondary to aesthetic. This image is soft as hell, taken with an old Sigma 28-70 zoom that will only work wide open on a digital eos. You could spend a while trying to find anything sharp in this vista, but I think it still works as an aesthetic piece:



PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2014 9:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mo wrote:
Don't confuse the two Lloydy,you'll break your teeth. Very Happy

Using a lens is about the enjoyment it gives,the wonder of how it will treat the image,the challenge of capturing the image,mastering the camera and the lens to acheive the look you want....by intention not mistake... Very Happy It takes time and effort, trial and error,I would try both lenses,if you have the funds for both go for it.


+1 on the bold type
OH


PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2014 11:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

calvin83 wrote:
My friend go for a Zeiss Planar HFT 50/1.4 .


+1

I have both.. Rollei and Contax version. I can't tell you why, but I love the HFT much more. I guess Calvin is right about the more natural color (less saturated than Contax) and that's the reason.. I never thought about.


iangreenhalgh1 wrote:

Konica Hexanon 1.7/50 first version


as much as I like Hexanons, but this 1.7/50 was one of the most boring lens to me. I really tried my best to like this Hexanon and had at least 8 copies (different versions).. I never liked it.

Two cheap lenses which surprised and impressed me are Ricoh Auto Rikenon 1.4/55 and Cosinon 1.7/50.. my Planar may be the technical better lens, but those both lenses are sharp enough and can make a lot fun if used right.


PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2014 11:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oldhand wrote:
mo wrote:
Don't confuse the two Lloydy,you'll break your teeth. Very Happy

Using a lens is about the enjoyment it gives,the wonder of how it will treat the image,the challenge of capturing the image,mastering the camera and the lens to acheive the look you want....by intention not mistake... Very Happy It takes time and effort, trial and error,I would try both lenses,if you have the funds for both go for it.


+1 on the bold type
OH


Dear Mo,
Can I use your quote as my signature in pentax forums? Smile


PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2014 12:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oldhand wrote:
mo wrote:
Don't confuse the two Lloydy,you'll break your teeth. Very Happy

Using a lens is about the enjoyment it gives,the wonder of how it will treat the image,the challenge of capturing the image,mastering the camera and the lens to acheive the look you want....by intention not mistake... Very Happy It takes time and effort, trial and error,I would try both lenses,if you have the funds for both go for it.


+1 on the bold type
OH


+1 totally agree


PostPosted: Thu Sep 11, 2014 2:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dan_ wrote:
Few years ago, when I faced the same choice, I've chosen the first version of the Summicron R. The way it renders the image was more on my taste than the other options. I liked it more then the newer (and sharper) versions of the Summicron R, too. As you have already had one, you know what I mean. I don't have the Planar but the Summicron does it's job so nicely well most of the time that I don't feel like needing another 50mm. I have (and play with) a lot of other 50 mm lenses but when I only need to take one with me it always is the Cron.
Probably the Planar owners feel the same about their lens.
Both lenses are very nice, none will disappoint you, chose the one that renders nicer to your eyes.

If I was in your situation, with a stolen Cron, I'd get the Planar for a change and sell it latter if I feel that the Cron rendering was better.


maybe this is the better suggestion so far...

let see what I can find


PostPosted: Fri Sep 12, 2014 1:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sure Hoan,you can use the smiley as well.. Laughing Thanks for the compliment. Embarassed


PostPosted: Mon Sep 15, 2014 9:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Finally I've decided to stay with my Minolta 50.17, is pretty sharp (at least sharper than the contax zeiss 50/1.7 at wide apertures) and can take this pic:





and I've also ordered the Zenitar M2S, it was so cheap...

both was suggested by Ian Very Happy


PostPosted: Mon Sep 15, 2014 9:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rick1779 wrote:
Finally I've decided to stay with my Minolta 50.17, is pretty sharp (at least sharper than the contax zeiss 50/1.7 at wide apertures) and can take this pic:





and I've also ordered the Zenitar M2S, it was so cheap...

both was suggested by Ian Very Happy

The difference of many modern double Gauss 50s are small. If you say these two photos are taken with a planar, most people might not discover they are takn with a rokkor. Wink


PostPosted: Wed Jun 10, 2015 1:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Guys, you can answer way this lenses is naked?




PostPosted: Wed Jun 10, 2015 2:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fun thread !

I've just acquired a West Germany Carl Zeiss Planar 1.8/50 HFT and 1.4/50 HFT...
I've yet to try them....

@ Klaus
member should know you became wise only after acquiring a zillion lenses Wink


PostPosted: Wed Jun 10, 2015 3:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I recently acquired the 1.8/50 and 1.4/50 HFT Planars too. I'm looking forward to comparing them to my Jena MC Pancolars 1.8/50 and 1.4/50


PostPosted: Wed Jun 10, 2015 3:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Most interesting as the Pancolar 1.4 is uncommon...
Looking forward to see it !


Here are good words for the Planar HFT 1.4/50
http://captjack.exaktaphile.com/rollei/Rolleilenses.htm


PostPosted: Wed Jun 10, 2015 4:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Jena lenses are late Prakticar bayonet models, they aren't actually labelled Pancolars, but that is what they are. The 1.8 is actually much less common than the 1.4. I'll include the Pentacon 1.8/50 Prakticar in the test too.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 10, 2015 8:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I recently acquired the 1.8/50 and 1.4/50 HFT Planars too. I'm looking forward to comparing them to my Jena MC Pancolars 1.8/50 and 1.4/50

I will be careful. Your opinion will be interesting. In my tests, the HFT 50/1.4 was indistinguishable in all hits to Canon FD 50 /1.4. The Zeiss 50/1.8 against Minolta MC 55/1.7 PF offered differences between them, but neither was a clear winner. None beat to Hexanon AR 50/1.7 in sharpness (or perceived sharpness) at f2.8.

Happy shots!


PostPosted: Wed Jun 10, 2015 9:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

calvin83 wrote:

The difference of many modern double Gauss 50s are small. If you say these two photos are taken with a planar, most people might not discover they are takn with a rokkor. Wink


I would even go further. Most people would not be able to find out the real lens behind a picture if not known in advance. In other words: If you state that a picture has been captured by a 2.000 $ lens most people would say that this is a wonderful lens, even if in reality it was only a 20 $ lens. That's psychology. Wink