Planar vs Sonnar lenses from Zeiss

Mist · Joined: 28 Jul 2009 Posts: 134 Location: Toronto, Canada

Hello, I know my question must be stupid, but could you answer me why Planar lenses usually two times more expensive then Sonnar? Does it mean that Planar two times better? I am asking because I just bought a 128mm 2.8 Sonnar and wondering maybe I should buy Planar instead? Embarassed

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

Not better , but faster. Faster lenses has premium price. Sonnar good as Planar take any of them what you can afford. In fact Carl Zeiss only the manufacturer what I know who has stable quality production line take any of them you will love it no exception.

Arkku · Joined: 28 Feb 2007 Posts: 1416 Location: Helsinki, Finland

I also suggest looking at sample photos from each lens; personally I find the Sonnar bokeh more pleasant (smoother, less distracting) than the Planar bokeh.

Mist · Joined: 28 Jul 2009 Posts: 134 Location: Toronto, Canada

Thanks a lot.
f2.8 is fast enough for me. I saved $200, so I could buy a new lens, or two Laughing

peterm1 · Joined: 06 Dec 2007 Posts: 224

I have a soft spot for Sonnar lenses myself. They tend not to be quite as sharp as some other lens designs but they have a nice round quality to the image - sharp merging into soft in a very smooth way. This is attributable to the way the bokeh looks and is perhaps associated with partially corrected spherical abberation.

aoleg · Joined: 22 Feb 2008 Posts: 1387 Location: Berlin, DE

malchauDK · Joined: 11 Aug 2009 Posts: 26 Location: Copenhagen/Denmark

Hi

I like my Sonnars very much. They are not as sharp as planar, but they have a more pleasant bokeh. I use 85mm/f2.8 and 135mm/2.8 for portraits and macro with extensiontubes.
They can produce the famous 3D effect when used correctly.
Samples:

Sonnar 85mm/f2.8 app. f5.6

Planar 50mm/f1.7 app. f5.6

Henrik

scsambrook · Expire: 2011-11-18

Spotmatic · Joined: 18 Aug 2008 Posts: 4045 Location: Netherlands

scsambrook · Expire: 2011-11-18

F16SUNSHINE · Expire: 2011-11-18

As has been said.
Sonnars have a smoother yet less sharp rendering.
Take less sharp with a bit of salt. These lenses can be very sharp and render fine details with precision.
The look overall is more calm and has less *POP* than the Planar.
Sonnars also seem to cntrol flare better.
This is due to fewer glass to air surfaces and generally slower max apertures so smaller front glass.

For Portrait work I nearly always prefer a sonnar.
The Zeiss 1.5/50, 2/50, or 2/85 on a RF camera or 2.8/85 on reflex is a super portrait rig.
I skip the J9 although it is a sonnar. Simply don't get on well with that lens.

Mist · Joined: 28 Jul 2009 Posts: 134 Location: Toronto, Canada

I love my new Sonnar 135/2.8
Thank you all for your advises.

F16SUNSHINE · Expire: 2011-11-18

Yup that is the look Smile

Here is another comparison un interesting pics however.
Notice how nervous the Planar Bokeh is by comparison

Opton Sonnar 2/85 f4

Contax Planar 1.4/50 f2.8

Opton Sonnar 1.5/50 f4 (poor scan sorry)

Esox lucius · Expire: 2011-11-18

The differences in bokeh in above photos are more due to the 50 vs 85 than Planar-Sonnar construction. Comparing an 85mm with a 50mm lens for bokeh is not exactly fair to the 50mm...

Generally speaking, I find 35 and 85mm lenses have much better bokeh than fast 50mm lenses, and this opinion is based on Leica, Nikkor, Zeiss, CZJ, Canon and other brands I've used.

This is Planar bokeh @ f/2, lens is Planar T* 85/1.4 ZF

My Getty photo editor loved the bokeh so much they took it for sale on Getty, despite there being about 1 million bamboo bokeh photos on Getty already Very Happy

. This same photo for purchase here http://www.gettyimages.com/Search/Search.aspx?assettype=image&artist=Vilhelm+Sjostrom

Another sample of Planar bokeh, same lens at f/2.8

Plenty of samples in large size here

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mureena/tags/planar8514zf/

F16SUNSHINE · Expire: 2011-11-18

Esox
the first sample is really nice

from so close in with calm light any lens will make nice bokeh