View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Yahvel
Joined: 12 Oct 2012 Posts: 243 Location: USA
|
Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2012 1:57 am Post subject: Battle of The Planars: Rollei VS Carl Zeiss (Part 1) |
|
|
Yahvel wrote:
I do not know if this topic was already discussed and if it was well i am sorry for repeating it
Ok i was a little bit bored so i decided to play around with two of my 50's.
In the week i will go outdoors and take some shots in the city and those will be from F5.6-F8, But i need a nice sunny day.
Part 1: Wide-Open Shots with Rollei Planar 50/1.8 and CONTAX Carl Zeiss Planar 50/1.4
Which lens you think perfoms better ? or do you think both are just as nice ?
I am really looking foward to your opinions. Remember to click images to see Hi-Res versions.
These are the two lenses
SAMPLES
Rollei
Carl Zeiss
Rollei
Carl Zeiss
Rollei
Carl Zeiss
Rollei
Carl Zeiss
Rollei
Carl Zeiss
Last edited by Yahvel on Sat Nov 10, 2012 2:22 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57840 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2021-11-18
|
Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2012 2:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
Both nice. _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
hifisapi
Joined: 25 Sep 2012 Posts: 941 Location: USA
|
Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2012 2:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
hifisapi wrote:
they look very similar to each other, maybe a fine touch sharper on the zeiss _________________ ===========
ACQUIRED OVER 30 YEARS:
Cameras: DSLR=Pentax istDS FILM=Pentax SP, SP-F, ESII, SP1000, KX, K2
Lenses : Pentax M42 = Super Multi Coated Takumars 50/1.4 55/1.8 100/4-BELLOWS 500/4.5 1000/8 135-600/6.7 Pentax PK= SMC Pentax-Ks K17/4-FF Fisheye K18/3.5 K20/4 K24/3.5 K28/3.5 K28/2 K35/3.5 K35/2 K50/1.2 K50/1.4K 50/4-MACROK 55/1.8 K85/1.8 K100/4-MACRO K100/4-BELLOWS K105/2.8 K120/2.8 K135/3.5 K135/2.5 K150/4 K200/4 K400/5.6 K45-125/4K 85-210/4.5 Pentax PKM = SMC Pentax-M M40/2.8-Pancake M50/1.4 M75-150/4 M80-200/4.5 Pentax PKA= SMC Pentax-A A15/3.5 A50/2.8-MACRO A28/2 A35/2 A50/1.4 A135/2.8 A200/4 A*300/4 A35-105/3.5 A24-50/4 A70-210/4 TAMRON AD2= SP80-200/2.8 SP180/2.5 TOKINA AT-X PK= ATX28-85/3.5-4.5 ATX35-70/2.8 ATX60-120/2.8 ATX80-200/2.8 ATX100-300/4 ATX90/2.5 MACRO KIRON-LESTER DINE PK = 105/2.8-MACRO VIVITAR PK = 135/2.8-MACRO 28-85/4 NOFLEXAR AUTOBELLOWS PK = 60/4 105/4 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Yahvel
Joined: 12 Oct 2012 Posts: 243 Location: USA
|
Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2012 2:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yahvel wrote:
I agree with both of you. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
poilu
Joined: 26 Aug 2007 Posts: 10469 Location: Greece
Expire: 2019-08-29
|
Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2012 10:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
poilu wrote:
it is not easy to compare a 1.4 with a 1.8 both wide open, the dof is different
if the lens had about the same quality, the 1.8 should be better as it it more closed down
the 1.4 is much better and if it was closed to 1.8, it would be even better
the glass on the Rollei lock dirty and the parts inside look blurred, the thread has almost disappeared
the contax have more pop, clarity and 3D
the rollei have more blue fringing at 1.8 than the contax at 1.4
the table is darker on the rollei, reflections and details are muted
the metal shine on the contax, colors are warmer & more pleasant
_________________ T* |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ManualFocus-G
Joined: 29 Dec 2008 Posts: 6624 Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-24
|
Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2012 10:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
ManualFocus-G wrote:
I'm way too biased towards the 50/1.4 regardless of the competition, so I'll keep my mouth shut _________________ Graham - Moderator
Shooter of choice: Fujifilm X-T20 with M42, PB and C/Y lenses
See my Flickr photos at http://www.flickr.com/photos/manualfocus-g |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15685
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2012 10:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I had the Rollei Planar 1.8/50 and sold it because it wasn't anything special, just another good 50mm but not outstanding, I have several that I think are noticeably better than it. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
sonyrokkor
Joined: 24 Sep 2012 Posts: 222 Location: Perù, Argentina, Chile, Uruguay
|
Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2012 4:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
sonyrokkor wrote:
In Rollei srl 24 x 36 film's world, the rolleinar 1,4/55 is more near to the zeiss 1,4 rendering than the planar 1,8 made by rollei.
If don't remeber bad, my copy of the rollei planar (made in singapur too) was more warmish rendering than yours. QC in singapur was not so good than germany, like the sonnar of the rollei 35 RF rendering had put on the table. One very good, another not so, other a dog, and so.
Anyways, the planar rollei and zeiss are very different lenses, with different schames, will have different rendering. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mos6502
Joined: 20 Jun 2011 Posts: 961 Location: Austin
|
Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2012 5:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mos6502 wrote:
It would make more sense to test them at a usable aperture that both lenses can be stopped down to. Like f2.8 for example. Then we'd have a proper comparison. I don't think either lens looks that nice wide open, but the Contax has maybe a tiny lead. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Yahvel
Joined: 12 Oct 2012 Posts: 243 Location: USA
|
Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yahvel wrote:
Mos6502 wrote: |
It would make more sense to test them at a usable aperture that both lenses can be stopped down to. Like f2.8 for example. Then we'd have a proper comparison. I don't think either lens looks that nice wide open, but the Contax has maybe a tiny lead. |
you are correct |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009 Posts: 5019 Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 11:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
erm maybe a large crop would show some difference _________________ Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15685
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 12:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I think all modern 50mm lenses are more than good enough and differences are small, stopped down the differences are really minute in most cases. Really the only time you will see a discernable difference is shooting wide open and honestly, wide open shooting is a bit of a silly modern fashion and poor technique in most cases. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|