| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
simbon4o
Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 390
Location: Bulgaria
|
 Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2014 10:45 am Post subject: |
 |
|
simbon4o wrote:
| Tedat wrote: |
| simbon4o wrote: |
Rollei Planar 1,8 50mm HFT............125 dolars - not bad Singapore Planar with bad coating. Not soft but not sharp enough for the price and mostly - nothing special. C/Y 50 1.7 Planar is much better |
HFT is bad coating for you? A lot people (including me) consider it nearly equal to T*.. C/Y 50 1.7 Planar may be better, but not much better.
But those prices on the list are too high.. a HFT Planar with QBM mount shouldn't cost much more than 50-60 Euro (plus shipping). |
Yes I think it is overpriced because of the name. Also not as sharp as the C/Y version. I have found many people on internet thinking that the HFT is not as good as the old Rollei planar(older coatings) but we can't be 100% sure because after all they are not new lenses and the quality may vary because of the years and users, cleaning...
Recently a friend of mine bought 50 1.8 Planar and tested it against Minolta 50 1.4, I have expected the planar to be much better in flare control and sharpness but flares were worse on it and it wasn't that much sharper than the rokkor.
Otherwise it is nice looking, not so big and not bad 50 1.8 with nice rendering but I don't think that it is much better than for example Auto Chinon 50 1.7 MC which is much cheaper lens with I think better coating and very similar bokeh.
_________________
10-300мм 4.0 - 1.2 - 4.5  NIKON&Sony bodies / Sony 10-18, Pentax 28 2.8 II, CZJ 35 2.4, Nikkor DX 35 1.8, Samyang 35 1.4, KMZ 50 1.7, FDn 50 1.2 L, Nikkor 55 2.8, Rokkor 58 1.2, Soligor 85 1.8 Preset, Samyang 85 1.4, Canon FDn 85 1.2 L, Tokina AT-X 90 2.5, Canon FDn 135mm 2.0, Nikkor 180 2.8 ED, Tair 300 4.5
________
snimo.net |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Tedat
Joined: 08 Nov 2011
Posts: 800
Location: Berlin/Germany
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2014 11:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Tedat wrote:
I had several HFT Planar/Color Ultron (still have one Color Ultron and a HFT Planar 1.4/50 which I even prefer over the CY Planar) and all are very very close to the Contax Planars.. especially wide open. I also have/had other HFT lenses (25mm and 35mm Distagon, 85mm Sonnar) and won't complain about HFT coating, for me the best right after T* and not far behind it.
I have to quote Orio about this lens: "Rollei Planar 1.8/50: if you have it, keep it !"
http://forum.mflenses.com/rollei-planar-1-8-50-if-you-have-it-keep-it-t16728.html
If your tested copy wasn't much better than the Minolta 1.4/50 (wide open).. it either was a bad copy or the Rokkor a exeptional good one. But like I said before.. on his list it's way overpriced, it shouldn't be a problem to get it for a lot less. Sometimes there are even some NOS copies for under 80 euro (BIN).
_________________
Regards
Jan
flickr
Sony A7RM2
Contax T*: Distagon 4/18, Distagon 2/28, Distagon 1.4/35, PC-Distagon 2.8/35, Planar 1.4/50, Planar 1.4/85, Planar 2/100, Planar 2/135, S-Planar 2.8/60, Tessar 2.8/45, Mirotar 8/500, Vario Sonnar 3.4/35-70, Vario Sonnar 4.5-5.6/100-300
Carl Zeiss for Rollei QBM: F-Distagon 2.8/16 HFT, Distagon 2.8/25, Planar 1.4/50 HFT, Sonnar 2.8/85
Konica Hexanon AR: 2.8/21, 1.2/57
Other: Minolta F2.8 [T4.5] 135mm STF, Meopta Meostigmat 1.4/70, Tokina AT-X 2.5/90.. and lots of early M42 Yashinon, Rikenon and Mamiya lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rafa1981
Joined: 15 Jul 2010
Posts: 142
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 26, 2014 7:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
rafa1981 wrote:
OM Zuiko 28 f3.5, sharp, light and cheap.
_________________
My flickr.
Gear: Constantly evolving. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KEzzAP
Joined: 24 Feb 2014
Posts: 4
Location: Türkiye
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 4:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
KEzzAP wrote:
Hi, it's me again. 
I found a Carl Zeiss Jena Pancolar 50mm f1.8 m42 for 115 dolars...
What would be your comments.
Or should I buy a new "Canon 50mm f1.8" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
simbon4o
Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 390
Location: Bulgaria
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2014 6:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
simbon4o wrote:
Well canon 50 1.8 II have AF... but it is the bulkiest 50mm lens so if you want AF - try to buy 50 1.4 canon.
About the Pancolar - it is like sharp helios 44 - swirly bokeh and in some situations - great lens. I love it for macro - great sharpness closed down. 100$ sounds like the price I get mine for. Be careful if you buy Pancolar- they are often stuck from bad or just old oil.
Do not expect the pancolar to be sharp wide open all over the frame, the corners are dreamy even at 2.8, sharp at 4.0. Center is good wide open with a little halo and the bokeh is nervous.
Here my thread about mine.
http://forum.mflenses.com/my-czj-pancolar-50-1-8-mc-t46566,highlight,%2Bpancolar+%2B50+%2B1+%2B8+%2Bmc.html
_________________
10-300мм 4.0 - 1.2 - 4.5 NIKON&Sony bodies / Sony 10-18, Pentax 28 2.8 II, CZJ 35 2.4, Nikkor DX 35 1.8, Samyang 35 1.4, KMZ 50 1.7, FDn 50 1.2 L, Nikkor 55 2.8, Rokkor 58 1.2, Soligor 85 1.8 Preset, Samyang 85 1.4, Canon FDn 85 1.2 L, Tokina AT-X 90 2.5, Canon FDn 135mm 2.0, Nikkor 180 2.8 ED, Tair 300 4.5
________
snimo.net |
|
| 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
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
