Zeiss Planar *T* 50/1.7 or Zeiss Planar 50/1.8 HFT Planar?

[Kram]

I'm contemplating them both. Which is better? The 1.7 seems to sell for more than the 1.8

1.7 *T* is C/Y mount and 1.8 is Rollei bayonet mount, right?

Any enlightenment appreciated.

[cambug]

I tried both and depends on the qualities you want, they have their respective benefits. In terms of mechanical construction, the Contax one is more rugged and easier to adapt to DSLR, especially Canon, but would cost more. The Rollei version is more fragile and cheaper, but more tricky to adapt, as the adapter to Canon DSLR is only about 0.7mm thick. According to Zeiss, T* and HFT are the same, but in real world picture taking, the colors are different. If you are using Canon DSLR, I would go for Contax version, good luck to your choice.

[Kram]

cambug, thanks so much. Yes, I will be using it on a Canon 30D.

[tkbslc]

The Rollei mount is not the easiest to adapt. I would choose the Contax or m42 Zeiss lenses for Canon if you can.

[Keysersoze27]

I own both... my W.Germany made Rollei QBM CZ Planar 1.8 will not reach infinity and will hit the mirror on the 5Dii.

Both are nearly equal sharp(even considering that my 1.8 planar is dual layer coated not HFT) but the Ultron based design Zeiss has smoother bokeh and I might even say that it has stronger 3D effect than the Contax Planar one.
Wide open the QBM one is way sharper that the Contax !!! Infact it's the sharpest 50mm at @1.8 that I own...

[apaddy]