View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
metallaro1980
Joined: 10 Sep 2009 Posts: 385 Location: West Emilia - Fidenza (PR) 43036 - Italy
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 10:08 am Post subject: Leica R 50mm f1.4 E60 vs Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 |
|
|
metallaro1980 wrote:
who wins? _________________
Olympus OM: 28 2.8, 35 2.8, 50 1.8 Made in Japan
Contax: 50 1.4, 85 1.4
Zeiss: 135 2.0 Apo-Sonnar ZE
Leica-R: 180 3.4 Apo-Telyt-R (Leitax)
Rollei QBM: 135 2.8 Rolleinar (Leitax), 50 1.4 HFT
Canon: 50 1.8, 40 2.8
M42: Helios 50 2.0, Jupiter-37A, Jupiter-21 200 4.0
Binocular: Hensoldt & Wetzlar DF 8x30
http://andreaverdi.altervista.org/ Vivaldi lives in my lenses.... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
scsambrook
Joined: 29 Mar 2009 Posts: 2167 Location: Glasgow Scotland
Expire: 2011-11-18
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
scsambrook wrote:
I don't have either, nor have I ever used them . . . but I would guess that both will be excellent lenses. No doubt each will have a different mixture of qualities, so the real question will, as ever, be 'Which appeals more to the individual user?' _________________ Stephen
Equipment: Pentax DSLR for casual shooting, Lumix G1 and Fuji XE-1 for playing with old lenses, and Leica M8 because I still like the optical rangefinder system. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
exaklaus
Joined: 11 Aug 2009 Posts: 1633 Location: Niederrhein, Germany
Expire: 2011-12-02
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
exaklaus wrote:
For me, the Leitz wins. Compared both and the important difference for me was, that wide open the Summilux was sharper towards the edges.
And has less CA
Klaus _________________ my Ebay auctions
Canon 5D II,
Fuji GW690III, Fuji G617, Fujifilm X-E1
Bessaflex TM
Tachihara 4"x5"
Summilux-R 1:1,4/50
Canon FD 85mm 1:1,2
Color-Heliar 75mm F2.5 SL
www.autoselbstfotografie.de
www.classic-cameras-and-lenses.de |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jjphoto
Joined: 17 Mar 2009 Posts: 410
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
jjphoto wrote:
Which 'Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50' ?
Contax (AE or MM) or Zeiss Zx?
I found the wide open close distance performance of the Leica R 50/1.4 E60 to be a little dissapointing compared to the Contax 50/1.4 (MM) which I find is very sharp wide open at close range. I kept thinking I was doing some thing wrong with the E60, possibly mis-focusing, but it wasn't me. The lens is much sharper at mid distances and longer, but I didn't expect it to underperfom at close range, approx 1-2m.
When I compared the E60 to a Leica R Cron E55 I found too little difference to justify the upgrade so I didn't, and kept the Cron E55. In the scheme of things I use my Contax 50/1.4 (MM) way more than the Cron and also find the close range wide open performance (of the Contax 50/1.4 (MM)) to be excellent. I really do like the Contax 50/1.4 (MM) and admit I've been thinking of selling the Cron E55 as I simply don't use it any more.
I've never directly compared the Contax 50/1.4 (MM) with the Leica R 50/1.4 E60 and although I'm sure there are differences I sincerely wonder if it is worth the price difference.
JJ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
exaklaus
Joined: 11 Aug 2009 Posts: 1633 Location: Niederrhein, Germany
Expire: 2011-12-02
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
exaklaus wrote:
Guess it was MM.
I had the Cron, too, but comparing with the Summilux at f2 made me sell my Cron.
So everyone makes different experiences!
Klaus _________________ my Ebay auctions
Canon 5D II,
Fuji GW690III, Fuji G617, Fujifilm X-E1
Bessaflex TM
Tachihara 4"x5"
Summilux-R 1:1,4/50
Canon FD 85mm 1:1,2
Color-Heliar 75mm F2.5 SL
www.autoselbstfotografie.de
www.classic-cameras-and-lenses.de |
|
Back to top |
|
|
rbelyell
Joined: 13 Oct 2009 Posts: 4269 Location: somewhere in the mountains of central NY
Expire: 2014-01-31
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 2:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
rbelyell wrote:
am i wrong or is the leica like a $2000 usd cost lens, compared to a $350usd cost lens? if so, i certainly hope the leica's better! for a reasonably priced lens though, i dont think one can do better than any in the planar T series. _________________ Epson RD1 + Elmarit 21/2.8; Summarit 50/1.5; Summarit 75/2.5; Elmar-c 90/4; Sankyo Komura 135/2.8, Hektor 135/4.5; Braun Paxina 29 6x6; Photax Boyer Paris; Holga 120 Pano
GREAT STUFF FOR SALE:
Contax T
Hasselblad XPan + 45/4, 90/4
Kodak Retina Reflex IV + full set of Schneider Krueznach lenses
Mercury 2 half frame 35mm
Kodak Pro slr/n
Fuji GM670+100/3.5+65/8!
Praktisix 6x6 medium format + ZeissBiometar 120/2.8
Bessa T 101 Anniversary Edition in Navy Blue
Mamiya Six Folder with Zuiko 75/3.5
Adaptall: Tamron SP 28-85 macro
Cameras: Canon IX
PM for more complete descriptions/pix. All in great shape!
_________________________
'buy me a drink, sing me a song,
take me as i come 'cause i can't stay long' |
|
Back to top |
|
|
exaklaus
Joined: 11 Aug 2009 Posts: 1633 Location: Niederrhein, Germany
Expire: 2011-12-02
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 2:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
exaklaus wrote:
I'm wrong, wrong, wrong!
I have the former version with 55mm filter mount.
Anyway, it is - for me - better.
Klaus _________________ my Ebay auctions
Canon 5D II,
Fuji GW690III, Fuji G617, Fujifilm X-E1
Bessaflex TM
Tachihara 4"x5"
Summilux-R 1:1,4/50
Canon FD 85mm 1:1,2
Color-Heliar 75mm F2.5 SL
www.autoselbstfotografie.de
www.classic-cameras-and-lenses.de |
|
Back to top |
|
|
metallaro1980
Joined: 10 Sep 2009 Posts: 385 Location: West Emilia - Fidenza (PR) 43036 - Italy
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 2:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
metallaro1980 wrote:
marco cavina says that Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 aej is better than mmj (because he bought a mmj and is not better than aej version than he bought after)...and he said than i have a good copy
but on italian forum...some users say than summilux-r e60 has more contrast and sharpness than planar
i am happy with it... but 3000 euro for a manual focus lens ... imho is to high !!!!! _________________
Olympus OM: 28 2.8, 35 2.8, 50 1.8 Made in Japan
Contax: 50 1.4, 85 1.4
Zeiss: 135 2.0 Apo-Sonnar ZE
Leica-R: 180 3.4 Apo-Telyt-R (Leitax)
Rollei QBM: 135 2.8 Rolleinar (Leitax), 50 1.4 HFT
Canon: 50 1.8, 40 2.8
M42: Helios 50 2.0, Jupiter-37A, Jupiter-21 200 4.0
Binocular: Hensoldt & Wetzlar DF 8x30
http://andreaverdi.altervista.org/ Vivaldi lives in my lenses.... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
nixland
Joined: 30 Jan 2011 Posts: 577
Expire: 2012-07-29
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
nixland wrote:
Almost a perfect question for me
I've just made some test shots to compare Contax Zeiss 50/1.4, Zeiss HFT 50/1.4 and Leica Summilux-R 50/1.4 ... unfortunately it's the first version summilux, not the E60
The bokeh pattern of the three are completely the same! I tried different background and still the same. For the color, Leica looks warmer where Contax is colder. Contax is more resistant to flare than the other. Leica is more resistant to CA that the other. Hope I have time to post the comparison shots. But, once again, too bad it's not the E60. I still can not justify it's price to buy it
By the way, I've seen a comparison shots between Leica first version, second version (E55?) and E60 in a website (I forgot not to bookmark it, but I'll find it), and the E60 bokeh is much smoother than the previous two. _________________ Carl Zeiss Jena: Biotar 58/2 1Q, DDR Pancolar 80/1.8 MC, Biotar 75/1.5, Biotar 10cm/2, DDR Sonnar 135/3.5 MC
Carl Zeiss C/Y: Planar 50/1.4 T*, Planar 85/1.4 T*, Planar 100/2 T*, Sonnar 135/2.8 T*
Leica: Summicron-R 35/2 v1, Summicron-R 50/2, Summilux-R 80/1.4, Summicron-R 90/2
Pentax: A 50/1.2
Minolta: Rokkor MC 58/1.2, Rokkor MC 85/1.7, Rokkor MC 100/2, MD 200/2.8
Olympus: Zuiko MC Auto-W 21/2, Zuiko 50/1.2, Zuiko MC Auto-T 85/2, Zuiko Auto-T 100/2
Nikon: Nikkor 28/2.8 Ais, Nikkor 85/1.8, Nikkor 105/1.8, 300/2.8 ED (Ais)
Canon: FD 50/1.2 L, FD 85/1.2 L
Sony: 135/2.8 STF
Jupiter: 85/2 Alu
Cyclop: 85/1.5
Meyer-Optic: Trioplan 100/2.8, Orestor 100/2.8, Primotar 135/3.5
Samyang: 8/3.5 FE, 14/2.8, 85/1.4, 85/1.4 UMC
FOR SALE
Carl Zeiss Jena Biotar 10cm/2 || Carl Zeiss ZE Distagon 28/2 || Minolta Rokkor MD 35/1.8 || Rokkor-X MC 85/1.7 || Rokkor MD 85/1.7 || Olympus Zuiko MC Auto-W 21/2 || Olympus 100/2 || Nikon Nikkor 35/1.4 || Canon: FD 55/1.2 || Vivitar 90/2.5 Series 1 VMC || Tamron: 90/2.5 SP
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
rbelyell
Joined: 13 Oct 2009 Posts: 4269 Location: somewhere in the mountains of central NY
Expire: 2014-01-31
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
rbelyell wrote:
again, unless i'm missing something, at $2000 vs $350, if there is even room for debate on which is best, i'm saving $1700 and putting it towards 3-4 more planar T lenses! at that price disparity the leica needs to absolutely blow the planar out of the water. i honestly dont understand this fascination with leica that would cause people to spend exhorbitant amounts of money for 'maybe' marginally better performance than other low cost options.
i have a summarit 50/1.4 that cost more than the planar T, but performs about the same as a $100 yashica ml 50/1.4! _________________ Epson RD1 + Elmarit 21/2.8; Summarit 50/1.5; Summarit 75/2.5; Elmar-c 90/4; Sankyo Komura 135/2.8, Hektor 135/4.5; Braun Paxina 29 6x6; Photax Boyer Paris; Holga 120 Pano
GREAT STUFF FOR SALE:
Contax T
Hasselblad XPan + 45/4, 90/4
Kodak Retina Reflex IV + full set of Schneider Krueznach lenses
Mercury 2 half frame 35mm
Kodak Pro slr/n
Fuji GM670+100/3.5+65/8!
Praktisix 6x6 medium format + ZeissBiometar 120/2.8
Bessa T 101 Anniversary Edition in Navy Blue
Mamiya Six Folder with Zuiko 75/3.5
Adaptall: Tamron SP 28-85 macro
Cameras: Canon IX
PM for more complete descriptions/pix. All in great shape!
_________________________
'buy me a drink, sing me a song,
take me as i come 'cause i can't stay long' |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Rolf
Joined: 02 May 2009 Posts: 4123 Location: NRW/Germany
Expire: 2015-12-26
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 5:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rolf wrote:
I don´t know where you found the price of 2000 $ for a R 1.4/50 E60.
You can get it here at German E*ay for between 600 to 700 € which is about 1000 $ - so the half of the amount above. And the version with E55 you will get for approx. 400 €.
May be you mean a 1.4/50 for Leica M. This one is indeed more expensive.
_________________ Rolf |
|
Back to top |
|
|
rbelyell
Joined: 13 Oct 2009 Posts: 4269 Location: somewhere in the mountains of central NY
Expire: 2014-01-31
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Rolf
Joined: 02 May 2009 Posts: 4123 Location: NRW/Germany
Expire: 2015-12-26
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rolf wrote:
Click here to see on Ebay.de
Click here to see on Ebay.de
Click here to see on Ebay.de
Ok Tony, your samples - these are dealers from Czech and HK, they have sometimes prices ideas beside good and bad. But I don´t think that these are "market prices".
_________________ Rolf |
|
Back to top |
|
|
metallaro1980
Joined: 10 Sep 2009 Posts: 385 Location: West Emilia - Fidenza (PR) 43036 - Italy
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 7:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
metallaro1980 wrote:
i think there are not e60
in one... there is a B&W 55E
the summilux-r e60 has 8 elements ... 1 asph
like the planar 1.2/55 _________________
Olympus OM: 28 2.8, 35 2.8, 50 1.8 Made in Japan
Contax: 50 1.4, 85 1.4
Zeiss: 135 2.0 Apo-Sonnar ZE
Leica-R: 180 3.4 Apo-Telyt-R (Leitax)
Rollei QBM: 135 2.8 Rolleinar (Leitax), 50 1.4 HFT
Canon: 50 1.8, 40 2.8
M42: Helios 50 2.0, Jupiter-37A, Jupiter-21 200 4.0
Binocular: Hensoldt & Wetzlar DF 8x30
http://andreaverdi.altervista.org/ Vivaldi lives in my lenses.... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
rbelyell
Joined: 13 Oct 2009 Posts: 4269 Location: somewhere in the mountains of central NY
Expire: 2014-01-31
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 7:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
rbelyell wrote:
thanks rolf. those were the only ones available on u.s. ebay. _________________ Epson RD1 + Elmarit 21/2.8; Summarit 50/1.5; Summarit 75/2.5; Elmar-c 90/4; Sankyo Komura 135/2.8, Hektor 135/4.5; Braun Paxina 29 6x6; Photax Boyer Paris; Holga 120 Pano
GREAT STUFF FOR SALE:
Contax T
Hasselblad XPan + 45/4, 90/4
Kodak Retina Reflex IV + full set of Schneider Krueznach lenses
Mercury 2 half frame 35mm
Kodak Pro slr/n
Fuji GM670+100/3.5+65/8!
Praktisix 6x6 medium format + ZeissBiometar 120/2.8
Bessa T 101 Anniversary Edition in Navy Blue
Mamiya Six Folder with Zuiko 75/3.5
Adaptall: Tamron SP 28-85 macro
Cameras: Canon IX
PM for more complete descriptions/pix. All in great shape!
_________________________
'buy me a drink, sing me a song,
take me as i come 'cause i can't stay long' |
|
Back to top |
|
|
BRunner
Joined: 29 Jul 2009 Posts: 705 Location: Czech Republic
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 7:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
BRunner wrote:
Unfortunately, those are 1st 7/6 optical design from late sixties in redesigned body with E55 fitlter thread.
The E60 8/7 version was made from 1997 SN: 37xxxx and above. It is branded Leica only. No Leitz or Leitz Weltzar.
Interesting MTF graphs comparison of fast 50s from Erwin Puts.
http://www.imx.nl/photo/technique/technique/hslenses.html _________________ .: APO-Maniac :.
Last edited by BRunner on Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:15 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Rolf
Joined: 02 May 2009 Posts: 4123 Location: NRW/Germany
Expire: 2015-12-26
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rolf wrote:
My mistake. I checked only the product images and not the serial numbers. You have complete right - last version started in 1997/1998.
Sorry for the wrong infos.
_________________ Rolf |
|
Back to top |
|
|
poilu
Joined: 26 Aug 2007 Posts: 10472 Location: Greece
Expire: 2019-08-29
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
poilu wrote:
BRunner wrote: |
Interesting MTF graphs comparison of fast 50s from Erwin Puts. |
where do you find this donkey that read lp/mm in MTF
Puts wrote: |
the marketing department of Zeiss claimed recently that this lens is the resolution champion with a resolution of 400 lp/mm. In fact the MTF analysis gives a maximum resolution of about 160 lp/mm, where the contrast goes to zero. This kind of promotion does the lens a disservice |
Puts have never read the original article
Zeiss wrote: |
The new Planar T* 1,4/50 ZF went even further: It reached 320 lp/mm in the aperture range from f/5.6 to f/2.8, and 250 lp/mm at f/2.
The resolution test chart was placed in the center of the frame, and the negatives were inspected directly on a research microscope. No other process involving projection (through even the best enlarging lens) or digitizing (in today’s best currently available scanners) is capable of transferring such high resolution values |
_________________ T* |
|
Back to top |
|
|
BRunner
Joined: 29 Jul 2009 Posts: 705 Location: Czech Republic
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
BRunner wrote:
Zeiss 50mm F1.4 Planar ZE vs. Leica 50mm F1.4 Summilux-M ASPH wide open bokeh and sharpness from www.pebbleplace.com
The images are self explanatory. Planar was introduced in early 70's and it is great lens, but is already overtaken by never designs. Summilux-M ASPH was introduced in 2004. According MTF graphs, 8 element Summilux-R will perform somewhere between these two lenses.
Planar
Summilux ASPH
Planar
Summilux ASPH
_________________ .: APO-Maniac :. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
BRunner
Joined: 29 Jul 2009 Posts: 705 Location: Czech Republic
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
BRunner wrote:
poilu wrote: |
Puts have never read the original article
Zeiss wrote: |
The new Planar T* 1,4/50 ZF went even further: It reached 320 lp/mm in the aperture range from f/5.6 to f/2.8, and 250 lp/mm at f/2.
The resolution test chart was placed in the center of the frame, and the negatives were inspected directly on a research microscope. No other process involving projection (through even the best enlarging lens) or digitizing (in today’s best currently available scanners) is capable of transferring such high resolution values |
|
The important question is, at which contrast value was 250 lp/mm at f/2 resolved? For practical purposes, you need at least 60%. And at this value - according Zeiss MTF graphs - Planar resolves exactly 40lp/mm at f4 in center...
Don't get me wrong, I do like all my Planars....as I do like my Elmarits and Summicrons _________________ .: APO-Maniac :. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jjphoto
Joined: 17 Mar 2009 Posts: 410
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
jjphoto wrote:
metallaro1980 wrote: |
marco cavina says that Carl Zeiss Planar T* 1.4/50 aej is better than mmj (because he bought a mmj and is not better than aej version than he bought after)...and he said than i have a good copy
... |
I have both the AE and MM and apart from the aperture blades I don't think there is any difference at all.
JJ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jjphoto
Joined: 17 Mar 2009 Posts: 410
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
jjphoto wrote:
nixland wrote: |
...By the way, I've seen a comparison shots between Leica first version, second version (E55?) and E60 in a website (I forgot not to bookmark it, but I'll find it), and the E60 bokeh is much smoother than the previous two. |
I've only seen one comparison between the E55 and the E60 and the E55 had a softer Bokeh. I felt it was enough of a difference to actually make the E55 a better choice than the E60.
JJ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jjphoto
Joined: 17 Mar 2009 Posts: 410
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
jjphoto wrote:
Rolf wrote: |
I don´t know where you found the price of 2000 $ for a R 1.4/50 E60.
You can get it here at German E*ay for between 600 to 700 € which is about 1000 $ - so the half of the amount above. And the version with E55 you will get for approx. 400 €.
May be you mean a 1.4/50 for Leica M. This one is indeed more expensive.
|
The last E60 I saw sell on Ebay (a few months ago, and I don't follow them so there will certainly have been more recent ones) sold for AUD$2500. This was an Australian lens, not a new old stock BIN. People bid that much for it and it sold.
JJ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jjphoto
Joined: 17 Mar 2009 Posts: 410
|
Posted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 9:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
jjphoto wrote:
BRunner wrote: |
Zeiss 50mm F1.4 Planar ZE vs. Leica 50mm F1.4 Summilux-M ASPH wide open bokeh and sharpness from www.pebbleplace.com
The images are self explanatory. Planar was introduced in early 70's and it is great lens, but is already overtaken by never designs. Summilux-M ASPH was introduced in 2004. According MTF graphs, 8 element Summilux-R will perform somewhere between these two lenses... |
How is it relevant to compare M images? The Summilux-M ASPH is a completely different lens and from the samples I've seen (I've never used it) seems to set the standard for all other 50's.
JJ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
metallaro1980
Joined: 10 Sep 2009 Posts: 385 Location: West Emilia - Fidenza (PR) 43036 - Italy
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|