Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

50 Milvus vs CY Planar vs ZF Planar
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2023 1:38 am    Post subject: 50 Milvus vs CY Planar vs ZF Planar Reply with quote
Well, I am trying to build out a retirement lens set when I hope to finally have time to enjoy them. I have quite a nice collection of vintage 50s, but as the window is closing on non-plasticky MF lenses, I have been looking at getting a good 50 1.4. I note that the CY 1.4s are now around $200, ZFs 350ish, and Milvus's low 600s and some on auction have gone for nothing (300's). Any one here do a comparison?

Again, vintage character are important but feel like a good time to get a great technical fast lens (thats affordable). Not interested in the Arts......

Thoughts?


PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2023 2:23 am    Post subject: Re: 50 Milvus vs CY Planar vs ZF Planar Reply with quote
Gatorengineer64 wrote:
Well, I am trying to build out a retirement lens set when I hope to finally have time to enjoy them. I have quite a nice collection of vintage 50s, but as the window is closing on non-plasticky MF lenses, I have been looking at getting a good 50 1.4. I note that the CY 1.4s are now around $200, ZFs 350ish, and Milvus's low 600s and some on auction have gone for nothing (300's). Any one here do a comparison?

Again, vintage character are important but feel like a good time to get a great technical fast lens (thats affordable). Not interested in the Arts......

Thoughts?


There is probably a comparison somewhere but it might take some searching.
I don't have any of these lenses, but here are my thoughts for what they are worth:
If you can afford the Milvus, I am sure that you will not be disappointed.
One alternative, not mentioned - and yes it is AF as well as MF - is the Sigma Art 50mm f1.4.
It is certainly a great technical fast lens (that's affordable).
Cheers
Tom


PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2023 8:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Why not buy a Ttartisan 50mm f/1.4 aspherical?


PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2023 12:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have seen articles on the 85 but not the 50, I know its better was just looking for subjective experience from this group if any.

I had the TTArtisans 0.95.... Hated the feel, and optically it was a total dog biscuit.

Not a sigma fan, although the Arts are extremely well regarded, and they will be the future of affordable premium glass with Zeiss gone from the space. Leica will be the Couture end of the market.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2023 2:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have a C/Y Planar 50mm 1.4 and wouldn't want to change it for any other version if that is any help.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 08, 2023 7:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
blotafton wrote:
I have a C/Y Planar 50mm 1.4 and wouldn't want to change it for any other version if that is any help.


I have a few f1.4 normal lenses including the Zeiss CY Planar 1.4/50mm and the Zeiss (Sony) Planar 1.4/50 mm ZA SSM , and I've been testing them side-by-side in the "landscape mode" (i. e. infinity and best corner-to-corner resolutiion). I have no experience using the "Classic" or the "Milvus" Zeiss 1.4/50mm.

The Planar CY 1.4/50mm is among the better 1.4/50mm of its time (around 1980), clearly better than e. g. the Super takumar 1.4/50mm or the Yashica ML 1.4/50mm. That said, lenses such as the Canon FD, the Minolta MD-III, the Nikkor AiS or the Konica AR 1.4/50mm are absolutely comparable, and the Mamiya Sekor EF 1.4/50mm probably is better. The Zess CY 1.4/50 has a very nice built quality though, and both focusing and aperture ring are easy to operate.

The much newer Zeiss (Sony) ZA 1.4/50mm SSM (Sony/Minolta A mount) was the best "pre-Otus" normal lens from Zeiss. While it was better than the Minolta and the Sony AF 1.4/50mm in direct comparison, I decided not to buy it since the improvements (on 24 MP FF) were not that remarkable. Otus is something different, but they are beasts. Much too heavy for my daily use (not talking about the price here).

S


PostPosted: Mon Oct 09, 2023 5:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The C/Y Planar 50 is the original.

The ZE and ZF from my understanding are the same optical formula except for mounts that are not dead. ZE for Canon EF. ZF for Nikon F. I imagine the T* coatings have improved over time. The optical glass may also be different as environmental extremists may have banned leaded glass in optics. It is not clear to me if it is still allowed or not. I have read both yes and no, so I am left confused, but not curious enough to dig deeper.

The Milvus is an evolution of the design with more elements and better aberration correction especially at wider apertures. The Milvus lens is much bigger in size, however, and the Milvus line is also weather sealed. This will be a more modern lens.

Do you care if you use an adapter or a native mount?

If you shoot portraits at wider apertures of models that don't have perfect skin, do you care if your model has a mental break down looking at the pictures if you don't apply skin softening or not?

Do you shoot landscapes at the widest aperture you can expecting the best corner sharpness your money can buy?

Do you intend to use it handheld at wides apertures for night photography where coma correction is important?


PostPosted: Mon Oct 09, 2023 8:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:


The Planar CY 1.4/50mm is among the better 1.4/50mm of its time (around 1980), clearly better than e. g. the Super takumar 1.4/50mm or the Yashica ML 1.4/50mm. That said, lenses such as the Canon FD, the Minolta MD-III, the Nikkor AiS or the Konica AR 1.4/50mm are absolutely comparable, and the Mamiya Sekor EF 1.4/50mm probably is better. The Zess CY 1.4/50 has a very nice built quality though, and both focusing and aperture ring are easy to operate.

S


I agree with Steve here. I own a few 50s between 1.4 and 1.8 and the Planar C/Y is the nicest to handle, but the results are not better (in my opinion) than some of the other ones mentioned. Not worth the extra price paid for the Zeiss tag. Except for the handling, which is truly remarkable.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 11, 2023 12:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I found some stuff on FM. Differences are mtf, coatings and 6 blade vs 9. Zs are reported warmer. This lens will be shot a7 r4 and gfx. Both through an m adapter. I have a contax in the mail...


PostPosted: Wed Oct 11, 2023 12:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I found some stuff on FM. Differences are mtf, coatings and 6 blade vs 9. Zs are reported warmer. This lens will be shot a7 r4 and gfx. Both through an m adapter. I have a contax in the mail...
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1