DPR Forum
Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. Whether it is Medium Format, fullframe, APS-C, MFT or smaller formats. Digital or film. DPRF is a forum for everybody and for every format.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Zeiss Ikon for the camera or Zeiss Ikon for the lenses
- Thread starter mohican
- Start date
Hey, who is the first person to know about this new lens ?
http://www.zeiss.com/C12567A8003B8B6F/EmbedTitelIntern/CSonnar_1.5_50_ZM.EN/$File/CSonnar_1.5_50_ZM.EN.pdf
(copy the whole line and paste, instead of just clicking the underlined URL)
C Sonnar 50 1.4 ZM T* something completely new, sensational isn't it ?
http://www.zeiss.com/C12567A8003B8B6F/EmbedTitelIntern/CSonnar_1.5_50_ZM.EN/$File/CSonnar_1.5_50_ZM.EN.pdf
(copy the whole line and paste, instead of just clicking the underlined URL)
C Sonnar 50 1.4 ZM T* something completely new, sensational isn't it ?
This 50/1.5 Sonnar seems to have unusually shaped diaphragm blades. I wonder why.
It would be curious to see how it compares to Planar 50/2.0 in real life.
At 850 Euro listed price I am personally not going to rush and buy one of these considering that at least on the paper in terms of MTF data available Planar 50/2.0 is a better choice. One area where this new Sonnar is slightly better is a distortion at edges of the frame, but it's not that significantly better. And obviously it's slightly faster than Planar, but then again at just under 1-f/stop difference it's not that much faster and there is also the Summilux which is probably better.
So, I'm bit surprised they're doing this. I'm guessing they're either counting on renewed interest from people that used Contax II back in 50's or they anticipate some real demand for it. If this lens was primarily needed for Japanese market I think they're making a big mistake. Focusing too much on Japanese market alone is what's partially to blame for Contax demise.
Since my first post I did get Zeiss Ikon and Planar 50/2.0. It already got a bit of a beating on my hiking trips and so far I really love it. It won't replace my Aria when it comes to flash photography though, but I like it so much that I wish Zeiss would design a fully mechanical Ikon as well.
It would be curious to see how it compares to Planar 50/2.0 in real life.
At 850 Euro listed price I am personally not going to rush and buy one of these considering that at least on the paper in terms of MTF data available Planar 50/2.0 is a better choice. One area where this new Sonnar is slightly better is a distortion at edges of the frame, but it's not that significantly better. And obviously it's slightly faster than Planar, but then again at just under 1-f/stop difference it's not that much faster and there is also the Summilux which is probably better.
So, I'm bit surprised they're doing this. I'm guessing they're either counting on renewed interest from people that used Contax II back in 50's or they anticipate some real demand for it. If this lens was primarily needed for Japanese market I think they're making a big mistake. Focusing too much on Japanese market alone is what's partially to blame for Contax demise.
Since my first post I did get Zeiss Ikon and Planar 50/2.0. It already got a bit of a beating on my hiking trips and so far I really love it. It won't replace my Aria when it comes to flash photography though, but I like it so much that I wish Zeiss would design a fully mechanical Ikon as well.
I have had Ikon for close to 10 months now. Recently it completely quit on me. Shutter wouldn't work, I couldn't wind film, it was totally dead. I sent it in for repair and turns out it happened because it took a hit (probably against one of the rocks on my numerous hiking trips). What was unpleasant to hear from repair guy though is that internally it's all plastic and electronics. All that metal you see outside is useless if a hit results in all components inside being dislodged and ICs disconnected from each other.
So, I give up, I will have to cough up some money for a real Leica.
Now I only have to figure out which one - used single-stroke M3 or used/new MP with 0.85 finder...
So, I give up, I will have to cough up some money for a real Leica.
Now I only have to figure out which one - used single-stroke M3 or used/new MP with 0.85 finder...
Sorry to hear of the Zeiss Ikon mishap Mike. I had considered this camera for the extra stop in shutter speed over a M.
M3 verses the MP: if you don't need an internal camera meter, and don't care if aux. viewfinders are needed for anything wider than 35mm ... then find a recently reconditioned M3. Great viewfinder, and obviously a robust camera. Check the viewfinder for de-silvering.
I like the MP also, and used one for awhile before moving to the MP3 shown above. You can consider an 0.72 finder and a Leica 1.25X magnifier. I use 3rd party magnifiers on my 2 M8s:
a 1.15X on one and a 1.35X on the other. These particular mags feature an adjustable diopter but aren't available in the USA, so a friend in Holland secured them for me and sent them along. Prior to that I had bought 2 mags that didn't have diopter adjustments which I need. If you go this route and don't need a diopter, let me know ... I'll sell you one of these for less.
M3 verses the MP: if you don't need an internal camera meter, and don't care if aux. viewfinders are needed for anything wider than 35mm ... then find a recently reconditioned M3. Great viewfinder, and obviously a robust camera. Check the viewfinder for de-silvering.
I like the MP also, and used one for awhile before moving to the MP3 shown above. You can consider an 0.72 finder and a Leica 1.25X magnifier. I use 3rd party magnifiers on my 2 M8s:
a 1.15X on one and a 1.35X on the other. These particular mags feature an adjustable diopter but aren't available in the USA, so a friend in Holland secured them for me and sent them along. Prior to that I had bought 2 mags that didn't have diopter adjustments which I need. If you go this route and don't need a diopter, let me know ... I'll sell you one of these for less.
Marc,
What is the brand name for those non-Leica magnifiers you got from Netherlands? 0.72 with magnifier is option that I may consider, but without trying it first hand it sounds a bit cumbersome (viewfinder piece+magnifier+my glasses) and may make it impossible to see 35mm framelines. On .85 at least theoretically it should be possible...
With M3 there are too many hidden underwater rocks - you never know what you got unless you're getting it from a really trustworthy dealer and even then, considering most of those M3s are like 40 years old it's somewhat riskier proposition than getting MP. Having internal meter is a huge plus - I frequently carry Gossen light meter with me, but not at all times and it's not always convenient (or wise) to use external meter, so having built-in meter is a big deal for me.
Mike.
What is the brand name for those non-Leica magnifiers you got from Netherlands? 0.72 with magnifier is option that I may consider, but without trying it first hand it sounds a bit cumbersome (viewfinder piece+magnifier+my glasses) and may make it impossible to see 35mm framelines. On .85 at least theoretically it should be possible...
With M3 there are too many hidden underwater rocks - you never know what you got unless you're getting it from a really trustworthy dealer and even then, considering most of those M3s are like 40 years old it's somewhat riskier proposition than getting MP. Having internal meter is a huge plus - I frequently carry Gossen light meter with me, but not at all times and it's not always convenient (or wise) to use external meter, so having built-in meter is a big deal for me.
Mike.
Try megaperls:
http://www.unicircuits.com/shop/product_info.php?products_id=112
I have the 1.35 one for my RD-1s. Very good, multicoated. Inbuilt diopter correction. Not much quality diff vs the 1.3 leica one i have.
http://www.unicircuits.com/shop/product_info.php?products_id=112
I have the 1.35 one for my RD-1s. Very good, multicoated. Inbuilt diopter correction. Not much quality diff vs the 1.3 leica one i have.
That's the one listed above by Robert.
I recently used the 1.35X and 1.15X on a pair of M8s to shoot a wedding ... one with a 75 Lux and the other with a 28/2 ASPH mounted. I had zero out of focus shots of almost 200 done.
I notice that there is a 0.85X available also ... which may relieve the eyeglass issue.
I recently used the 1.35X and 1.15X on a pair of M8s to shoot a wedding ... one with a 75 Lux and the other with a 28/2 ASPH mounted. I had zero out of focus shots of almost 200 done.
I notice that there is a 0.85X available also ... which may relieve the eyeglass issue.