a small correction : @ 2:54 it's not Distagon but C-Sonnar (50mm f/1.5 ZM), otherwise, this was the best review of this lens on youtube, rather, of any 50mm lens. Simply brilliant. thanks, warm regards, brother.
Brilliant review! You have touched the core of the reason why photographers are falling in love with manual focus fast fifties again. The sheer joy of turning a focus ring that is smooth as butter, while you are composing your shot and the subsequent joy when you see the "utopian bokeh" in your creation. I enjoy this lens on my Nikon D850, as well as the Milvus and the Voigtlander. And then - experiencing the same joy with my old Takumars and Pancolars on my Sony Alpha 7. Each lens is a (totally) different paintbrush and each image is unique, in its own right.
Thank you. That was just what I need. I got this lens back in the 1980s. I've used it a bit since going digital and loved the colours and bokeh, but mostly it's stayed in the cupboard because of the lack of AF. You've inspired me and I can't wait to explore it all over again with a 90D that's on it's way. I must add that handling this lens is a dream. It still looks and feels brand new. The focus ring is so smooth, it moves like soft butter. The aperture ring is the same, but with the soft clicks into place. (Such a contrast with the (cheap) Canon 50mm f1.8 that only lasted a very short time before seizing up.)
This was one of my favorite lenses, when I was using my Canon Fullframe, but then I switched to Sony A7ii and really started to appreciate it. Then things got even better. I purchased the Techart LM-EA7 and added a K&F EOS to Leica M and started using this lens with autofocus and now I hardly ever take it off! I also have several Minolta lenses that I've converted to autofocus as well.
I forgot about AF adapters. I would imagine the camera has a harder time autofocusing this lens than another, sharper 50mm, but who knows. It is such a gem.
One of my friends is strongly suggesting I move to Sony, and the Techart AF adapter. I have a number of Minolta and Pentax lenses which would probably be of use in this. How do you find the Techart experience?
@@raksh9 It is not as perfect, as a native lens would be, but it is much better than just manual focus. For portraits within 10 feet, it is super nice! I recently started using ready glasses, so it really helps you feel good about the focus.
Really wanted a Zeiss Planar 50mm for my Sony A7R II, after contemplating many manual options (Contax, ZM, ZF, ZE, Loxia...), I went for the autofocusing SEL50F14Z
I have the Zeiss 1.4 50mm. To fix the focusing issue, I went back to a film camera. I have it mounted it on a Nikon FA. The split image/micro prism focusing screen is meant for this lens. I’ll shoot film and have it digitized for post processing. My eyes are deteriorating with age but I can snap focus using the appropriate screen. I use my digital camera with the autofocus lenses that are made specifically for those cameras.
Yes, it is easier to focus using a good film camera. There are many reasons for this, including larger, brighter viewfinders, but even the split prism screens are meant to focus at smaller apertures. Whatever the case, this les IS easier to focus using the focus screen of an FA or similar. Enjoy.
Had a Canon 50 1.4 and a person selling the Zeiss 50 1.4 agreed to switch, with no money in between. Basically I got the lens for 150 US, that is what I paid for the Canon 50 1.4. I use it on my Canon 6D and it was a pain in the *ss to get that focus at 1,4. Then I installed Magic Lantern firmware in the camera and activated focus peaking for Live view. Setting focus now is like tying my shoes. The IQ is breathtaking, from the fantasy backgrounds at f1,4-2,8 to the sharpness and 3D pop from f4-f8.
It is a great lens, but without a focusing screen, it is VERY hard to focus wide open on an dSLR. But with a focusing screen suddenly that lovely OVF goes dark. I really really wish this was AF. STill, at least the Canon 50/1,4 delivers wonderful images- despite perhaps having horrible mechanics.
Try the Nokton 50mm 1.2. The bokeh is fantastic. Below f2 it's a bit dreamy but very sharp in the center of the frame, at f2 and higher the haze dizappers completely and at f8 it's tack sharp from corner to corner even on my 61mp Sony A7rIV.
Thanks, this was very informative! Recently I watched some reviews of other fast manual focus lenses which communicate with the body: the nokton 40 f1.2 and 50 f1. A reviewer said that, using those with the Nikon Zf, the focus guides were reliable and easy to use with those lenses wide open (even though they're soft and lack contrast wide open). The reviewer said that they just used the focus guides, and didn't feel the need to use magnification, and the images were in focus. Hearing that, I was surprised and hopefully I could get the same manual focus experience (where focus guides are present around the subject's eyes, and all I'd need to use) with my Canon R8. Watching your review, am I right to understand that your experience of using the ZEISS Planat T f1.4 has been quite different, and that manual focus wasn't quickly+easily achieved using focus guides alone when the lens was wide open? What about at f2? Thanks a lot
Because the lens glows a bit wide open, contrasting edges are hard to nail wide-open. Using a wide-open focus screen on a dSLR makes it easy to focus wide open, but it is harder to focus on mirrorless cameras, none of which I have used are able to as cleanly bring out focus edges/points due to the nature of the EVF.
I disagree with issues using manual focus on a mirrorless. I use this on my Canon R6m2 and not only get edge assistance but a focus tool of lining up triangles.
I now have this lens and use it on my r8 (same focus system as r6ii). It’s very easy to focus using the focus guides, or even just by eye especially if adding sharpness to the live image preview.
Here is a solution: second generation of the Techart Leica M - Sony FE autofocus adapter.... I am adapting my Voigtlander Nikon lenses with an additional Nikon to M mount adapter.... Works like a charm...even Eye AF. What I do mostly is manual focus into the ballpark and just for the final precision focusing I use the AF motor. This Zeiss lens is 300 something gramms...so it would do fine even with the additional NikonF - M mount adapter...
What about the 32mm touit for Fuji. That is said to be a planar as well. It does AF and with fuji crop it is similar-ish field of view as 50 planar on your full frame DSLR
I bought this lens recently. It's my darling glass. Sharpness is not the attribute I want from this lens, there are other lenses to do that. I use it to get that creamy bokeh and the filmy warmth that no other glass is able to produce. Always use it with Canon 5D, 5DII and 5DIII. Thank you for the videol
@@FauxtakuLounge Thanks for the reaction. New it is, yes, I agree, pretty expensive, but it's now also on the second hand market, and one can be lucky to find a nice sample a reduced price. But with regard to the 58/1.4, beautiful rendering, not so sharp wide open, like the Zeiss, but also with a great plus of AF. (at least on the Nikon camera's ) ;) It reminds me of this Zeiss, that was the reason to ask you.
There is a clear difference in bokeh style, contrast, and sharpness. The Zeiss is the least sharp wide open, both against the modern and older Nikkor and Canon. It fast reaches the same sharpness, but that is a problem with it. Its bokeh is the most open and soft-edged of the three but not everyone likes it. In perfectly controlled environments and shoots, you should be able to easily tell which lens is which- this is to say nothing of preference.
I'm no expert, but I'd look for mould inside, for too much dust, and oil on the aperture blades. Apart from that, is the focus ring smooth? Are there scratches on the glass?
The Zeiss company is so unloved by Canon that the latter does not see Carl Zeiss lenses on its cameras. Lenses are simply not detected on the Canon R system. Sad. I wonder if Carl Zeiss is offended? And what about lens owners? Zeiss apparently doesn't care about his customers. It would be better if he gave up electronics in lenses for Canon
I keep watching your Voigtlander 50mm f1.5 video. I am debating on it for my Sony A7iii or wondering if I should just get the snappy autofocus Zeiss Batis 85mm f.18 for portraits of my 5 yr old. But damm that Chrome 50mm f1.5 is so kawaii....lol. Cheers from Canada. Not sure now if I can go to Japan now, seems like the Japanese gov is blocking all foreigners.
@@FauxtakuLounge I can't help but stare at how nice it looks. I am not used to manual focus. Debating on if its a good idea trying to get shots with a 5 yr old vs snappy 85mm Zeiss batis. I would still have to get an adaptor.
@@skipper4114 Oh, keeping up with a child is tough with a manual lens. Even some autofocus lenses are tough. That said, this lens, when on point, is about as good as it gets.
Skipper I have the Sony Zeiss 50 1.4 Planar, M Voigt 50 1.5, Sony Zeiss 55 1.8 and M zeiss 50 2.0 planar. It depends on what characters you value more.
This lens is really not perfect for shooting wide open digital, especially on a high Mpx sensor. CAs are one of the worst I've seen. Bokeh is a matter of preference, personally prefer a smooth creamy type of blur alike old fashioned bubbly style this lens does. So, having it along with 4 other 50mm lenses. Which show more sharpness wide open, less distortion, less CAs, same good built wuality even (Makroplanar 50mm f2). Why do I keep this lens in my kit? Simply becausevof its rendition. Its trully shines at f4, this is an abdolute golden spot of tjis classical planar. The color and microcontrast reachin the top level at tjis apperture. It noticebly delivers more of a dimensional look. Skin tone is very pleasing with reach color tonality. Where tjis lens also shines is when you shoot film, then CAs are not so pronounced. Very nice color again. Tjis small planar is not perfect but wonderful optical tool as long as it is used for photographing people and not a brick wall.
a small correction : @ 2:54 it's not Distagon but C-Sonnar (50mm f/1.5 ZM),
otherwise, this was the best review of this lens on youtube, rather, of any 50mm lens. Simply brilliant.
thanks, warm regards, brother.
That is an egregious miss. I will amend the video. Many thanks.
@@FauxtakuLounge welcome
Speaking of the term brother, we appear to be subscribed to a few of the same channels, Mouthy Buddha for one, and computing forever for two.
that was not an egregious miss at all, only a minor error.
Brilliant review! You have touched the core of the reason why photographers are falling in love with manual focus fast fifties again. The sheer joy of turning a focus ring that is smooth as butter, while you are composing your shot and the subsequent joy when you see the "utopian bokeh" in your creation. I enjoy this lens on my Nikon D850, as well as the Milvus and the Voigtlander. And then - experiencing the same joy with my old Takumars and Pancolars on my Sony Alpha 7. Each lens is a (totally) different paintbrush and each image is unique, in its own right.
Thank you. That was just what I need.
I got this lens back in the 1980s. I've used it a bit since going digital and loved the colours and bokeh, but mostly it's stayed in the cupboard because of the lack of AF. You've inspired me and I can't wait to explore it all over again with a 90D that's on it's way. I must add that handling this lens is a dream. It still looks and feels brand new. The focus ring is so smooth, it moves like soft butter. The aperture ring is the same, but with the soft clicks into place. (Such a contrast with the (cheap) Canon 50mm f1.8 that only lasted a very short time before seizing up.)
It's a great lens.
This was one of my favorite lenses, when I was using my Canon Fullframe, but then I switched to Sony A7ii and really started to appreciate it. Then things got even better. I purchased the Techart LM-EA7 and added a K&F EOS to Leica M and started using this lens with autofocus and now I hardly ever take it off! I also have several Minolta lenses that I've converted to autofocus as well.
I forgot about AF adapters. I would imagine the camera has a harder time autofocusing this lens than another, sharper 50mm, but who knows. It is such a gem.
@@FauxtakuLounge It actually focuses much faster than my Minolta 58mm 1.4
One of my friends is strongly suggesting I move to Sony, and the Techart AF adapter. I have a number of Minolta and Pentax lenses which would probably be of use in this. How do you find the Techart experience?
@@raksh9 It is not as perfect, as a native lens would be, but it is much better than just manual focus. For portraits within 10 feet, it is super nice! I recently started using ready glasses, so it really helps you feel good about the focus.
Really wanted a Zeiss Planar 50mm for my Sony A7R II, after contemplating many manual options (Contax, ZM, ZF, ZE, Loxia...), I went for the autofocusing SEL50F14Z
I have the Zeiss 1.4 50mm. To fix the focusing issue, I went back to a film camera. I have it mounted it on a Nikon FA. The split image/micro prism focusing screen is meant for this lens. I’ll shoot film and have it digitized for post processing. My eyes are deteriorating with age but I can snap focus using the appropriate screen. I use my digital camera with the autofocus lenses that are made specifically for those cameras.
Yes, it is easier to focus using a good film camera. There are many reasons for this, including larger, brighter viewfinders, but even the split prism screens are meant to focus at smaller apertures. Whatever the case, this les IS easier to focus using the focus screen of an FA or similar. Enjoy.
Had a Canon 50 1.4 and a person selling the Zeiss 50 1.4 agreed to switch, with no money in between. Basically I got the lens for 150 US, that is what I paid for the Canon 50 1.4. I use it on my Canon 6D and it was a pain in the *ss to get that focus at 1,4. Then I installed Magic Lantern firmware in the camera and activated focus peaking for Live view. Setting focus now is like tying my shoes. The IQ is breathtaking, from the fantasy backgrounds at f1,4-2,8 to the sharpness and 3D pop from f4-f8.
It is a great lens, but without a focusing screen, it is VERY hard to focus wide open on an dSLR. But with a focusing screen suddenly that lovely OVF goes dark. I really really wish this was AF. STill, at least the Canon 50/1,4 delivers wonderful images- despite perhaps having horrible mechanics.
@@FauxtakuLounge did you change the focusing screen on your 5D Mark II ? If so which one exactly?
Try the Nokton 50mm 1.2. The bokeh is fantastic. Below f2 it's a bit dreamy but very sharp in the center of the frame, at f2 and higher the haze dizappers completely and at f8 it's tack sharp from corner to corner even on my 61mp Sony A7rIV.
I may see if I can do that. Thank you.
Thanks, this was very informative!
Recently I watched some reviews of other fast manual focus lenses which communicate with the body: the nokton 40 f1.2 and 50 f1. A reviewer said that, using those with the Nikon Zf, the focus guides were reliable and easy to use with those lenses wide open (even though they're soft and lack contrast wide open). The reviewer said that they just used the focus guides, and didn't feel the need to use magnification, and the images were in focus.
Hearing that, I was surprised and hopefully I could get the same manual focus experience (where focus guides are present around the subject's eyes, and all I'd need to use) with my Canon R8.
Watching your review, am I right to understand that your experience of using the ZEISS Planat T f1.4 has been quite different, and that manual focus wasn't quickly+easily achieved using focus guides alone when the lens was wide open? What about at f2?
Thanks a lot
Because the lens glows a bit wide open, contrasting edges are hard to nail wide-open. Using a wide-open focus screen on a dSLR makes it easy to focus wide open, but it is harder to focus on mirrorless cameras, none of which I have used are able to as cleanly bring out focus edges/points due to the nature of the EVF.
I disagree with issues using manual focus on a mirrorless. I use this on my Canon R6m2 and not only get edge assistance but a focus tool of lining up triangles.
I now have this lens and use it on my r8 (same focus system as r6ii). It’s very easy to focus using the focus guides, or even just by eye especially if adding sharpness to the live image preview.
Here is a solution: second generation of the Techart Leica M - Sony FE autofocus adapter.... I am adapting my Voigtlander Nikon lenses with an additional Nikon to M mount adapter.... Works like a charm...even Eye AF. What I do mostly is manual focus into the ballpark and just for the final precision focusing I use the AF motor. This Zeiss lens is 300 something gramms...so it would do fine even with the additional NikonF - M mount adapter...
Have you considered trying the DJI RS 3D Focus System?
What about the 32mm touit for Fuji. That is said to be a planar as well. It does AF and with fuji crop it is similar-ish field of view as 50 planar on your full frame DSLR
That is a nice lens, but the rendering is not the same.
I believe you means Zeiss SONNAR 50mm 1.5. Not Distagon. But I agree. Love that ZM lens.
Yes, Chirag below also pointed out my mistake. Thank you. And fans forever, dude.
Conurus modified the Contax N 50mm 1.4 Planar to autofocus on Canon EF. It's a bit pricey if you find one.
Have you a link for this mod?
I bought this lens recently. It's my darling glass. Sharpness is not the attribute I want from this lens, there are other lenses to do that. I use it to get that creamy bokeh and the filmy warmth that no other glass is able to produce. Always use it with Canon 5D, 5DII and 5DIII.
Thank you for the videol
Very nice video. What adapter do you recommend for a Fuji xt3? Thanks
wanted to love this lens for filming skateboarding but i see myself struggling on moving targets already... great video though :) thanks
Thanks for the review. Have you ever tried the Nikkor 58mm f/1.4 G ?
Only in the shop. That is a beautiful lens, but it is also a little out of my league.
@@FauxtakuLounge Thanks for the reaction. New it is, yes, I agree, pretty expensive, but it's now also on the second hand market, and one can be lucky to find a nice sample a reduced price. But with regard to the 58/1.4, beautiful rendering, not so sharp wide open, like the Zeiss, but also with a great plus of AF. (at least on the Nikon camera's ) ;) It reminds me of this Zeiss, that was the reason to ask you.
I've shot them side-by-side with the Nikon 1.4 and couldn't see the difference for 1/4 the price.
There is a clear difference in bokeh style, contrast, and sharpness. The Zeiss is the least sharp wide open, both against the modern and older Nikkor and Canon. It fast reaches the same sharpness, but that is a problem with it. Its bokeh is the most open and soft-edged of the three but not everyone likes it. In perfectly controlled environments and shoots, you should be able to easily tell which lens is which- this is to say nothing of preference.
Could you please share some tips when buying used one?
I'm no expert, but I'd look for mould inside, for too much dust, and oil on the aperture blades. Apart from that, is the focus ring smooth? Are there scratches on the glass?
zeiss touit 32 mm 1.8 for fujifilm x mount or sony e mount
on point! Thank you for sharing
The Zeiss company is so unloved by Canon that the latter does not see Carl Zeiss lenses on its cameras. Lenses are simply not detected on the Canon R system. Sad. I wonder if Carl Zeiss is offended? And what about lens owners? Zeiss apparently doesn't care about his customers. It would be better if he gave up electronics in lenses for Canon
how does it compare to Z series from Nikon?
I have no way to compare it.
I keep watching your Voigtlander 50mm f1.5 video. I am debating on it for my Sony A7iii or wondering if I should just get the snappy autofocus Zeiss Batis 85mm f.18 for portraits of my 5 yr old. But damm that Chrome 50mm f1.5 is so kawaii....lol. Cheers from Canada. Not sure now if I can go to Japan now, seems like the Japanese gov is blocking all foreigners.
The Voigtlander is great. The thing with it is that it is aspherical, which makes onion rings in OOF highlights.
@@FauxtakuLounge I can't help but stare at how nice it looks. I am not used to manual focus. Debating on if its a good idea trying to get shots with a 5 yr old vs snappy 85mm Zeiss batis. I would still have to get an adaptor.
@@skipper4114 Oh, keeping up with a child is tough with a manual lens. Even some autofocus lenses are tough. That said, this lens, when on point, is about as good as it gets.
Skipper I have the Sony Zeiss 50 1.4 Planar, M Voigt 50 1.5, Sony Zeiss 55 1.8 and M zeiss 50 2.0 planar. It depends on what characters you value more.
This lens is really not perfect for shooting wide open digital, especially on a high Mpx sensor. CAs are one of the worst I've seen. Bokeh is a matter of preference, personally prefer a smooth creamy type of blur alike old fashioned bubbly style this lens does. So, having it along with 4 other 50mm lenses. Which show more sharpness wide open, less distortion, less CAs, same good built wuality even (Makroplanar 50mm f2). Why do I keep this lens in my kit? Simply becausevof its rendition. Its trully shines at f4, this is an abdolute golden spot of tjis classical planar. The color and microcontrast reachin the top level at tjis apperture. It noticebly delivers more of a dimensional look. Skin tone is very pleasing with reach color tonality. Where tjis lens also shines is when you shoot film, then CAs are not so pronounced. Very nice color again.
Tjis small planar is not perfect but wonderful optical tool as long as it is used for photographing people and not a brick wall.
Brilliant comment.
If you like that lens, do not try the Hasselblad 80mm 2.8 planar
Fauxtaku here. I've tried the Hassy 80, but on a V body. Amazing.
My standard lens for weddings for decades.
best 50mm 1.4 ever made is the current summilux SL, and equally, the summilux m aspherical. Those lenses are not made by humans..