Hi Dustin, I've been reading a lot of bad reviews about this lens, some people trashing Zeiss for the "soft" focus at 1.4. So, I went to the Zeiss company website in search of answers. Here's what I found out. Zeiss put out 3 50mm; the Milvus, the Otus, and the Classic. If you are looking for ultimate sharpness wide open, buy the Milvus or the Otus (the difference between the two is more to do with color); the Classic was made intentionally soft at 1.4 for portrait shooters who prefer a soft focus filter to smooth skin imperfections. The "softness" is intentional, aimed at a particular type of shooter. As you mentioned, the lenses gets very sharp very quickly as you stop down. Now all the haters can get a life.
LOL. This lens is not designed with a number of the characteristics that modern photographers are programmed to value, but it does reward those that use it to its strengths.
Dustin Abbott Yes, further research reveals it was actually remake of the Original 1896 Planar design, which was always soft wide open, but incredibly sharp as one stopped down. Just about all lenses by other companies throughout the 20th century were based on it's design. I actually shoot art for artists and rely on its Unbelievable sharpness at f/11! Thanks for your good work.
If I were ZEISS, I'd replied the same. The 1.4/50 CY is - in my eyes - as same as soft, and relatively sharp at 5.6 only (@ Sony7III and EOS 5DIII, 5DSR).
Nice review. I actually sold one about two years ago out of frustration coming from the difficulty to focus with modern cameras and replaced it with a Nikon 50mm 1.4 offering, thinking I could do without the cinematic look of the Zeiss... Two years down the road I am selling the Nikon and getting the 50mm 1.4 ZF.2 lens again. As you say, it's not the most technically correct lens out there but has lots of character coming from colour rendering, tonal transitions and drawing. A unique offering, very much misunderstood and underestimated.
Hi I got Carl Zeiss 1.4 Planar all manual lens I used for my Contax RTS II, Have it since 1984 , got a adaptall to canon and I love it very good quality photos comes from it.
I’ve seven 50mm lens(!) ranging from mundane FE to Leitze Summicron and Sumitar. But I spot this Planar beauty sitting at a corner of a second hand store, for $280, I can’t resist. Comparing to the Leica Summicron, which is very consistent throughout all apertures, this one is temperamental, but in a good way. In different aperture settings, it has a different look, but always interesting rather than annoying. I like it very much, as sharpness is not the most important aspect on artistic photography, sort of like painting, you don’t look at a Mona Lisa with a microscope. The overall structure is where it is most important, and this lens have it in spades.
@@DustinAbbottTWI If I may, is the Makro-Planar 50mm 1.4 superior to this 1.4 Planar? Am a bit confused. So it does Macro as well plus the what the 2010 1.4 Planar can do?
Great review, just bought one, to use for copy work, so the "1.4 softness" isn't an issue (always shooting at f/8 or above). Look forward to getting it. BTW, I am surprised, being from the old school (B4 AF), that AF is sooo important. I stopped relying on AF years ago, after losing many shots due to "indecisive focusing" phenomenon! Ha, ha. I would encourage all shooters to turn the AF off for a year or so and learn to "see" focus again. Thanks again!
Thanks for the great review. I've owned and used this lens for years and have grown to love it. It offers a unique rendition that the newly designed lenses just don't have. I think that you give it a very fair review and highlight some of it's unique qualities. I've read a number of pro reviews where this lens is dimissed because of some test pics of a door knob and mtf charts I barely understand. There are two "pros" I would add to your list. While it's not very sharp wide open, the colour does not fade as it does on other 50s. Furthermore, at 2.8 this lens becomes very sharp. I find myself shooting at 2.8 as here you get that so called 3d look.
+Dustin Abbott I wanted to add that I'm currently shopping for an 85mm and am torn between the Milvus and the classic Planar. But it's precisely those qualities that you attributed to the 50 that makes the classic 85 so appealing in spite of it's ostensible short comings wide open. What are you thoughts?
***** I've reviewed the Milvus but not the classic lens. I think you are probably right, but I can't back that up with first hand experience. The Milvus is a super nice lens, but it's definitely big, too.
Great review Dustin. I have the Nikon version 50mm 1.4 ZF.2, on a D700. I absolutely love this lens. It's something about manual focus lenses, that makes you think more than just your framing. It reminds me of my old Nikon f100 camera with mf lens. Where u just can't fire away at everything and hope u have a perfect composition, exposure and sharp picture. You put more thought in to it before capturing the image.
Thanks Dustin, have u tried the Zeiss 100mm f2 makro-planar T? The Zeiss 100 MP ZF.2, is my most astonishing lense to date. Distortion free images. Chromatic aberration are well controlled throughout all the apertures. Extremely sharp throughout the entire frame. Out of focus is smooth and buttery. Long focus throw for precise focusing. If magnification of 1:2 is not a deal breaker. Then this is an absolute lens to have.
Another excellent Review Dustin! Love the personal touch you put in that draws from your own experiences. Magda Wasiczek, one of my favourite photographers, uses old lenses for the very qualities you described with liking to use old lenses; the drawing, the interesting flare. She goes as far as to even use damaged lenses for effect. I have the Canon f1.4 and like it even-though it's a bit dreamy but after what you have said, and at this price point, i am adding this CZ lens to my watch list.
Thanks for the review. I've owned one of those for some years now and didn't use it as much. But in my new mirrorless cânon it's become one of my favorites if not my favorite. In the street and at parties I usually shoot at f/4 through f/8 so it's very sharp. When I need to shoot it at 1.4 it's usually in situations when the dreamy look comes in handy. So, I'm finding it very suitable to my tastes. Also, very correctable with post-processing. It's like falling in love again with an old friend.
I'm a photographer using Canon's 50mm and 85mm f/1.8 lenses and I suppose my biggest issue with the 85mm particularly is that it's too clinical for portraits while the abberations are difficult to deal with in landscape and urban photography. So I am very pleased to hear that the Planars are not as clinical and I'm very interested in using them :).
Zeiss lenses are loved by those that use them because of their beautiful drawing. Manual focus is an acquired talent, but if you can learn it there are a number of manual focus lenses that are really rewarding.
Sick video, young man....very thorough. Was thinking about purchasing but you probably just about talked me out of it, or in????? Damn it! It's not so easy, you know.
From your recommendation I just pickup today the Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 Planar T*.WOW expensive. Thank you. Two words that are simple to say but not said enough.
Dustin Abbott Dustin, it's been 4 months and the 50 Planar has become my favorite lens. I prefer this lens over the 50L that I used to own. I'm looking to buy a telephoto lens for head shot portraiture, landscape, and floral photography. Zeiss 135mm APO or Canon 70-200mm II?
***** Hard to make a bad choice there. The image quality will be somewhat better from the Zeiss, but the Canon is one of the most used professional lenses in the world for a reason.
thanks to share more than a clinical review and put something of your personal taste and experience in those reviews. I'm totally agree that today seems all about sharpness, and this zeiss lenses are really amazing in something that not everybody look for, the rendering, microcontrast, 3D effect.
Personally I prefer the textural quality of this lens to the newer zeiss. The earlier lens designs of sonnar - tessar - planar were meant to bring out different optical qualities & textures unlike the present obsession with faster/shallower/cream out background completely. During the SLR film era a 1.4f was often intended to bring out a dreamlike background and one had slow film (fuji 50 - kodak even slower). The 1.8 range often had the combination of more sharpness yet retaining the quality of artistic blur. Actually one of the very underrated primes is the Fujinon 55/1.8
I got one 2 years ago, after listing to this video, to use on pictorialism projects. This year i got the Zeiss Milvus 50mm F2.0 macro , after listing to your macro video, to use on D700 and D800E for landscape and panorama. I'm saving for a 2nd hand D850 and I waiting for the Z8 to be released and if it have a 55 Mpix sensor I will get one in a few years time but use my F-system lenses on it with a FTZ adapter. My problem is that I have a 300mm screwdrive lens and AF will not work so I have to upgrade to a 2nd hand 400mm F2.8 VR lens
This is the type of review I was looking for. I consider sharpness a boring pursue as megapixels, even as consequence of the latter. I think all lenses are enough sharp and cameras have for already a long time enough megapixels, what is interesting to me is if a lens is optically corrected, and if it has a nice contrast and a rendering that makes you feel to be there. The images in this review seem to me to have those traits I value more, although I can say that as I am not a professional, I just try to get a few moments to last before they are forgotten.
Great review and information. Now I'm thinking if I should get the Nikon-mount of this Zeiss or the Voigtlander Nokton 58mm f/1.4. Both seem to be great lenses.
Dustin Abbott I'm looking for manual focus lenses because I often shoot film. The Zeiss is slightly more expensive than the Voigtlander but they're both made in the same factory. I never tried both brands before so I don't know their differences in terms of picture quality. Which one would you recommend?, and thanks for the reply.
LKD27 I'm not familiar with the Voigtlander. I need to do a review of one of their lenses. I would compare reviews of the two. If I ever done one I'll try to post an update here.
Dustin Abbott I really do like your reviews because you also mention each lens' unique characteristics, like colour renderings, or even the length of the "throws" and what it does, as well as their strength and weak points, while most reviews that I often read or watch usually only focus on the lenses' sharpness and proneness to produce chromatic aberrations. Keep up the good work and I'm looking forward for your next reviews.
Hi Dustin! I've observed a similar effect with the newer lenses- feeling more clinical than artistic. If you had to recommend an artistic wide, and prime lens for a film maker, which two would you pick?
***** Dave - I'm actually very partial to the new Tamron 15-30 VC on the wide end, although it is pretty heavy. You'll have to elaborate on what kind of focal length you are looking for in a prime. I actually use an older Zeiss Planar T* 1.7/50mm quite a bit (with an adapter). It is a beautiful video lens.
***** Not necessarily. The Planar T* 50mm f/1.4 is a native mount, which has its advantages, and it is much better at infinity than my lens because of the adapter.
@@DustinAbbottTWI the price of these used in China is about $100 now. I’m hesitant to get one after having a Batis 40/f2. Its priced in with the softness.
Subscribed. Excelent channel! Lot of information, Excelent review Dustin. Not everything is sharpness, I own the Planar 85mm f1.4 zf2 and the colours makes my photography so special. Regards!
I haven't. But I can pretty much get anything for review. Maybe I'll put it on the list to review at the same time I get the new Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8 when it comes out.
Dustin, your reviews are amazing. I currently own the Canon 35mm f/2 IS on an APS-C and it's been a dream to use. After watching this review I'm seriously considering getting this lens. It sounds incredibly fun to use and I think it would be a great addition to what I consider a very practical 35mm. Will I actually get a lot of use out of a 50mm f/1.4 planar? It is very similar focal length after all
Thanks for the great feedback. As to your question: that is a tough call. I actually really like 35IS on a crop body. I think you might be better served getting a different focal length than a 50mm if you are happy with the 35mm angle of view. An 85mm lens would probably be a better option.
Hey Dustin - did you have the time to try if this lens also works with the focus guide triangles on the new R cameras (R5 for example)? From what I heard it's not really limited to RF lenses with electronics like the new Voigtländer Nokton.
Dustin - you’re my go to reviewer for lens! So thorough! You mentioned the Takumar and Zeiss Planar in the same video. If I was to buy one, which one would you recommend, as I believe you have both. I have the Zeiss 2/35 ZE and love the look.
Very informative video.Bit expensive glass but it must be worth it... Can you recommend a reasonable adapter for Sony APS-'e camera that supports Auto focus for this lens???
I must have a unicorn version. Or the majority of owners need to improve manual focus and pro calibration of their lens to body. Mine is razor sharp and very contrasty wide open on my 5D miii. And it was bought second hand/well used off eBay for $200. I only wish that the focus throw was shorter or the distance scale were a bit more telling like on Leica M or R glass.
Is there a difference between the ZE and the MM mount in Bokeh? I have a Canon 5D MKIII and I am debating to get the Ze mount or the older MM with an adapter. please advice :)
I haven't used the older one, so I can't really comment. If it just a mount difference and the same optical formula, there might not be a difference. But if the optical formula or even coatings have changed you might get a different result.
There is a difference between them. The coatings on the MMJ versions are different and produce more of a vintage feel where as the ZE/ZF lenses feature a more digital look. In addition, Zeiss has used lead glass in the ZE/ZF versions, making them have much better microcontrast and color saturation.
I really appreciate your great reviews. They helped me decide between the 150-600s and the 100-400 II. Just a bit curious, have you ever tried out the voigtlander ultron 40mm f2 SL II lens?
instead of 40mm f/2, go for Voigtlander 58mm f/1.4 SL II. I had it and i think that lens is way,way too underrated That indeed is a special lens,starting from it's build to it's image quality. Just check it out ;)
I saw some videos on Canon 5Dmark II with the lens, but now that you said this, i think they used an adapter (Nikon to Canon). That lens is a gem,it is a way better option than Nikon's 58mm f/1.4 G lens :) Cheers
Hi Dustin. Thanks for the quick reply. I'm new to film so not sure how the EF mount should look like. But mine looks like this: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF_lens_mount#/media/File:Canon_EF_camera_mount.jpg If I buy a non-Canon version of the lens (i've been eyeing one at a decent price), which adapter would I need? Thank you so much for your help, really appreciate it.
Looks like the EF mount to me. The Canon version will fit fine as is, but if you purchase some other version you will need the appropriate adapter from the native mount of the lens to the EF mount.
Bro will u please test this lens with a nikon dslr and tell us that do it works better on canon or nikon . I have nikon d810 and a canon 5d mk ii I don't know that should I buy this lens for nikon or canon .
Just be sure that your shooting priorities are what this lens offers. It’s not particularly sharp at wide apertures. The Samyang AF 45m F1.8 might be a good option for you if you are on a budget.
Hi Dustin, Great to have come across this great, concise review as I recently just purchased this lens! Of all my glass, this is definitely my "artistic" lens (not to be confused with my Sigma ART lens). As you noted, it really seems to have a unique colour rendition and drawing like no other. It does become sharp around f/2.8+, and it really does have a special place in my collection :) See you on Flickr and 500 px!
Thanks, Todd. I was glad to see your name there this morning. I'm glad you are enjoying the Zeiss. I am eager to review the Milvus replacement of this lens
one of the excellent reviews. thank you dustin. i bought this when the price came down for few days ($655) from adorama - black friday weekend. this is not as sharp as i expected. but the color it produces is beautiful................. its true, image from this lens has a character. I am very happy buying this lens. I like the manual focus in it. gives more control on what I am looking at/what I want to look at. sometimes auto focus points something else than what I am looking through viewfinder. added a link to one of the images taken using this lens. www.flickr.com/photos/roy1729/15936193006/in/photostream/lightbox/
+Isaac Gutierrez If you are looking for ultimate sharpness at wide apertures, this lens is a disappointment. People buy it more for the "look" wide open than the sharpness. You will find the new Milvus 50mm f/1.4 much, much sharper. Another great choice now is the Tamron 45mm f/1.8 VC.
Hi Dustin, I've been reading a lot of bad reviews about this lens, some people trashing Zeiss for the "soft" focus at 1.4. So, I went to the Zeiss company website in search of answers. Here's what I found out. Zeiss put out 3 50mm; the Milvus, the Otus, and the Classic. If you are looking for ultimate sharpness wide open, buy the Milvus or the Otus (the difference between the two is more to do with color); the Classic was made intentionally soft at 1.4 for portrait shooters who prefer a soft focus filter to smooth skin imperfections. The "softness" is intentional, aimed at a particular type of shooter. As you mentioned, the lenses gets very sharp very quickly as you stop down. Now all the haters can get a life.
LOL. This lens is not designed with a number of the characteristics that modern photographers are programmed to value, but it does reward those that use it to its strengths.
Dustin Abbott Yes, further research reveals it was actually remake of the Original 1896 Planar design, which was always soft wide open, but incredibly sharp as one stopped down. Just about all lenses by other companies throughout the 20th century were based on it's design. I actually shoot art for artists and rely on its Unbelievable sharpness at f/11! Thanks for your good work.
If I were ZEISS, I'd replied the same. The 1.4/50 CY is - in my eyes - as same as soft, and relatively sharp at 5.6 only (@ Sony7III and EOS 5DIII, 5DSR).
Good information I got it for my Pictorialism projects. But I have som problem focus it on my D700 so I must use the internal focus dot on the camera.
Nice review. I actually sold one about two years ago out of frustration coming from the difficulty to focus with modern cameras and replaced it with a Nikon 50mm 1.4 offering, thinking I could do without the cinematic look of the Zeiss... Two years down the road I am selling the Nikon and getting the 50mm 1.4 ZF.2 lens again. As you say, it's not the most technically correct lens out there but has lots of character coming from colour rendering, tonal transitions and drawing. A unique offering, very much misunderstood and underestimated.
Hi I got Carl Zeiss 1.4 Planar all manual lens I used for my Contax RTS II, Have it since 1984 , got a adaptall to canon and I love it very good quality photos comes from it.
+JOSEPH SOLTES Nice. Enjoy
I’ve seven 50mm lens(!) ranging from mundane FE to Leitze Summicron and Sumitar. But I spot this Planar beauty sitting at a corner of a second hand store, for $280, I can’t resist. Comparing to the Leica Summicron, which is very consistent throughout all apertures, this one is temperamental, but in a good way. In different aperture settings, it has a different look, but always interesting rather than annoying. I like it very much, as sharpness is not the most important aspect on artistic photography, sort of like painting, you don’t look at a Mona Lisa with a microscope. The overall structure is where it is most important, and this lens have it in spades.
Great review of this little beauty! Btw, I was blown away with the 3D like pictures in your review of the OTUS lens .. wow!!
It's in a whole other class.
@@DustinAbbottTWI If I may, is the Makro-Planar 50mm 1.4 superior to this 1.4 Planar? Am a bit confused. So it does Macro as well plus the what the 2010 1.4 Planar can do?
Great review, just bought one, to use for copy work, so the "1.4 softness" isn't an issue (always shooting at f/8 or above). Look forward to getting it. BTW, I am surprised, being from the old school (B4 AF), that AF is sooo important. I stopped relying on AF years ago, after losing many shots due to "indecisive focusing" phenomenon! Ha, ha. I would encourage all shooters to turn the AF off for a year or so and learn to "see" focus again. Thanks again!
I wrote an article for DPS about how every photographer should shoot with a manual focus lens for some of those very reasons.
BTW, just got my lense and I have to say it's pretty awesome; yes, soft at 1.4, but man is it sharp above 2.0. Nice lense, nice review.
Thanks, Henry. Enjoy the lens!
Do you still like it? I am thinking of getting one. Thanks :)
Thanks for the great review. I've owned and used this lens for years and have grown to love it. It offers a unique rendition that the newly designed lenses just don't have. I think that you give it a very fair review and highlight some of it's unique qualities. I've read a number of pro reviews where this lens is dimissed because of some test pics of a door knob and mtf charts I barely understand. There are two "pros" I would add to your list. While it's not very sharp wide open, the colour does not fade as it does on other 50s. Furthermore, at 2.8 this lens becomes very sharp. I find myself shooting at 2.8 as here you get that so called 3d look.
+Ostap Melnik Thanks for the nice feedback. I'm just finishing up a Voigtlander 20mm f/3.5 lens that I feel similarly about.
+Dustin Abbott I wanted to add that I'm currently shopping for an 85mm and am torn between the Milvus and the classic Planar. But it's precisely those qualities that you attributed to the 50 that makes the classic 85 so appealing in spite of it's ostensible short comings wide open. What are you thoughts?
*****
I've reviewed the Milvus but not the classic lens. I think you are probably right, but I can't back that up with first hand experience. The Milvus is a super nice lens, but it's definitely big, too.
+Dustin Abbott thanks for the feedback 👍
Great review Dustin. I have the Nikon version 50mm 1.4 ZF.2, on a D700. I absolutely love this lens. It's something about manual focus lenses, that makes you think more than just your framing. It reminds me of my old Nikon f100 camera with mf lens. Where u just can't fire away at everything and hope u have a perfect composition, exposure and sharp picture. You put more thought in to it before capturing the image.
Herwin Cortez I've got an article I'm about to share that says pretty much exactly that!
Great review, Dustin, keep 'em coming.
That's the plan ;)
the best preview i saw so far ! Thank you ! i am going to buy this lens for sure !
Enjoy!
Thanks Dustin, have u tried the Zeiss 100mm f2 makro-planar T? The Zeiss 100 MP ZF.2, is my most astonishing lense to date. Distortion free images. Chromatic aberration are well controlled throughout all the apertures. Extremely sharp throughout the entire frame. Out of focus is smooth and buttery. Long focus throw for precise focusing. If magnification of 1:2 is not a deal breaker. Then this is an absolute lens to have.
Herwin Cortez I'm reviewing the Otus 55 right now, but the MP100 is next lens on my list from Zeiss. Spring is a great time for macro!
Another excellent Review Dustin! Love the personal touch you put in that draws from your own experiences. Magda Wasiczek, one of my favourite photographers, uses old lenses for the very qualities you described with liking to use old lenses; the drawing, the interesting flare. She goes as far as to even use damaged lenses for effect. I have the Canon f1.4 and like it even-though it's a bit dreamy but after what you have said, and at this price point, i am adding this CZ lens to my watch list.
Good feedback. There is more to optical performance than absolute sharpness!
Thanks for the review. I've owned one of those for some years now and didn't use it as much. But in my new mirrorless cânon it's become one of my favorites if not my favorite. In the street and at parties I usually shoot at f/4 through f/8 so it's very sharp. When I need to shoot it at 1.4 it's usually in situations when the dreamy look comes in handy. So, I'm finding it very suitable to my tastes. Also, very correctable with post-processing. It's like falling in love again with an old friend.
It’s great when an older lens suddenly feels new again.
I'm a photographer using Canon's 50mm and 85mm f/1.8 lenses and I suppose my biggest issue with the 85mm particularly is that it's too clinical for portraits while the abberations are difficult to deal with in landscape and urban photography. So I am very pleased to hear that the Planars are not as clinical and I'm very interested in using them :).
Zeiss lenses are loved by those that use them because of their beautiful drawing. Manual focus is an acquired talent, but if you can learn it there are a number of manual focus lenses that are really rewarding.
Great honest review, thank you very much! About to buy one :)
+bisonfilm lomianki I'm sure you will enjoy it.
Sick video, young man....very thorough. Was thinking about purchasing but you probably just about talked me out of it, or in????? Damn it! It's not so easy, you know.
No, it is not. It's not a lens for everyone, but some people really love it.
True...but I think it is the lens for me... after careful consideration...and thank you again for your lovely videos...keep up the good work.
From your recommendation I just pickup today the Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 Planar T*.WOW expensive. Thank you. Two words that are simple to say but not said enough.
Hope you enjoy it!
So much good information in this review. Subscribed!
That's what I want to hear! :)
Dustin Abbott Because of your review, I received my 50 Planar ZE today =D
***** - Good for you, Andrew. Enjoy! I actually won an auction for an older Planar 50mm f/1.7 today. Interested to try it out.
Dustin Abbott Dustin, it's been 4 months and the 50 Planar has become my favorite lens. I prefer this lens over the 50L that I used to own.
I'm looking to buy a telephoto lens for head shot portraiture, landscape, and floral photography. Zeiss 135mm APO or Canon 70-200mm II?
*****
Hard to make a bad choice there. The image quality will be somewhat better from the Zeiss, but the Canon is one of the most used professional lenses in the world for a reason.
thanks to share more than a clinical review and put something of your personal taste and experience in those reviews. I'm totally agree that today seems all about sharpness, and this zeiss lenses are really amazing in something that not everybody look for, the rendering, microcontrast, 3D effect.
Glad it cold help.
Personally I prefer the textural quality of this lens to the newer zeiss. The earlier lens designs of sonnar - tessar - planar were meant to bring out different optical qualities & textures unlike the present obsession with faster/shallower/cream out background completely. During the SLR film era a 1.4f was often intended to bring out a dreamlike background and one had slow film (fuji 50 - kodak even slower). The 1.8 range often had the combination of more sharpness yet retaining the quality of artistic blur. Actually one of the very underrated primes is the Fujinon 55/1.8
I don't disagree. I'll be reviewing the Milvus 1.4/50mm by the end of the month, and will be interesting to see the quality of the drawing.
Look forward - thanks to your reviews one gets to see where lens development is going!
Just stumbled on your channel, great review! Ordering mine next week!
Thanks, Bryan. A number of people have done the same!
I got one 2 years ago, after listing to this video, to use on pictorialism projects. This year i got the Zeiss Milvus 50mm F2.0 macro , after listing to your macro video, to use on D700 and D800E for landscape and panorama. I'm saving for a 2nd hand D850 and I waiting for the Z8 to be released and if it have a 55 Mpix sensor I will get one in a few years time but use my F-system lenses on it with a FTZ adapter. My problem is that I have a 300mm screwdrive lens and AF will not work so I have to upgrade to a 2nd hand 400mm F2.8 VR lens
I hope you're enjoying it.
Thank you so much for your review. I am shopping for a new 50mm for my Canon DSLR, and I find your lens reviews very helpful.
Henry Dan Friedman You're welcome, Henry. There are number of great options now.
Dustin Abbott P.S. I have a head to head showdown between the top dogs (Canon 50L vs. Zeiss Otus 55) planned for next month.
This is the type of review I was looking for. I consider sharpness a boring pursue as megapixels, even as consequence of the latter. I think all lenses are enough sharp and cameras have for already a long time enough megapixels, what is interesting to me is if a lens is optically corrected, and if it has a nice contrast and a rendering that makes you feel to be there. The images in this review seem to me to have those traits I value more, although I can say that as I am not a professional, I just try to get a few moments to last before they are forgotten.
I'm glad the review helped out.
Have a Leica MD 262 with a Zeiss 50mm T Planar f/2 ZM with mesmerizing results...!
That's cool
Could not describe how percise your review is, love your review as this Zeiss 50mm. Cheese!
Thank you!
Great review and information. Now I'm thinking if I should get the Nikon-mount of this Zeiss or the Voigtlander Nokton 58mm f/1.4. Both seem to be great lenses.
LKD27 If you don't mind manual focus, they are both nice choices.
Dustin Abbott I'm looking for manual focus lenses because I often shoot film. The Zeiss is slightly more expensive than the Voigtlander but they're both made in the same factory. I never tried both brands before so I don't know their differences in terms of picture quality. Which one would you recommend?, and thanks for the reply.
LKD27
I'm not familiar with the Voigtlander. I need to do a review of one of their lenses. I would compare reviews of the two. If I ever done one I'll try to post an update here.
Dustin Abbott Thank you very much!
Dustin Abbott I really do like your reviews because you also mention each lens' unique characteristics, like colour renderings, or even the length of the "throws" and what it does, as well as their strength and weak points, while most reviews that I often read or watch usually only focus on the lenses' sharpness and proneness to produce chromatic aberrations. Keep up the good work and I'm looking forward for your next reviews.
Hi Dustin! I've observed a similar effect with the newer lenses- feeling more clinical than artistic. If you had to recommend an artistic wide, and prime lens for a film maker, which two would you pick?
***** Dave - I'm actually very partial to the new Tamron 15-30 VC on the wide end, although it is pretty heavy. You'll have to elaborate on what kind of focal length you are looking for in a prime. I actually use an older Zeiss Planar T* 1.7/50mm quite a bit (with an adapter). It is a beautiful video lens.
I wanted to get the Zeiss 50 in this review, and then get a lens for good medium/close ups, like something in the 80-100 mm range.
Would you recommend your Zeiss Planar over the Zeiss in the review?
***** Not necessarily. The Planar T* 50mm f/1.4 is a native mount, which has its advantages, and it is much better at infinity than my lens because of the adapter.
Very interesting. Thanks for the response Dustin!
Got a local deal for this baby for $250 with filter stick on it, loving it so far.
That’s an awesome price.
@@DustinAbbottTWI the price of these used in China is about $100 now. I’m hesitant to get one after having a Batis 40/f2. Its priced in with the softness.
I'm in love. Gonna get one.
Enjoy!
Subscribed. Excelent channel!
Lot of information, Excelent review Dustin.
Not everything is sharpness, I own the Planar 85mm f1.4 zf2 and the colours makes my photography so special.
Regards!
Zeiss colors are special...as is the contrast typically.
One more question. Will you or have you reviewed the Tokina 16-28mm f2.8 for Canon?
I haven't. But I can pretty much get anything for review. Maybe I'll put it on the list to review at the same time I get the new Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8 when it comes out.
Dustin, your reviews are amazing. I currently own the Canon 35mm f/2 IS on an APS-C and it's been a dream to use. After watching this review I'm seriously considering getting this lens. It sounds incredibly fun to use and I think it would be a great addition to what I consider a very practical 35mm.
Will I actually get a lot of use out of a 50mm f/1.4 planar? It is very similar focal length after all
Thanks for the great feedback. As to your question: that is a tough call. I actually really like 35IS on a crop body. I think you might be better served getting a different focal length than a 50mm if you are happy with the 35mm angle of view. An 85mm lens would probably be a better option.
I wonder does this lens change aperture in liveview when you rotate camera dial or only change it to f-number while take a shot?
Typically live view will show you true depth of field
Hey Dustin - did you have the time to try if this lens also works with the focus guide triangles on the new R cameras (R5 for example)? From what I heard it's not really limited to RF lenses with electronics like the new Voigtländer Nokton.
I haven't tested that combo, but I do think it should work. The electronics are there.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you :-) So should be the same for Milvus and Otus :-)
Dustin - you’re my go to reviewer for lens! So thorough! You mentioned the Takumar and Zeiss Planar in the same video. If I was to buy one, which one would you recommend, as I believe you have both. I have the Zeiss 2/35 ZE and love the look.
The Zeiss is a little easier to use for a number of reasons, though the Takumar is actually sharper from, say, about f/2 - f/4.
Hi Dustin, based on your experienced, Makro Planar 50mm f2 or Milvus 50mm f1.4?
Very informative video.Bit expensive glass but it must be worth it... Can you recommend a reasonable adapter for Sony APS-'e camera that supports Auto focus for this lens???
+hevitra vaovao The lens is manual focus only. It doesn't AF on any system.
Some of my best dog and kid photos were taken with these lenses.
It still has a certain charm to it.
I must have a unicorn version. Or the majority of owners need to improve manual focus and pro calibration of their lens to body. Mine is razor sharp and very contrasty wide open on my 5D miii. And it was bought second hand/well used off eBay for $200. I only wish that the focus throw was shorter or the distance scale were a bit more telling like on Leica M or R glass.
Is there a difference between the ZE and the MM mount in Bokeh? I have a Canon 5D MKIII and I am debating to get the Ze mount or the older MM with an adapter. please advice :)
I haven't used the older one, so I can't really comment. If it just a mount difference and the same optical formula, there might not be a difference. But if the optical formula or even coatings have changed you might get a different result.
Thank you for the quick reply, you are awesome!
There is a difference between them. The coatings on the MMJ versions are different and produce more of a vintage feel where as the ZE/ZF lenses feature a more digital look. In addition, Zeiss has used lead glass in the ZE/ZF versions, making them have much better microcontrast and color saturation.
I really appreciate your great reviews. They helped me decide between the 150-600s and the 100-400 II.
Just a bit curious, have you ever tried out the voigtlander ultron 40mm f2 SL II lens?
+張仁迪 I haven't. I'm interested in taking a look at some point, though.
+Dustin Abbott - Thank you Dustin
instead of 40mm f/2, go for Voigtlander 58mm f/1.4 SL II.
I had it and i think that lens is way,way too underrated
That indeed is a special lens,starting from it's build to it's image quality. Just check it out ;)
Marius Paul
Unfortunately I don't think the 58mm comes in a Canon mount.
I saw some videos on Canon 5Dmark II with the lens, but now that you said this, i think they used an adapter (Nikon to Canon).
That lens is a gem,it is a way better option than Nikon's 58mm f/1.4 G lens :)
Cheers
Hi Dustin. Great video. May I ask which adapter one should use for this lens on a Canon EOS 3? Thank you!
Does the EOS 3 have an EF mount? If so, just buy the Canon version of the lens and it will work.
Hi Dustin. Thanks for the quick reply. I'm new to film so not sure how the EF mount should look like. But mine looks like this: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF_lens_mount#/media/File:Canon_EF_camera_mount.jpg
If I buy a non-Canon version of the lens (i've been eyeing one at a decent price), which adapter would I need?
Thank you so much for your help, really appreciate it.
Looks like the EF mount to me. The Canon version will fit fine as is, but if you purchase some other version you will need the appropriate adapter from the native mount of the lens to the EF mount.
very nice review. a lot of own thought and philosophy.
That's nice feedback. Thanks!
Wish I can listen to this guy speak but every 5 seconds the tah sounds he makes annoys the hell out me! Hello, tah today I'm reviewing tah ...
best reviewer of lenses... :)
Thank you
Excellent review. Edge to edge sharpness isn't everything, in fact in terms of a great photograph it's often something you don't want.
Some people get this lens...and this review. Others don't.
great review and great channel! I sub!
That's what we want to hear!
Bro will u please test this lens with a nikon dslr and tell us that do it works better on canon or nikon . I have nikon d810 and a canon 5d mk ii I don't know that should I buy this lens for nikon or canon .
I don't really deal with Nikon bodies, but I would say this lens wouldn't be sharp at wide apertures on the higher resolution sensor of the Nikon.
Since I’m poor, I’m thinking on get this lens (ais) to be used on my a7iii+techart instead of the incredible but expensive Sony Fe version. 🤷🏻♂️
Just be sure that your shooting priorities are what this lens offers. It’s not particularly sharp at wide apertures. The Samyang AF 45m F1.8 might be a good option for you if you are on a budget.
Hi Dustin,
Thanks for a great video!
I'm wondering what is the lens used at the point th-cam.com/video/xdt95Umzu4M/w-d-xo.html (09:48)?
Thank you :)
I think that was the 1.4/50mm (Zeiss), but I’ve done a LOT of reviews since then and can’t be 100% sure
Thanks!
Hi Dustin, Great to have come across this great, concise review as I recently just purchased this lens! Of all my glass, this is definitely my "artistic" lens (not to be confused with my Sigma ART lens). As you noted, it really seems to have a unique colour rendition and drawing like no other. It does become sharp around f/2.8+, and it really does have a special place in my collection :)
See you on Flickr and 500 px!
Thanks, Todd. I was glad to see your name there this morning. I'm glad you are enjoying the Zeiss. I am eager to review the Milvus replacement of this lens
Is it any good thn 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor
I don't have experience with the Nikkor lens, so I can't really give you a good answer.
I like your videos , You are very good very professional job.
+JOSEPH SOLTES Thank you very much!
Amazing
Thanks!
one of the excellent reviews. thank you dustin. i bought this when the price came down for few days ($655) from adorama - black friday weekend.
this is not as sharp as i expected. but the color it produces is beautiful................. its true, image from this lens has a character. I am very happy buying this lens. I like the manual focus in it. gives more control on what I am looking at/what I want to look at. sometimes auto focus points something else than what I am looking through viewfinder.
added a link to one of the images taken using this lens.
www.flickr.com/photos/roy1729/15936193006/in/photostream/lightbox/
I use this lense on Canon 70D
How does it look like? I just got one (waiting for delivery though) and also have a 70D
Dustin, I think you should run for President Of The United States Of America
LOL. I've got enough to deal with already 😀. And when would I get time to shoot?
I’ll vote for you over Donald any day!
Thank you for this video, I will now avoid this lens like the plague.
For sure. Some people like the rendering; others are turned off by the low sharpness at wide apertures. The new Milvus 1.4/50mm is much sharper.
The Zeiss 50mm F2 Makro Planar puts the other Zeiss 50mm in the ZE line to shame.
But as always, great review, Dusty!
I’ve reviewed both the classic MP50 and the newer Milvus version. Great lenses, for sure.
No one likes Zeiss cap, and it is really bad designed. which is weird
It stands out because the lens is so beautifully made.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Exactly, that is the point.
I've owned this lens for 2 years and it doesn't do anything the $125 Nikkor 1.4 won't do
I'm not familiar with the Nikkor, but I'd be surprised if the overall rendering is as nice.
Really disappointed with this lens. My canon fd 50 1.4 is a lot sharper wide open and only gets sharper. This lens starts to sharpen up after past 3.5
+Isaac Gutierrez If you are looking for ultimate sharpness at wide apertures, this lens is a disappointment. People buy it more for the "look" wide open than the sharpness. You will find the new Milvus 50mm f/1.4 much, much sharper. Another great choice now is the Tamron 45mm f/1.8 VC.