[Leica] Zeiss Planar 50/2 vs. latest Summicron 50/2

[mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)]

On 7/19/05 12:57 PM, "Scott McLoughlin" <scott@adrenaline.com> typed:

> For my budget, my big "splurge" last year was a used Leica 28/2.
> About $1500 or so, IIRC.  I'm no measurbator, but damn that
> lens can help make nice pics :-)
> 
> Used current 50/2's seem to come around quite frequently and are
> usually pretty good deals. Oddly, the much maligned built in hood
> is a plus for me when I think of cramming the camera/lens combo
> into a 1/3 of my tiny Domke satchel. OTOH, my 28/2 with hood
> and a CV 28 metal finder seems to squeeze in there, so who knows.
> 
> Just gotta be curious about the Planar 50/2 though. CV can make
> nice lenses if they want to.  Some of the nicest feel and "smooth
> action" I've experience has been with CV's nice, heavy 35/2.5
> Pancake-I (the old LTM version).  Man, that's a nicely made
> lens. Just found a guy on eBay who makes 43mm screw in vented
> hoods for the thing, and me'thinks she'll be getting more "air time"
> soon.  Same goes for the build of my CV 50/2.5, and I hear good
> things about their 28/3.5 build wise as well.
> 
> But in plain speak, I've got nothing against CV. Right now I'm using
> their Nokton 50/1.5 for my 50mm lens (and experimenting again with
> their CV 50/2.5, which I never sold because it's just so nicely made
> and damn small).  That Nokton 50/1.5 is a pretty sharp shooter,
> although the size of the thing (E52) bothers me, and the bokeh can
> be a little wirey at times.
> 
> Scott
> 
I have nothing against CV either - today I shot only with a 45mm Nikor P
lens made by them on a N80 which is loads of fun.
It's my cheap digital camera which shoots film! I think they had it adapted
special. It's sure lighter with out all that digital stuff in it!
I tried putting a vintage 55 macro on it and it was dead in the water like
my D100 which it emulates. Or visa versa.
I love Nikon but from what I hear about Cosina from some acquaintances and
friends my money would be with their glass over Nikons if it was a blind bet
and my life depended on it. I think they may put more into it than Nikon
does. Are more innovative in a way I like. I think Nikon is innovative and
gives great bang for the buck but Cosina might be a little more in both
areas.
But Nikon makes some very cool glass which I'm very experienced with.
I just landed a 20 year old (perfect vintage) 105 2.5 AI for the price of a
few pairs of socks. I found the 105 macro to be too heavy for when you're
not really needing it for macro. It's got to weight twice as much as the non
macro. All those helical I'm sure. They'll get you every time.

But by the way the 55 macros in just about any version are NOT heavy at all
but very compact with its very recessed small air to glass built in lens
hood kind of arrangement which I love. Although it is a 3.5.
SLOWER THE BETTER is how I feel half the time.
I just WILL it into focas!


Mark Rabiner
Photography
Portland Oregon
http://rabinergroup.com/