Nice review of the Planar. I would like to add that it is actually very close to exactly 50 mm focal length, otherwise focussing via the rangefinder would be a off. The rangefinder is only indicating correctly if the lever-roller in the bajonet is pushed in at the same amount a 50mm-lens has to travel in and out to focus without any compensation. The whole assembly is build around the 50mm as its standard. Other focal lengths have compensation build in as a second helicoid travelling in and out a different rate. The Planar doesn't, look inside and focus it, so it either is more or less exactly 50 mm or its focussing would be off. But why then are you getting more into the frame than you expected? There you stumbled into another limitation of the rangefinder-design. It compensates for parallax but not for the change in field-of-view when focussing close or distant objects. What you noticed was the inaccuracy of the framelines in the finder which indicate the frame for a 50mm when focussed to the closest distance. There is a bit less in the frame when focussed close, because the optics have been moved away from the film/sensor-plane and the people at Leitz decided to rather have a bit more in frame at infinity than cutting on ears and heads when focussed close.
I feel like this lens doesn’t get the love it deserves but it’s my absolute favorite lens for its size, quality, and price point. It pairs nicely with the 35mm zm and makes for a great kit for both film and digital Leica m bodies.
Zeiss is good quality, no doubt. I'm on the 50/1.5 C-Sonar on my M240. Great performer for approx. 1.200 USD (7.800 DKK). But I'll go for the Summilux 50/1.4 soon, just to get the last kick out of the M. Why? The Summilux is both APO and ASPH. Voigtländer has a 40/1.4 Nokton for approx. 650 USD (4.100 DKK) I bought by accident. It's a nice alternative to a 50. Anyway, thanks for an honest review.
I am floored when I see the results of the 50mm 1.5 ZM Sonnar. I am always doing bling comparisons and each time I find thos photos to be breathtaking. Like I actiually gasp. I shoot almost everything wide open but when I stop down to even f2 the nature of the lens changes from sharp and creamy to sharp and perfect. I love that ;little lens.
The frame lines on my M3 don’t default to 50mm with my Zeiss. But they are proper with my TTArtisan lens. I guess that’s the only flaw of the Zeiss Leica lens
As good as the current leica summicron which I owned and sold . I like this zeiss more as the colour is really pop , the sharpness and bokeh is the same but price is a 1/3 of the Leica . I shot on digital M 240 /m10/m monochrom and this lens never let me down . I use adapter on my sony A7iii, Panasonic S1r and fujifilm xt3 all are fine . Highly recommend lens if you are looking for a high quality lens equally as good as Leica but far cheaper . Next zeiss zm lens you should look at is the zeiss 35mm 1.4 .
Surely the lens being 45mm throws off the rangefinder? I assume that this is due to rangefinder framing in that the rangefinder frame lines aren't magnification compensated, so it assumes close to the FOV at infinity. Since it is always possible to crop I assume the frame lines are slightly wider than the actual framing even for a lens of exactly 50mm FL.
Great video, thanks! I've used a lot of the Zeiss ZM lenses, Leica glass too and a bit of Voigtlander too. I would say the ZM 50 Planar is superior to the Leica Summicron -- it's performance is as good as if not better, and the price is significantly better. There are some downsides of Zeiss ZM lenses: - As you mentioned, the 50mm Planar is actually a 45mm Planar! Happily everything else in the range is labelled more accurately. - Build quality. There are some credible reports of Zeiss wobbles. I haven't had any, whereas I have had some QC issues with Leica lenses, and I find build quality to be roughly equivalent. However maybe I've been lucky with Zeiss and unlucky with a couple of Leica lenses. - the one-third aperture stops can be a pain if mixing ZM/Leica glass in your set-up. - I much prefer the focus tabs on the Leica lenses. The focus nub on the ZM lenses is too small. - I don't like the chrome front ring on the black ZM lenses, they are aesthetically annoying. - There is more choice in Leica glass. For example I wish Zeiss made a fast 28mm. On the positive side: - The Zeiss ZM 18mm f4, 21mm f2.8, 25mm f2.8, 28mm f2.8, 35mm f2, 35mm f1.4, 50mm f2 are at least as good as, if not better than their modern Leica equivalents. - Price. Zeiss ZM lenses has been fairly steady in price. Leica on the other hand has been creeping up each year. This is Leica's business model as they carve out their niche more as a luxury goods company with a luxury dealer network. When I bought my 50mm Summicron 20 years ago, it cost $800 new. My 35mm Summicron ASPH was $1200 new. Since then Leica glass has tripled in price. Nikon or Canon glass has stayed roughly the same in price. - In the equivalent Leica/Zeiss lenses, arguments can easily be made about which lens is "better". At this level of performance, small objective and subjective differences may mean more to each individual users. Some like the Zeiss "3D pop" or warmer cast, some prefer the more cooler, clinical presentation of Leica. Some prefer the look and feel of one over the other. As a user (rather than a collector), buying Zeiss over Leica is a no-brainer. They are as good as, if not better, than the equivalent Leicas at one-third the price. Meanwhile, the Voigtlanders I've used have been generally very good -- but not quite as good as Leica/Zeiss. However I'm keen to try their newer Noktons (21, 35, 50). Judging by user comments they've been making huge improvements in glass and build.
Have you shot with the 50f2 Summicron? So far I’ve shot the 50f2 APO-Lanthar, 50f2 Planar and Nokton II 50f1.5. Out of all the lenses in terms of their image quality I would rank them: 1) Apo Lanthar 2) Nokton II 50f1.5 3) Planar The Lanthar is optical perfection besides the vignetting at f2 which is quite strong. It’s also quite bigger and heavier than any other 50f2 M lens. If size and weight are a priority don’t buy it, but if the image is a priority then Get it. Too build quality. Like a Rolex. Don’t even consider the Leica APO 50. The Nokton is sweet and beautiful and ultra tiny, and if you have a 24MP Leica this is all you need (get the MC) The Planar feels a little rough, the sharpness and resolution are very high, however it is terrible for skin. There is a harshness to the images that don’t make it good for portraits or if you’re shooting mainly people. It does have great B&W though, colors are good, the contrast is high. And sharpness is very high like I said. I had fun with it but didn’t keep it long. The focusing isn’t very smooth all the way through either. Maybe it’s more suitable for film. I don’t know. I wouldn’t get it for an M10R or another high megapixel camera as the harshness will be amplified. I however can’t decree that any of them are “better than a summicron” or that “it packs about the same punch”… what does that even mean? 😂 I can’t proclaim anything because I’ve never shot with the summicron. I’m picking it up tomorrow though. The v5 that is … not the APO. If you shoot the Planar and the Summicron you’ll get 2 very different images. Saying it “packs about the same punch” means not much. It can certainly be an alternative to a Summicron but then you have to have them both to show the differences between them, not only in a test situation but in the real world taking real photos. I’m expecting the Summicron to be somewhere between the Nokton and the APO-Lanthar. Not as perfect and sharp as the APO (which is much sharper than the Planar without being harsh), but with the warm sweetness of the Nokton 50f1.5 II.
Thanks for this review. I've been using my Summilux 50mm on my Leica M11 and the M6. I like having a permanent 50mm on the M6 and looking to find something more affordable yet allow no real reduction in quality of the image - this sounds like the perfect solution. I ordered the silver edition to go with the silver M6 body and very excited to test it out this coming week.
@@bora8254 Well, I returned the Zeiss as i just preferred to move the 50 Summilux back and forth and save the $$. I've also decided to now sell the M6 camera so trying to cut down on all the "stuff" I have and keep it simple.
I bought quite a few Zeiss ZM lenses while I lived in Japan. You can get them new in Tokyo for about 2/3 the US retail price. I own the 28/2.8, 35/2, 35/2.8, 50/1.5, 50/2, and 85/4. I also own a 50mm Summicron V3. I bought the Zeiss lenses for their flare-resistance and their “affordable” price. My favorite travel set-up is the 35/2.8, 50/2 and 85/4 or 28/2.8 and 50/1.5. Both of those kits share the same filter sizes and I shoot B&W and use yellow, orange, and UV filters. The first kit is the more technically perfect lenses and the second give really great rendering while being less “perfect.” Zeiss lenses stand their own against Leica, and should be considered for anyone building a kit. I have considered Leica 28/2 and 50/1.4, but I am happy with what I have and don’t plan on buying any more camera gear. (I shoot M3/4/6 so I don’t have experience on digital with these lenses).
Nice setups! If I may ask, how do you find the 50mm Summicron v3 compared to the 50mm Sonnar? There’s many used v3 for almost the same price as a new Sonnar. What are your thoughts?
@@fyzd3r That’s a good question. They are similar and different. Both give a classic look to the images, and in my experience the Sonnar has a bit more contrast and flare-resistance while the Cron V3 seems to show a bit more detail when I zoom in. I was shocked by the detail I could see on portraits taken with the Cron at 3 to 6 feet on Acros or Delta 100. You could zoom in 200% and see the fibers on their shirt very impressive for a 50-year-old design. The Sonnar looks sharp and gives a pleasing image, but it doesn’t have the same about of fine detail if you are looking closely at your photos. I think they are both great options. I also picked up a Plannar which is like the Cron V3, but a little sharper and more contrast/flare resistance in my experience. But the Cron does seem to have smoother background rendering. I think that a consideration is the other lenses you would pair it with in a 2 or 3 lens kit. I took the Sonnar on a trip with my Zeiss 35mm f/2.8. Both are great lenses, but the images didn’t quite match up side by side as they have a different look. I pair my 35mm f/2.8 with my 50mm Plannar and my 85mm f/4 Tessar. They are all 43mm filters, and I believe that Zeiss designed this as a set to be used together (really wish the 85mm was a 90mm though). I then pair my 50mm Sonnar with a Zeiss 28mm f/2.8. Both are 46mm filters, and make beautiful, and sharp images (that just happen to be less “clinical” than the above set). I only shoot film, so that itself gives the image a little more texture than a ultra clean digital file.
super solid review man, i have the M10-P *white* limited edition with 50 summilux. Your images are magnificent. This lens really shines. The 50/1.5 C-Sonnar is 250 grams, just 20 grams heavier than this lens.
The 50/1.5 is awesome. I opted for the 50/2.0 instead because it’s slightly sharper and I know I’ll nail focus more consistently at f/2 than I will at f/1.5. Zeiss did an incredible job somehow making the 1.5 slightly shorter and only marginally heavier than the f2 though.
no, have tried all Carl Zeiss old classics & milvus for Dslrs, but sadly none of the 3rd parties for M-mount, will inform you in case i get to try, after lock down. Thanks.
Well spoken video. I am a Zeiss fan. I several F mount Zeiss Milvus lenses. I am thinking about buying a Leica M10 and Zeiss M mount is what I plan on getting for it when I do.
I got it but I sold it for the sonnar C…. I may have done a mistake tho… let’s see when the sonnar will be here.. I put this side by side with the Sony Gm 1.2 , both at f2,2,8 and f4. On sony a7iv . This little lens was just a bit behind in center and corner,… really impressive.
Great video Jason! I'm on the brink of moving to Leica and although I plan in buying Leica lenses (at least the 50mm Summicron) it is good to know that this Zeiss lens, no surprise there, it's a good more affordable alternative. Could you (maybe you're planing in making a video about this) explain why did you choose Leica as your everyday camera? Thanks, greetings from Scotland!
i will definitely go for the leica Summitar or summicron, for budget reason you go for summitar, serial nummber between 6xxxxx and 7xxxxxx will be great, better for film. and on digital, its sharp enough, much more details in grey tone, better bokeh and cheaper , smaller size everything lol
If only it had a 39 mm filter mount like the Leica lenses, it would be perfection - might seem to be irrelevant to most, but I use BW film and I constantly carry different color filters. Carrying two different sized sets is possible, but a nuisance. Still not as big a nuisance as paying 2500 or more USD for a „nifty fifty“ from Leica.
If Zeiss had an equal or better than Leica after all these years - don't we think they'd command more money on the used market and/or Zeiss would price it 2x what it is now that's STILL 1/2 or more than the Leica equiv? No. Why? Because they don't stack up. Hell, Voigtlander lenses from 20 years ago are better than any modern Zeiss. #fact
I bet $1000 that you can not recognize which picture is from a Leica and which is from a Zeiss. The fact that Leica cost insanely huge stupid money is because there are people willing to pay for the brand. That's it.
I have 8 Zeiss ze primes and that is the only one I ever sold in disgust. The out-of-focus is jittery and suffers from the same ills as the old Canon 50 Ef 1.4. Same horrid mess as the old 85 ZE. Zeiss agreed. Both were replaced design-wise during the Milvus rebuild- the 50 is my favorite of all Zeiss, including for my Leica M.
Interesting! When I’m shooting in super harsh light I actually do occasionally notice weird effects with the light.. might have to dig into that more but it’s never really bothered me
More like the zeiss was highly corrected for a lot of things included flare. The lens never flares which is useful for shooting into light. The leica images were more natural looking in my opinion and the bokeh is more gentle. The zeiss bokeh gets busy sometimes.
@@JasonWebberYT honestly man i just snagged an 23 F/2 since the camera itself is great in lowlight lol.. maybe try a 7artisans 35 1.2 to give it more of a rangefinder feel. or an adapter and mount your leica lenses to it
Jason Webber in all sincerity, what has the Leica done for your photography? I’m a sucker for high quality craftsmanship and that 3D pop, but I also struggle to spend so much more money if I could get similar images from a lesser cost camera. Worth it in your mind? Thoughts on CL vs M-D?
The Leica, in terms of image quality, has done nothing for my photography. My EOS R performs much better purely in terms of IQ and capability. I’m also a huge sucker for high quality craftsmanship and the “feel” of a camera. The M-D has gotten me out to shoot much more often than I would with my EOS R. I find myself photographing every day life, my family, etc in ways that I never did before with my other cameras simply because the M-D is such a pleasure to shoot with.
@@JasonWebberYT I completely understand. I lust after a Leica in the future, but for me I crave portability. Maybe a CL in the future? For now though, I bought a brand new EM10 Mark II with the Pana 20mm pancake for $300 and I carry it everywhere... and because it was so (relatively) cheap I'm not worried about breaking it ... and that makes me shoot more. I think the CL w/ and 18mm would be the Leica equivalent. Anyways, keep it up and I'll be around to keep watching.
Zeiss and Leica lenses are not comparable. The rendering is totally different. I have both and I prefer Leica. It is not about sharpness, but Leica has a very natural and organic rendering compared to Zeiss.
Again with this story. I bet whatever you want that if I show you 10 pictures took with the Leica and 10 pictures took with the Zeiss you are not able to recognize which is Leica and which is Zeiss.
As I see it, at f/2.0, and expert might be able to tell the difference between them. At f/8 *even* an expert can't tell them apart. I generally shoot around f/4.
@@chrisreich40 At F8 my friend I couldn't tell if it was taken with a Leica or a £50.00 chinese lens. Yes, you are correct, its when they are wide open that the more expensive lenses usually show their qualities.
There’s two versions available to buy brand new. The normal Summicron and the APO-Summicron. The normal one is $2700 and the APO is $8800, $9200, or $10,600 depending on the color you choose. After sales tax in New York where I live, the black chrome ($10,600) version is well over $11k.. Those are the current brand new prices at B&H
