Sony A7II plus Zeiss C Sonnar 1.5 50mm ZM

[Paulo Bizarro]

Hi,

This is just to share some of my experience with the above combination. In the last few months I have tested and tried several MILC options for my travel and documentary photography. I have started with the Olympus EM1, but concluded that, as nice as the system is, the sensor is still limited compared to other options. I then tried the Sony A6000, which was better, and that convinced me that the A series was the best option for me.

Recently, with the introduction of the A7II (with IBIS and robust build), I managed to borrow one for a few days. I have been testing it with the Zeiss 50mm f1.5 ZM lens (with Novoflex adaptor). I read a lot and investigated about this lens, and it is clear it is not for everybody. What I found is that it suits me fine, and I really like the results I am getting. the camera has two flaws for me: loud shutter, and lack of touch screen. But I can live with that.

Here are some images I made recently, in Lisbon, and in the Fatima and Batalha monastery.

Regards.

[David Anderson]

The A series is getting more and more interesting.
I wonder how well the focus peaking would work with fast lenses (like the Zeiss 135 f2) shot wide open ?

Not sure about all the adapters, but the lens line-up is certainly getting better.

[Paulo Bizarro]

Hi,

My experience so far with focus peaking, with the 50 f1.5 ZM lens, is very good. Even wide open, I have no problem in getting focus indication, with, or without enabling magnification.

[JV]

Not sure about all the adapters, but the lens line-up is certainly getting better.

With only 2 primes available, I believe there is still room for improvement though...

My experience so far with focus peaking, with the 50 f1.5 ZM lens, is very good. Even wide open, I have no problem in getting focus indication, with, or without enabling magnification.

I have the Zeiss Planar 50mm/f2 and I tested with the A7s.  I was not very impressed but perhaps I need to try again.

I also have the native Zeiss 55mm/f1.8 and given that it is a fairly inexpensive and very good lens I am not sure whether bothering with M-mount glass and adapters is even worthwhile...

[Telecaster]

The Contax Rangefinder (CRF) version of this lens is among my all-time favorites. A few days ago I received an adapter that allows me to use it on Sony A series cameras. (The lens has no focusing helical—instead the mount provides one—so it isn't usable with other CRF-to-FE adapters.) One thing I've noticed in initial use is the lens/A7r combo exhibits some off-axis astigmatism, similar to that seen with wider rangefinder lenses though not as pronounced. I've included an example pic, of a 1940 Gibson L-50 archtop guitar, along with a full-res crop at the point of focus (the Gibson logo on the guitar's headstock). The pic is 2:1 aspect ratio with minimal top/bottom cropping. The lens is at f/2. ISO at 10000 for anyone inclined to complain about the noise.    The logo is as crisp as it gets with this focus point placement.

Paulo, have you checked the off-axis performance of your ZM lens at wider apertures? I don't remember seeing any such blurring with my Leica Thread Mount versions of this lens, but I don't have them handy at the moment to test either.

-Dave-

[Paulo Bizarro]

With only 2 primes available, I believe there is still room for improvement though...

I have the Zeiss Planar 50mm/f2 and I tested with the A7s.  I was not very impressed but perhaps I need to try again.

I also have the native Zeiss 55mm/f1.8 and given that it is a fairly inexpensive and very good lens I am not sure whether bothering with M-mount glass and adapters is even worthwhile...

New prime lenses are coming this year, 28, 35, and 90 macro. There are also rumours about a 85. So the lens line is shaping up nicely.

To me, M mount adapters are not bothersome, as they allow the use of a vast array of M lenses, from Leica (expensive though), Zeiss, Voigtlander, and Minolta. The Zeiss 55 1.8 is a very good lens, but I was after the characteristics of the Sonnar.

[Paulo Bizarro]

The Contax Rangefinder (CRF) version of this lens is among my all-time favorites. A few days ago I received an adapter that allows me to use it on Sony A series cameras. (The lens has no focusing helical—instead the mount provides one—so it isn't usable with other CRF-to-FE adapters.) One thing I've noticed in initial use is the lens/A7r combo exhibits some off-axis astigmatism, similar to that seen with wider rangefinder lenses though not as pronounced. I've included an example pic, of a 1940 Gibson L-50 archtop guitar, along with a full-res crop at the point of focus (the Gibson logo on the guitar's headstock). The pic is 2:1 aspect ratio with minimal top/bottom cropping. The lens is at f/2. ISO at 10000 for anyone inclined to complain about the noise.    The logo is as crisp as it gets with this focus point placement.

Paulo, have you checked the off-axis performance of your ZM lens at wider apertures? I don't remember seeing any such blurring with my Leica Thread Mount versions of this lens, but I don't have them handy at the moment to test either.

-Dave-

Dave, I have not tested the lens specifically for this. TBH, I rarely place the focus point that far off in the frame. Even stopped down, one of the characteristics of the Sonnar is the pronounced field curvature, so the edges, or borders, of the image will always suffer in a way. This is certainly not a lens to shoot landscapes and look for critical sharpness in the borders and corners of the image.

But when the point of focus is, say, about 2/3 of the way away from the center of the image, I do not see what you exemplified above. For example, in the shot below, the words on the cabin are very sharp, but then again, this was not shot wide open... perhaps your lens gives that result (and mine too?) shot at close range and wide open, with the focus very off-centre? In my case, this does not bother me.

[JV]

New prime lenses are coming this year, 28, 35, and 90 macro. There are also rumours about a 85. So the lens line is shaping up nicely.
 

Yes, I am aware of that.  I have been waiting for them for 6 months...  They also just got delayed with no new date yet...
I don’t want to sound negative but 2 primes after 1.5 years is simply not acceptable... Sony simply must do better than that if they want to be successful...

To me, M mount adapters are not bothersome, as they allow the use of a vast array of M lenses, from Leica (expensive though), Zeiss, Voigtlander, and Minolta.

I shoot (mostly) wider than 50mm, adapters are up till now unfortunately not the best solution...

The Zeiss 55 1.8 is a very good lens, but I was after the characteristics of the Sonnar.

It is a very good lens but it is too much about sharpness.  It is a bit too clinical and lacks real character.  Still a very good lens though.

[Telecaster]

Dave, I have not tested the lens specifically for this. TBH, I rarely place the focus point that far off in the frame. Even stopped down, one of the characteristics of the Sonnar is the pronounced field curvature, so the edges, or borders, of the image will always suffer in a way. This is certainly not a lens to shoot landscapes and look for critical sharpness in the borders and corners of the image.

I talked with my friend Bruce about this last night. He currently has my LTM 50/1.5 Sonnars, and after a quick check on his A7r tells me they behave just like my CRF version. Guess I'd never used 'em in quite this way before. He thinks, and I'm inclined to agree with him, that the blurriness in my example pic is a mild form of the exit pupil/filter stack interaction—resulting in astigmatism-like smearing—seen with most wider M & LTM lenses on the A7 series cameras. Sonnars do indeed exhibit field curvature, but I've found (with the Zeiss 85/2 on the Sony anyway) that they resolve pretty well off-axis if you focus 'em properly. "This stuff happens when you mix old & new tech," Bruce says. He's (mostly) right, of course. 

-Dave-

[Paulo Bizarro]

Thanks for the update Dave. I would suggest that for photographers trying to combine the A7 series with "old fashioned" manual focus experience, the best option would be the Loxia lenses.

I have thought long and hard between the ZM 50 Sonnar and the Loxia 50, in the end I prefer the look provided by the Sonnar, even in spite of its limitations used on the A7 cameras.

I hope that Zeiss releases a portrait Loxia soon...

[Telecaster]

I have thought long and hard between the ZM 50 Sonnar and the Loxia 50, in the end I prefer the look provided by the Sonnar, even in spite of its limitations used on the A7 cameras.

I hope that Zeiss releases a portrait Loxia soon...

I had the chance to give a Loxia 50mm a quick spin not long ago, and it does make for a real nice combo with an A7x camera. It's a Planar design, though, and lacks the Sonnar's pleasing quirks (and extra speed). An 85mm Loxia would be lovely, particularly if Zeiss bases it on the terrific (but rarely seen) ZM 85/2.

-Dave-

[JV]

It's a Planar design, though, and lacks the Sonnar's pleasing quirks (and extra speed).

I have been reading about this lens and it does sound like a very intriguing lens.

A lot of people seem to get it explicitly optimized for 1.5...

Any experience with that?

[Paulo Bizarro]

I had the chance to give a Loxia 50mm a quick spin not long ago, and it does make for a real nice combo with an A7x camera. It's a Planar design, though, and lacks the Sonnar's pleasing quirks (and extra speed). An 85mm Loxia would be lovely, particularly if Zeiss bases it on the terrific (but rarely seen) ZM 85/2.

-Dave-

Indeed the ZM 85/2 was a sort of "now you see me now you don't" lens, taken out of production shortly after its introduction? Supposedly it was actually made in Germany, hence its steep price. It was replaced by a much less interesting 85/4... I remember reading somewhere that the 85/2 had strong fringing? A Loxia version would no doubt be really expensive, and in that case I would start thinkink about a Leica 90...

[Paulo Bizarro]

I have been reading about this lens and it does sound like a very intriguing lens.

A lot of people seem to get it explicitly optimized for 1.5...

Any experience with that?

I suppose the optimization bit had to do with shooting the lens on a rangefinder, where wide open, or near wide open, the focusing distance would change with aperture. It seems the early batches were optimized for 2.8, latter one for 1.5. On a MILC, there is no such problem, you set the aperture, focus, and shoot.

[Telecaster]

I have been reading about this lens and it does sound like a very intriguing lens.

A lot of people seem to get it explicitly optimized for 1.5...

Any experience with that?

Yeah, the 50/1.5 has focus shift issues. This is true of the originals, including CaNikon's f/1.5 & then f/1.4 copies, as well as the current ZM. Nikon appears to be the first, with their f/1.4 version, to optimize for wide open performance. OTOH my WWII-era & 1950s Zeiss versions perform very well wide open on rangefinder cameras too. None of this matters of course when using the lenses on a Sony A camera…you can and should focus at the taking aperture, at least at f/5.6 and wider.

-Dave-