Zeiss 50/2.0 Planar T* ZM lens

[David H. Bebbington]

Does anyone have experience of this lens? I have a 50 mm F1.5 Nokton on my Voigtänder T, I find it a little too flare-prone, and I am currently bidding on a 1970s Summicron. I thought if I didn't win this, I might try a Color-Skopar, but then I thought of the Zeiss M lenses. One thing I don't want is the latest model Summicron, I had one a few years ago and found it just too contrasty. Is the Zeiss lens also contrasty? I had experience years ago of a 1950s Summicron and found the contrast of this too low, so would like to try and find a lens which is mid-way between Summicrons Mark I and III. It needs to be about the same contrast as the 28 mm Ultron which I also have

All advice gratefully received!

Regards,

David

 

[Claire Senft]

Have you read what Erwin Puts has posted to his web site? He has quite a bit to say about quite a few lens that have a Leica M mount. One of those lenses is the 50mm 2.0 Planar. I am inclined to think that it is not what you are seeking. Going to imx.nl and reading what has been posted can be worthwhile.

 

[psvensson]

Seems like you want contradictory things. Flare-prone lenses are generally low contrast, and high-contrast lenses generally have good resistance to flare. Since Zeiss is famous for its coatings, I would bet the Planar is very high contrast (even though it's actually made by Cosina). An old Summicron is probably not high-contrast.

 

[Claire Senft]

Go to the leica web page. Click on camers, M system, then lenses. They have on line a good deal of writing by E Puts. It includes some Leica lenses that are out of production.

 

[David H. Bebbington]

Seems like you want contradictory things. Flare-prone lenses are generally low contrast, and high-contrast lenses generally have good resistance to flare. Since Zeiss is famous for its coatings, I would bet the Planar is very high contrast (even though it's actually made by Cosina). An old Summicron is probably not high-contrast.

You might think that efficient coating goes hand-in-hand with low flare, in my experience this is true for generalized flare but not for individual flare spots. The reference to Erwin Puts was interesting, he comments:
"It [the 50 mm Zeiss Planar] shares with that lens [50 mm Summicron] the weak suppression of secondary reflections, due to the reflections at the edges of the rear mount."

A while back I was doing a long series of pictures of backlit water with strong sun and at various times tried a new 50 mm Summicron, a new Nikon 50 mm f1.8 AIS and a Pentax 43 mm f1.9. The Leica lens had noticeably higher contrast than the Nikon lens, both had a tendency to flare spots, the Pentax was far better, even though it has what I would call normal contrast, not ultra-high, which is why I kept it and sold the others. I still have it and also a Nikon 50 mm f1.4, which seems much better. Among my medium- and large-format lenses, the ones with the lowest flare seem to be 4-element single-coated examples, although generally flare is much less of a problem with these than with 35 mm lenses. What I am looking for now is a lens like the Pentax in Leica M mount!

Thanks to all for responses!

 

[isaacc7]

Pentax did release the 43mm lens in LTM. If you could track down one of those and a screw mount to M adaptor, you'd be in business!

Isaac