Carl Zeiss 50mm F1.4 for Canon - your thoughts?

[johndizzo]

The focus shift issue is definitely not something that happens for everyone consistently (or with great frequency) as this is dependent upon how you shoot and what you are shooting. However the fact of the matter is that the Canon 1.2 does not have a floating element within it and inherently has the focus shifting issue in various shooting situations. This is simply a design flaw and not something that is a defect. Based on my personal experience, the focus shift issue was definitely present and was definitely aggravating when it happened for a shot I really wanted.

Also in response to PhotoBrody - I must concur that the 50 1.2 is fully capable tool for creating beautiful images, I was just pointing out it's faults and trying to help the OP to weigh those factors into the pricing/comparing other options available. Also curious, have you or any of your peers had experience with the Makro Planar? You can google search any lens with any camera body combination and find that people are able to produce amazing results respectively. However, it is not necessarily a clear representation of what one specific person will be accomplishing with that same equipment. Just based on MTF charts and testing done for all the 50mm primes out there, the Makro Planar consistently performs better than the Canon 1.2 at F2. The only reasons I would ever go back to the Canon 1.2 is if I decided I needed 1.2 and AF at that focal length. Otherwise, the Makro Planar is king.

 

[PhotoBrody]

The focus shift issue is definitely not something that happens for everyone consistently (or with great frequency) as this is dependent upon how you shoot and what you are shooting. However the fact of the matter is that the Canon 1.2 does not have a floating element within it and inherently has the focus shifting issue in various shooting situations. This is simply a design flaw and not something that is a defect. Based on my personal experience, the focus shift issue was definitely present and was definitely aggravating when it happened for a shot I really wanted.

Also in response to PhotoBrody - I must concur that the 50 1.2 is fully capable tool for creating beautiful images, I was just pointing out it's faults and trying to help the OP to weigh those factors into the pricing/comparing other options available. Also curious, have you or any of your peers had experience with the Makro Planar? You can google search any lens with any camera body combination and find that people are able to produce amazing results respectively. However, it is not necessarily a clear representation of what one specific person will be accomplishing with that same equipment. Just based on MTF charts and testing done for all the 50mm primes out there, the Makro Planar consistently performs better than the Canon 1.2 at F2. The only reasons I would ever go back to the Canon 1.2 is if I decided I needed 1.2 and AF at that focal length. Otherwise, the Makro Planar is king.

I completely understand your frustration on focus shift issues, I had one with my 50D and 17-40 f4L at one point. Had to do micro focus adjustments to fix it.

I did check out the Makro Planar 50/2 I'm sure you were referring to..? It looks pretty awesome.. Carl Zeiss has a great reputation for making incredible things.

 

[Derrel]

Carl Zeiss...made by Cosina...formerly makers of some of the cheapest chit in the photo biz...

 

[johndizzo]

Carl Zeiss...made by Cosina...formerly makers of some of the cheapest chit in the photo biz...

Quality control and standards are still currently handled by Zeiss within the Cosina plant.

True regarding the lineage of products by Cosina, but let's not forget that many companies that were once infamous for producing shiza are now household names known for producing high quality products.

I once would've never considered purchasing a Hyundai either. Lol.