PERFORMANCE

The Zeiss 50mm F2 Makro-Planar ZE is not a new lens design. Its roots go all the way back to 1896 with the first symmetric lens design by Dr. Paul Rudolph. On the Zeiss page there are two optical formulas shown - one the Contax 60mm Macro and the second for the Hasselblad 120mm CFE. Both those designs consist of 6 elements. On the front page of this review, the 50mm Makro-Planar ZE design shows 8 elements - with the most significant changes in rear lens groups. There could be any number of reasons for changes such as improved optical performance, or maybe it is more cost effective to produce 2 simpler elements and bond them together compared to forming one larger, more complex element. The important point here is - the 50mm Makro-Planar is not a new lens created for the ZE / ZF / ZK / ZS family; it is an evolutionary step.

Another incarnation of the 50mm Planar is the Zeiss 50mm F2 Planar ZM for the Zeiss Ikon and Leica M rangefinders. I was quite fond of the Zeiss 50mm F2 Planar ZM on the Leica M8 (a short review available here). The 50mm ZM is a nice casual lens on the Leica M8 (and presumably the Leica M9 as well). Eventually I purchased the Leica 50mm F1.4 Summilux-M ASPH for the M8 and for 50mm lenses, the Leica set my personal standard for what a good should 50mm lens should be.

The Zeiss 50/2 ZF review was written BEFORE owning the Leica 50mm Summilux-M ASPH. At the time I felt the Zeiss 50/2 ZF was the best 50mm lens I had used. Fast forward back to present time, and now I feel the Leica 50mm Summilux-M ASPH is the best 50mm lens I have owned. Whether I will be as impressed with Zeiss 50/2 ZE today as I was two years ago with the Zeiss 50/2 ZF will be an interesting question to answer.

The sample images on page 2 showcase the 50/2 ZE’s sweet spot - which is wide apertures at close distances. Under those conditions the 50/2 ZE delivers shallow DOF, highly abstracted bokeh, a sharp, pronounced focal plane, and bold, contrasty colors. The amount of fine detail is amazing. I think the 50/2 ZE could go head to head with the Leica 50mm F1.4 Summilux-M ASPH in a resolution test.

I have seen the usual Zeiss chromatic aberrations in the bokeh. Thus far the CA has not been objectionable and the focus plane is essentially CA free. Based on my past experience with the 50/2 ZF, I do not expect CA to be a problem; however, CA is one those areas where a lens needs to be used across a wide range of settings, locations and light conditions before any conclusive statements can be made with a high degree of confidence.

Thus far I have only had two occasions to use the 50/2 ZE, so it is far too early to make any sweeping statements about its overall performance. Thus far the lens appears to be a “good copy” and I have not noticed any bad traits or hints of poor optical performance that would lead to question the lens. I was quite happy with 50/2 ZF performance (click here for the 2008 ZF review), and I expect the ZE version will perform identically. For those of you who want to play with some 1Ds Mark III raw files, here are some ISO 100 samples from the 50/2 ZE -

1. •F5.6 landscape sample file (CR2, 31 MB)
   

2. •F5.0 potential CA resistance (CR2, 23 MB)
   

3. •F5.6 flare sample, shot into the sun (CR2, 28 MB)
   

4. •F2-F5.6 city scape samples (3 CR2’s, 85 MB)
   

5. •F5.6 shallow DOF sample (CR2, 25 MB)
   

All the images in this review have been post processed in Photoshop. Pushing the levels in Photoshop tends to exaggerate a lens’ weaknesses such as color fringing, CA and smearing in the corners. Thus far the 50/2 ZE images have held up well in Photoshop and have not revealed any hidden gremlins. The 50/2 ZE’s images are consistently sharp with a very resolution, so there is little need for additional sharpening or high pass filters to coax out additional detail. Most of the Photoshop editing has concentrated on colors and levels to tone down certain areas or enhance other areas.

I would like see some extra 3D pop in the pictures. The 3D pop is there from time to time, but it really depends on the scene, lighting and aperture. At close distances like 3 and 5 feet, the 50/2 ZE does a nice 3D feel. At 10, 12 or 15 feet the 3D feel starts to slip away. I would like to the 50/2 ZE to mimic the 3D results the Mamiya ZD produced (see this page for some examples); however, the Mamiya images were taken with a 80mm lens on a 48x36mm sensor, so hoping a 50mm lens on a 36x24mm negative can produce the same feel is very unrealistic. I know that, but I still hoped the 50/2 ZE might hold a surprise or two.

In my opinion the 50/2 ZE’s standout features are its sharpness, resolution and bokeh when focusing at close distances. Light fall-off in the corners in minimal and is a non-issue around F4. Likewise, the corners are a tad soft F2, and by F2.8 to F4.0 they are quite sharp. CA is well managed. There be a slight touch of pincushion distortion. I have seen no signs of focus shift. Overall the 50/2 ZE has all the indications of being a very good lens.