Thus far the Contax 50mm N’s performance has not raised any red flags. Optical issues such as CA and color fringing have been a non-issue thus far. As expected there is some flare when shooting into the sun. Generally the flare renders in a somewhat attractive manner; however, the flare will not look like a pretty sun-spot photoshop filter. So, if shooting into the sun, expect some flare, and it may or may not add a nice photographic touch.

Saying a lens has good or bad color is somewhat misleading because there are many variables at work. Color is a function of the dSLR’s sensor, in-camera DSP, the raw converter / editor and subsequent post processing in Photoshop, etc. Based on the pictures taken with the Canon 1Ds Mark III, the Contax 50N’s colors are not overly saturated. Canon L lenses tend to have a more vibrant, saturated rendering. Thus far the Contax 50N appears to have a more neutral coloring. For Canon comparisons the images in the Canon 24-105L and Canon 135L provide a loose benchmark. All the images in this review have been processed by Phase One’s Capture One (C1) and then furthered edited in Photoshop. The photoshop editing was mostly for levels, contrast and color.

The last topic is the Contax 50N’s performance at F1.4. I waited to write this part last because the lens has good days and it has bad days. A good portion of the F1.4 images OOF’d (out of focus). I do not know whether it is the Canon 1Ds Mark III had trouble or if it is the Contax 50N. If I manual focus, an OOF is almost guaranteed, so auto-focus and live view have been a necessity. I have OOF’d so many images with manual focus that it is not worth even trying any more. When focus is correct, F1.4 is actually pretty good. The images are not “tack” sharp, but they are not soft either. If I had to rank the Contax 50N, it is better at F1.4 than the Canon 50mm F1.4 and probably a bit softer than the Canon 85L @ F1.2.

CONCLUSIONS

I have owned the Contax 24-85N, 85N and 100N. Compared against those Contax lenses, the Contax 50mm N is my favorite Contax N lens thus far. The two aspects I like most are the Contax 50N’s smallish size and its wide open performance at F1.4. The Contax 50mm N is light enough (roughly 12 ounces) to be a walk-around lens. The Canon 1Ds Mark III is a large camera body, so a compact, lightweight lens is highly appreciated. Auto-focus is quick enough, the hood is easy to attach (and reversible for storage on the lens body), the lens is sharp and the rendering is good. The only significant niggle is price. A converted Contax 50N costs around $1200 including a used 50N, shipping, conversion and shipping back. Is the Contax 50N worthy of its $1200 price tag?

The Contax 50N’s F1.4 performance has been better than expected - definitely better than the Canon EF 50mm F1.4 USM. I am not a fan of the Zeiss 50mm F1.4 Planar ZE - its wide open performance is lacking and the bokeh is marginal at best. The Zeiss 50mm F2 Makro-Planar ZE has wonderful bokeh, but it is a f2 lens and is not a good low-light lens for candids, indoor people shots, etc. I like the Zeiss 50mm F2 Makro-Planar ZE, but for walk-around use it did not work out and the lens was subsequently sold. Through a process of elimination, the Contax 50N is the last man. The Leica 50mm F1.4 Summilux-R (E60) is whisker better at F1.4, but the Leica costs ~$2000 used. The Leica 50mm F1.4 Summilux-M ASPH is outstanding at F1.4, but it costs $3695 new - plus the cost of a Leica M9... So again, through a process of elimination the Contax 50N looks pretty good.

The Contax 50N’s auto-focus is worlds better than the Canon 50mm F1.2 L USM. The Canon 50L has a nicer overall rendering at F1.2, but the Canon 50L cannot focus and is plagued with focus shift. I tried three 50L F1.2’s and finally gave up. The Canon 50L’s optical performance at its minimum focus distance, or close to it, is dismal.

By a process of elimination the Contax 50N is the last lens remaining. The Contax 50N’s weak spot is its performance at or near its minimum focus distance. It is not a poor performer, but lens with floating element designs will do better. Thus far I have not taken many people shots with the lens, so whether or not the near field performance is a deal-breaker. Thus far the Contax 50mm N’s strengths easily out-weigh the weaknesses and have no intentions of selling or replacing the lens. For the mid-semester report card -

“A”    Resolution at F4 and on

“B”    Bokeh - a bit sketchy at F1.4

“B”    Contrast - very neutral, but not rich in micro contrast

“C”    3D Rendering - not really seeing a 3D feel

“B”    Color - again, pretty neutral

“B”    Handling - feels great on the 1Ds3, manual focus ring is pretty poor

“B”    Auto Focus - overall it is pretty good, F1.4 is hit or miss

I want to give the Contax 50N a A- / B+ grade, but based on the list above, that’s a “B” average. The Contax 50N has done very well over the past couple of months and it deserves higher than a “B”. I have no plans to sell the Contax 50N, so hopefully that vote of confidence helps you in your decision. If I had not previously owned a Leica 50mm F1.4 Summilux-M ASPH, I think the above grading would have been more relaxed. The Leica set a very high bar.