Topic: Cv vs Zi m mount lenses .....

[LT]

ok - I know they're made by the same people at the same factory etc etc etc, but they are to very different design spec and quality (hence the price difference) ... But - is anyone here a regular user/ been a regular user of either the CV 50mm f1.5 nokton and/or the ZI 50mm f2 Planar?

There is a substantial percentage difference in price, but not in real money terms - I can get the CV from the US with shipping included for about ?200 and the ZI for ?350 ... so is the difference in quality so great as to warrant me spending another tun-nifty???

From my research so far ...

Pros of CV Nokton - price, speed, quality of results between wide open and mid f number
cons of CV nokton - build quality, min focus 0.9m, mediocre performance at mid F number +, LTM not bayonet,        prone to flare

Pros of ZI Planar - quality of results throughout range, build quality, min focus at 0.7, 1/3 f stop increments, Bayonet mount
Cons of Z I Planar  - price, all but one stop slower ...erm that's about it!

All these differences might be so slight that I'm way better off keeping my extra cash for a few extra pints down the Union Bar on a wednesday afternoon (bloody students). And i know all the experts are over at rangefinder forum or apug, but you always get a load of science thrown at you with no substantive user experience or reasons why people think what they think - I trust you lot much more to give me a reasoned response.  That said, maybe nobody has used these lenses here as you cant get harmaroid backs for 35mm rfs 

SO user experiences please (if there are any) - not regurgitated stuff you've read elsewhere when in reality you dont even own a camera 

[david b]

I briefly used the Nokton a few years ago - it's a big ol' lens by RF standards. Results were pretty sharp, but I wasn't impressed by the build quality - the focus ring was quite scratchy-feeling and the aperture ring prone to slip around. The paint was already wearing off the edges to reveal plastic underneath.

Haven't used the ZI, but it might be worth looking out for the M-Hexanon 50/2 - they seem to be going for ?200 or less on ebay, which is insanely good value for a lens that is supposed to be of equal performance to the equivalent Leica Summicron. It's certainly of equal quality physically - really exquisitely neat and well-made little lens ... I haven't shot 35mm for several years now, but it was probably the best lens I ever used in that format.

[Pete_R]

Are you referring to the ZM 50/1.5 Leon? Because the Zeiss spec. says closest focussing is 0.9m not 0.7m.

And why the search for a 50mm? Didn't you say you had a 40mm/1.4 already?

[LT]

Hi peter - no, that's the C Sonnar ... I'm talking about the 50 Planar f2.  I understand a comparison between the nokton and planar is a bit silly, but price plays a big part here  - the sonnar is just out of my reach. 

I very nearly always end up cropping out the edges of frames I shoot with the 40 which, with my MF stuff isnt a problem at all, but when the frame size is as small as 35mm, I need as much image area as I can get I was thinking of the 75mm but the frame lines in the viewfinder are too small for my liking.  The 50 seems to be just right.  If I got on with it well enough, I expect I'll sell on the 40 - maybe.

I really like my bessa, but I just dont use it enough and I want to use it more.  I much prefer a "standard" lens for all my stuff, so I reckon the 50 will be the key to more successes with it.

[Pete_R]

... I'm talking about the 50 Planar f2. 

and I ought to try reading the post a bit more carefully.