A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Community > Forums > Nikon > Nikon Lenses and Optics > Nikkor 50/1.2 AIS vs Zeiss...

Featured Equipment Deals

Basic Printing with Lightroom (Video Tutorial) Read More

Basic Printing with Lightroom (Video Tutorial)

Learn to print your images directly from within Lightroom. This video tutorial covers the basic settings (page borders, watermarking, print resolution, and paper and printer preferences) for creating...

Latest Equipment Articles

The Week in Photography News Read More

The Week in Photography News

November 15-21, 2014: Hear the latest goings-on in the photography world, from product releases to event and campaign announcements and more.

Latest Learning Articles

Introduction to Creating an Album in Lightroom - Part I (Video Tutorial) Read More

Introduction to Creating an Album in Lightroom - Part I (Video Tutorial)

Learn to create an album in the Book Tab of Lightroom that you can publish and present to clients.


Nikkor 50/1.2 AIS vs Zeiss 50/2 Makro-Planar ZF.2

Frederico L , Jan 18, 2013; 04:31 p.m.

I already have a Nikkor 50/2 H.C. Auto (AI converted) and a Nikkor 50/1.8G but I am thinking of adding one more 50 to the bag.
Despite of large differences in max. aperture and price, can anyone compare Nikkor 50/1.2 AIs with Zeiss 50/2 Makro-Planar if shooting at F2 and smaller? I’m interested in knowing how they perform in terms of color rendition, boken and sharpness. Thanks.

Responses


    1   |   2   |   3     Next    Last

Keith B , Jan 18, 2013; 04:39 p.m.

Don't have a Nikon 50/1.2 but have had the Zeiss for a few years. The Zeiss is excellent on "sharpness", different but equally as good--compared to similar vintage Nikon Ai(S) lenses--- on color, but bokeh might be the Zeiss' weak point IF you are super critical and particular about bokeh. Try before you buy.
One note: Based on actual samples of the Zeiss ZF 50/2 and ZF.2 50/2 that I have examined, Zeiss apparently changed the AR coating with the ZF.2 model, and not for the better. The newer coating results in a yellower color cast, and blue-colored flare where the older ZF version had more neutrally colored flare. Yes, that's right, Zeiss made it worse.

Michael Bradtke , Jan 18, 2013; 04:52 p.m.

I have the 50mm f/1.2 AI-S and if you are going to shoot it at f/2 don't waste your money. Its sharp enough at f/2 and has good out of focus renditions but my 50mm f/2 is sharper at f/2 then my 50mm f/1.2 is.

Andy Murphy , Jan 18, 2013; 04:57 p.m.

I have the AIS 50 f1.2 but not the Zeiss. With 9 blades the Nikkor's bokeh is okay at f2 and I like it right up to f5.6 where I get very good results. And, on a DX, it is a 75 mm f1.2 lens. Cary Jordan tested Seven 50mm lenses for Nikon's F-mount, including the Zeiss 50mm f1.4 Planar ZF2 lens which Nikon Rumours carried with the date November 3, 2011.

John Hinkey , Jan 18, 2013; 05:14 p.m.

Get the 50/1.2 to shoot it at f/1.2. At any other aperture it is bested by the 50/1.8G that you already have. I thought I'd get rid of the 50/1.2 once I got my 50/1.8G, but the look at f/1.2 is very much worth having it around, though I don't use it quite as much as I used to once the G came along.

John

Frederico L , Jan 18, 2013; 05:49 p.m.

Michael,
When you said “my 50mm f/2 is sharper at f/2”, which lens are you referring to? A Nikkor f/2 of a Zeiss f/2?

Jack Kozera , Jan 18, 2013; 05:59 p.m.

Frederico, I have both of them and I agree with Michael; the 50/1.2 AI-s is very sharp at f/2 and even sharper stopped down, but I feel it was meant to be used wide open in low light. If you're looking for a fast lens, well 50/1.2 it is. If you plan to use it at f/8, say for landscaping, 50/1.2 AI-s it is.
Said that, Zeiss MP has very short MFD, if you need it, and it's a great lens for short to mid distances, especially in bright(er) light where 50/1.2 AI-s would flare.
Still not sure which one to get? :) Consider Leica Summicron-R 50 E55 as your 3rd lens.

Owen O'Meara , Jan 18, 2013; 06:31 p.m.

You might take a quick look at the Nikkor 50 1.4D. This is a very shape lens at 2.0 with wonderful color saturation and broke. It is a much better bargain than the 1.2 .

-O

Rodeo Joe , Jan 18, 2013; 07:33 p.m.

For years I've had a 55mm f/1.2 Nikkor S-C, and believed the pundits that it was a poor lens compared to the 50mm version, so always hankered after the later 50mm f/1.2. Well, recently I found one at a reasonable - but not bargain - price and bought it. What a mistake!

Quite frankly, it's probably the worst 50mm Nikkor that's ever passed through my hands. Wide open I consider it unusable because of the low contrast, flare, coma and residual spherical aberration. The "look" is just that of a very poor lens compared to what I get from the old 55mm version. Stopped down the 50mm f/1.2 isn't that brilliant either. My advice - Don't waste your money.

I know it's not all about sharpness with a lens like this, but below is what you can expect from it in the centre of the field at f/1.2 on a D800. The edges are even worse BTW.


Who designed this thing? Holga?

Michael Bradtke , Jan 18, 2013; 08:12 p.m.

Fredrico I am talking about the Nikkor 50mm f/2.0 Mine is the Nikkor H with a factory AI conversion kit installed.

Joe your 50mm f/1.2 sucks, mine is much better wide open then that. You might think to have it looked at as it may be a little out of adjustment. My 50 f/1.2 is better at f/1.2 then my 55 f/1.2 is.

And again Fredrico if you are nopt buying the 50 f/1.2 to shoot at f2 or fater then save your money.


    1   |   2   |   3     Next    Last

Back to top

Notify me of Responses