ZF Makro Planar 50/2

<p>What are your first hand impressions on this lens?<br>

I've already gathered all the information(scant) available on the web at this time.<br>

The lens seems to be exellent image wise and versatile.<br>

Did you make any pictures with this lens that you are proud/satisfied of ? Not just flower shots but maybe portraits and/or still life?<br>

How about use with extention tubes?</p>

<p>It's strange this lens has been out for a couple of years yet so few comments. Is it the price? (1000€)<br>

If no one responds I'll have to bite the bullet and find out on my own! <br>

Thanks for your imput.</p>

<p>For sure the high price is a drawback. It`s also a manual focus lens... that will be used on most cases with a non splitted, nor gritty, super smooth bright screen of a digital camera. Many times you`ll need to check focus on the electronic rangefinder led. Not a big deal for most people, I suppose.<br>

I think it`s a lens for a very special type of user.</p>

<p>I bought my ZF 50/2 to replace my ancient, wobbly, dust-filled Nikon 55/2.8. I use it handheld in the infinity to about 1:5 range, and I am completely pleased with it. The mechanical construction is very nice...on par with Leica-R lenses. I feel the focusing mech will not self-destruct over time, as Nikon Ai-type lenses often do. The 1/2 stop detents on the aperture ring are lame, but that would be my only complaint. Imaging-wise, it's better than my 55/2.8 Nikon at infinity, and at least as good(for my purposes) at close up. Haven't used it on extension tubes. Plenty of ghosts if bright light sources are in the shot(typical for double-gauss design), but overall seems to have a normal amount of flare. Among the easier-to-focus lenses on the D3, noticeably easier than the 24-70/2.8, for example...I'm not sure why. Of course, a focusing screen designed for eye-focusing would be nice...</p>

<p>The 50/2 ZF is actually very easy to manual focus at least on a full-frame camera because it is super sharp at f/2, which is the viewing aperture. I have only played with it in a store a few times, for optical tests check out photozone.de's review of it.</p>

<p>IMO a macro lens <em>should </em>preferably be manual focus, as these lenses are easier to focus precisely manually, and autofocus is not very useful for close-up work since the depth of field is shallow and it's hard to find a focus sensor that would just nail the correct focus on a subject like that. AF on autofocus macro lenses tends to hunt a lot at macro distances since the DOF is so shallow. I have two AF-S Micro Nikkors and I rarely use them for close-ups because I find the 100mm and the 85 PC-E better both optically and from a handling point of view. I've been thoroughly enjoying close-up photography since I got these two lenses. I know it's the photographer that matters rather than the gear, but frankly speaking a pleasant and rewarding photography experience with lenses that are easy to use and deliver consistently excellent quality keeps me trying for better and better results.</p>

 

<p>I second Ilkka's assertion that Macro/Micro lenses should be MF. I have several Nikon Micro-Nikkors and never use them in AF. I need to control the area of the subject that is sharp.</p>

<p>I appreciate your chiming in although your comments are mostly off topic.<br>

Just to be clear, I am interested in first hand experience with this lens and if possible looking at convincing images made with it other than flower shots.<br>

Why? well, I find 50mm a good focal length on a crop sensor for faces, flowers and objects. It has an aperture ring, meaning I can use bellows and extention tubes. This lens also has, according to reports, good(smooth) manual focussing, something that I cannot say of other AF macros (in that focal range)that I have tried. And by the way, using the D300's live view for manual focusing is a joy, better than looking through the viewfinder, split screen or not. <br>

I saw some colourful flower shots on pbase I forgot where. The samples on photozone are boring, the tester <i>seems</i> to be more of a(good) tester than a (good) photographer. <br>

That said it looks like I will have to try it and find out! Now I gotta find the € 1000!</p>