sell Zeiss 50/2 for an AF 50mm macro lens?

was mulling selling the manual focus Zeiss 50mm makro for either the Canon 50mm 2.5 or Sigma 50mm 2.8 macros.

main reason being, i like the MFD, but i would also like AF.

mistake? go for it?

if ur mainly using it for macro work i think u should keep the zeiss..

yeah, for macro work you will be manually focusing. And being a owner of the 50 2.5, the af isn't very good. It's not usm.

I did EXACTLY this. Sold my 50 MP in favor of the Canon 50 f/2.5 CM. I do very little macro and wanted something cheap & light. The Zeiss 50 MP and Canon 50 CM are very different lenses. Zeiss gives better looking images overall (typical Zeiss vs Canon) but with lots of vignetting. The AF on the Canon is a welcome addition but the lens only opens to f/2.5.

I've been on a Zeiss hunt recently and the 50 CM keeps me happy enough that the 50 MP, while on my list, is not the first Zeiss lens I'm looking for.

Regarding the 50 CM AF performance, I've found it to be accurate enough. Sure it is slow but I've had no issues with its accuracy in normal lighting.

vgrab wrote in post #14250170
if ur mainly using it for macro work i think u should keep the zeiss..

yeah, that's actually the reason, i'm "limited" to doing macro on the zeiss because anything farther away, i can't see if i got it in focus.

BobbyT wrote in post #14250203
yeah, for macro work you will be manually focusing. And being a owner of the 50 2.5, the af isn't very good. It's not usm.

wow, all MF on your gear list, was about to ask about the 50 1.8 II vs 50 2.5 AF motor ... similar, or is the macro crappier?

n1as wrote in post #14250233
Regarding the 50 CM AF performance, I've found it to be accurate enough. Sure it is slow but I've had no issues with its accuracy in normal lighting.

what about in dark environments?

I've owned the 50 1.8II. They do have the same af motor, but it is a lot snappier on the 50 1.8 because the 50 macro has more to move. On the 50 macro, the af has to move the extra weight of the guide which extends out for macro work. Also, the 50 macro is not a true 1:1 magnification lens without the addition of the Canon Life Size Extender.

I do have the Canon 200mm 2.8, but I manual focus it. And if a good 200mm manual focus becomes available I will get that.

BobbyT wrote in post #14250521
I've owned the 50 1.8II. They do have the same af motor, but it is a lot snappier on the 50 1.8 because the 50 macro has more to move. On the 50 macro, the af has to move the extra weight of the guide which extends out for macro work. Also, the 50 macro is not a true 1:1 magnification lens without the addition of the Canon Life Size Extender.

I do have the Canon 200mm 2.8, but I manual focus it. And if a good 200mm manual focus becomes available I will get that.

yeah the zeiss is also 1:.5

the sigma is 1:1 but i don't really need anymore magnfication, i'm only considering the macros due to their MFD's

50 CM AF in dark places? I've never used it in dark places. I doubt it would keep up with some of the more expensive lenses but it has done better under good lighting than my Sigma 50 f/1.4 or Sigma 85 f/1.4 did. I've also had better in-focus hit rates with it than I do with Zeiss in less-than-daylight lighting.

mike cabilangan wrote in post #14250567
yeah the zeiss is also 1:.5

the sigma is 1:1 but i don't really need anymore magnfication, i'm only considering the macros due to their MFD's

knowing this, an option to consider would be selling the Zeiss for a Sigma 50 1.4 and a set of extension tubes. The 50 has a close MFD. The tubes would make that really close when you need it. The Siggy 50 is super sharp, has lightening fast AF, and 1.4 aperture. And you should come out with cash in your pocket.

regarding extension tubes. i know they don't let you focus to infinity (on AF lenses) but what range are we talking about from MFD to how many feet?

A 36mm tube will take the Sigma 50 from a MFD of 1.48' to around 6". And increase the magnification from .13x to .85x. Stacking more tubes will obviously increase the close up performance. And like I said earlier, I mentioned this route because you are looking more for close MFD than magnification. A normal 50mm with tubes gives you more versatility, including being able to use the tubes with your other lenses.

One other option to consider is finding a Canon Life Size Converter. Despite the paperwork saying the LFC is only for the Canon 5omm 2.5 macro. I have found it will work on any chipped lens. i.e. the LFC won't work on my Rokinon lenses because it needs a chip to read. I have tested it on a Sigma macro, and use it regularly on my 200 2.8 prime. It is basically an extension tube with a magnifying glass. Even getting a 50 with a LFC, you would come out ahead on money after the sale of your Zeiss due to the difference in value.

The ZE50 MP is the best 50mm out there for Canon IMO. I think you'll be sorely disappointed with any other 50 out there, especially if your biggest reason for switching is to gain AF.