Zeiss Ikon 50mm F2 Makro Planar ZE...first impressions

I just recieved this lens in the new Canon mount a few days ago and figured that I would report on my first impressions to you guys and gals. Just to let you know, I'm not a measurbator...I don't spend all day taking photos of test charts and brick walls. I'm more of a "take it out and use it" type person.....so there won't be any science applied here. Just me taking the lens for a spin and seeing if I like the results and then reporting to you guys and gals of my thoughts.
The first thing I noticed when I opened the box was the outstanding build quality of this lens. There's no slop or looseness or play or rattling. It's as solid as a brick and quite hefty for its size and as far as I can tell, no plastic (even the hood is metal). The second thing I noticed was the front element....it sits way back in the housing and is quite small. No sexy big piece of glass up front like the Canon 85L or 135L to show off...at least it's well protected back there. Now, I'm hoping the IQ will hold up to the standards of the build.
After putting the lens on my camera (and I'm using a 1DsMkII for these tests), I gave the manual focus a try. Considering that the lens has such a close MFD, the throw of the focus adjustment is quite long to go from close to far...I guess that's to be expected. Other than that, the ease of MF is absolutely wonderful. The focus ring is well dampened and it's very easy to tell when the viewfinder "snaps" into focus and to stop at that exact point. In fact, with a bit of practice, this lens can be focused very accurately very quickly.
As far as IQ, I've found it to be extremely impressive. Shooting wide open, this lens is as sharp as a tack. Absolutely no purple fringing along highlights (which my 85L is horrible about) and a very smooth transition to OOF areas. The bokeh this lens produces is very pleasing to my eyes. The OOF areas are buttery smooth with no signs of harshness. What I find equally amazing is the beautiful color rendition and awesome contrast produced by this lens. Considering that all of my other glass is Canon, there is definately a different look here...the images seem to "pop" a bit more with little to no PP. Another positive thing I've noticed, this lens is more forgiving of the red channel. I've often found it very easy to blow the red channel (especially with bright colors such as yellow) using Canon glass but with this lens, it doesn't happen nearly as easily.
On the downside....I really wish this lens was a stop faster. Considering that this lens shines wide open, F2 is nice but F1.4 would be nicer Vignetting is also a bit of an issue wide open but not so much that it can't be fixed...it also disappears very quickly when stopping down a small bit. Overall, so far, I'm quite pleased with this lens and would consider it a keeper. I don't find the manual focusing aspect of it to really be that much of a downside unless shooting moving subjects.
Below are a few sample photos that I've taken over the last few days with the lens. All were taken wide open (I think) with the exception of the guy on the paddle board.
EDIT: Just to let ya know...these photos are pretty much right from the camera. No added contrast, saturation boost or additional PP.

One more.....

Great review and very rich colors. Keep posting as time goes on.

Impressions aside, love the bottle shot, perfectly placed focus and the similar colors blend together nicely. The reds definitely do look nice and vibrant without looking baked too. Though, I think my most loved aspect of Zeiss lenses is how they handle blues (due to the cooler rendition).

Thanks for sharing. Those are some awesome colors, they really pop.

Meh, average - for Zeiss...

very nice review with pics, thanks!!!

Although nice, the reds in the first shot are baked.

The paddler, reds are also baked...more than the first shot.

Just curious... were these in camera JPG's and what was the Picture Style setting(s) ? Looks like Landscape.

bohdank wrote in post #9254529
Although nice, the reds in the first shot are baked.

The paddler, reds are also baked...more than the first shot.

Just curious... were these in camera JPG's and what was the Picture Style setting(s) ? Looks like Landscape.

These were shot in RAW and processed in ACR, all settings at default. The saturation was at "0".
The reds in the first shot are only slightly blown in just a few small spots. The shot of the paddler...there is quite a bit of clipping in that photo. I didn't say that it won't blow the red channel, it just seems more forgiving. That said, It's just an impression after using the lens a very short time. I may be completely wrong here. Still, I'm really liking this lens thus far. Maybe I'll get some time to compare it head to head with a Canon lens just to see the actual differences.

that sweet zeiss bokeh!

ken_vs_ryu wrote in post #9256311
that sweet zeiss bokeh!

I agree....I find it very pleasing

jra wrote in post #9256065
These were shot in RAW and processed in ACR, all settings at default. The saturation was at "0".
The reds in the first shot are only slightly blown in just a few small spots. The shot of the paddler...there is quite a bit of clipping in that photo. I didn't say that it won't blow the red channel, it just seems more forgiving. That said, It's just an impression after using the lens a very short time. I may be completely wrong here. Still, I'm really liking this lens thus far. Maybe I'll get some time to compare it head to head with a Canon lens just to see the actual differences.

Ok. ACR Standard, then.

I asked because people post, "no processing" when, for RAW, there is always some processing, the Picture Style.

I'm used to seeing Faithful which is my starting point and closer to "no processing" along with Nuetral, then any of the other Styles. Try them in Faithful and see if the Red channel is still blown out. It might not be at all but certainly less so. Certainly less pop and contrast.

You mention the down side of not having a 1.4 lens. Did you consider getting the ZE 50/1.4? Lot less money.

gasrocks wrote in post #9256791
You mention the down side of not having a 1.4 lens. Did you consider getting the ZE 50/1.4? Lot less money.

Yep. But it isn't as good as the 50 F/2. The 50 F/1.4 is more like a 50 F/2.8 lens, IMO.

Kind regards, Wim

whenever I see pics from this lens the colors just are amazing. makes it hard to not order one.