MC Zenitar 1.2 / 50s review by reader Radozhiva

Overview of the MC Zenitar 1.2 / 50s lens specially for Radozhiva prepared Rodion Eshmakov.

MC Zenitar 1.2 / 50s

MC Zenitar 1.2 / 50s

Specifications:

Structure: 8 elements in 7 groups
Viewing angle: ~ 30 degrees
MDF: 0,45 m
Aperture Limits: 1:1.2-1:16
The weight: November 630, XNUMX
Years of production: since the beginning of 2014
Filter Thread Diameter: 62 mm
Contents of delivery: a lens with caps, a cloth bag under the lens.
Format: APS-C
Focus Type: Hand
Aperture type: manual

Appearance and design

The lens has a body made of hard, durable plastic that inspires confidence. The lens mount is made of non-black metal, which is best corrected by at least blackening it with a marker to avoid loss of contrast.
The plastic case is no longer glass and metal, plastic can quickly lose its appearance if handled carelessly. In general, it raises no objections.

Portrait on MC Zenitar 1.2 / 50s

Portrait on MC Zenitar 1.2 / 50s

The lens is available at KMZ for Canon EF and Nikon F mounts and is suitable only for cropped cameras (APS-C). At full-frame, he will give strong vignetting. Contrary to current trends, the lens has no connection with the camera, even the focus confirmation chip, which does not add convenience.

MC Zenitar 1.2 / 50s

MC Zenitar 1.2 / 50s

Key features:

1. Huge aperture - F1.2 - allows you to shoot in low light, achieve a small depth of field and use the lens as a portrait lens (equivalent to 75 mm at 1.5 crop).
2. Manual setting of the diaphragm. Aperture control is performed by one ring, without presetting mechanisms. The diaphragm snaps nicely, stops at the feet and half-stops. It's nice that there is a label for 1.4 between 1.2 and 2.
3. Multilayer coating - allows you to achieve good contrast and colors. At the same time, a lens from an open aperture, due to some features, is able to catch huge rabbits - more on that below. In terms of light transmission, the object is approximately equivalent to F1.4.
4. The lens has nine blackened aperture blades - more than enough to get smooth circles in the bokeh and a multi-pointed star from the flashlight.
5. The lens is suitable only for cameras with a format of no more than APS-C (although no one forbids using on trimmed APS)
6. The lens uses manual focus by moving the entire lens block. To do this, he has a wonderful convenient wide focus ring with a stroke, however, only 180 degrees. However, this move allows you to shoot videos faster and more conveniently.
7. The lens's MDF is large - 0.45 m, but still allows shooting small objects.
8. The lens is assembled flawlessly - no flaws were noticed. Often they write about the chips between the lenses in the new lenses of KMZ and so on ... This specimen has no such problems.

MC Zenitar 1.2 / 50s

MC Zenitar 1.2 / 50s

Photo quality

At 1.2 sharpness, the lens is more than enough. It is limited only by light software and chromatic aberrations, especially they appear on sources of bright light. Chromatic aberrations lenses are represented by both conventional fringing and the more harmful chromatism of magnification, which almost does not disappear with aperture. However, this is a disease of many lenses with "extreme" characteristics. And it is quite worthy to be removed programmatically, in the editor. In addition, there is a very small spherical aberration (soft) for such a lens and a barely noticeable coma at the edge of the frame. Overall, the lens is very good in distortion correction. The main problem - getting into focus at 1.2 - is solved by gradually getting used to the lens.

The maximum sharpness of the lens appears at F / 5.6, although already at 2.8 sharpness in the center abound. At the edges, the sharpness more or less aligns closer to F / 5.6-F / 8 due to chromatism.
The lens has very good color rendition and contrast. Thanks to the successful layout, the lens has a very good pattern and bokeh, which is closer to the edge of the "lemon", like planars. And just like planars, these circles can be “cut off” from the edge.

With backlight at apertures of up to 1.4, the lens gives a huge annular rainbow flare that occurs due to the special bore of one lens of the lens. Glare can be a good effect, but sometimes it becomes a big problem. At 1.4, it completely disappears, leaving only small reflections of enlightenment. Those. it is necessary to close the aperture to 1.4 at least to minimize the drop in contrast in backlight.

In general, the lens is nice to use for photos (especially portraits, night photographs) and video, there’s nothing to complain about.

MC Zenitar 1.2 / 50s

MC Zenitar 1.2 / 50s

Download source files in format JPEG can at this link (10 files in '.JPG' and '.CR2' format, 100 MB). All photos were taken on Canon 600D.

UPDATED

Prices for MC Zenitar 1.2 / 50s

You can see the real prices for the lens in online stores here.

Conclusion

Zenitar-S 50 / 1.2 is a wonderful portrait-night lens for cropped cameras, with a huge aperture, noble design, pleasant build and image quality and a "highlight" in the form of a sly flare.
Of course, its retail price is far from small, but if we ignore it, the lens is simply wonderful.

A list of all reviews from readers of Radozhiva will find here.

Add a comment:

 

 

Comments: 184, on the topic: Review of MC Zenitar 1.2 / 50s from the reader Radozhiva

  • Yaroslav

    The lens disappointed me. The picture is like a bottle glass. I am attaching examples, if the manufacturer considers it adequate (there is an OTK stamp) - then ok, but I - no. Monstrous software.

    View post on imgur.com

    View post on imgur.com

    If not inserted - link separately
    https://imgur.com/a/d8CkdVN

    • anonym

      For a starling with a manual fifty dollars? At 1,2!? Mogo ...
      If he could charm in the open ... his price would be twice as high.
      But didn’t you try to process the rabbi normally?

    • Fedka

      Is this the type you shoot with manual focus on speed and accuracy like AF?)))) So with the same success, any lens will be soap for you. But the experts divorced))))

      • Michael

        He got into focus, so all the rules

  • Rodion

    Today I decided to check the difference between aperture marks 1.2 and 1.4 on my lens (sample from the review). Here in the comments they write that there is no difference. So - this is not true: when switching to live view and changing the aperture from F / 1.2 to F / 1.4 with a ring, not only a noticeably small (less than a third of a stop - as it should be) drop in illumination is noticeable, but also a change in the shape of the circles in the bokeh: they become cut blades of the diaphragm.
    Actually, that’s all: honest with him, geometric 1.2.

    • Responsive

      Most likely, this lens 1.2 and 1.4 are not exactly the same, but just THE SAME. If you believe that 1.4 really gives exactly its declared aperture ratio of 1.4, then 1.2 is subjectively equal to 1.39. On Liv View everything is confirmed. there can be no talk of any 1/3 foot (pordon, 1/3 of the diaphragm stop). And what is the term “honest Geometric”? it needs to be patented and sold to the Chinese. By the way, Artistic zest, on pseudo-1.2, whatever one may say in the sun, it was not possible to catch! Honestly Komsomolskoe :)

      • Responsive

        I’ll try again to catch this round flare before sunset, as in the photo in this review. In the afternoon, the sun is bright, it did not work out.

      • Fedka

        Not pseudo 1.2 to 1.2 aperture. Write some nonsense. You need to forums for nerds

        • Rodion

          They don’t take such people there either.

      • Boris

        There is no 1.2 look at the lens there the skirt interferes up to 1.4 nothing happens sadly for deception. Well, this is not the main thing, I think the review is a dummy, the topic is not disclosed. I personally compared it with the Takumar SMC 1.4 / 50 m42 took a photo on the world from a distance of 1m at the zenith on the open and up to 5.6 edges the soap center is so-so takumar at 1.4 edges are slightly blurred after 2.0 everything is sharp as a result the takum wins with a weight of 250g. But at a distance of 3 or more meters, on the contrary, the zenith is sharp throughout the field, so I often use it not for macro someone will tell you what's the matter I can throw off the photo tests

    • Boris

      Look carefully into the lens, everything is clearly visible there 1.2 closed with a skirt until 1.4 nothing changes there

      • Rodion Eshmakov

        Oh, the sectarians are in place. Hello again.

        Recently I got my hands on an interesting 7artisans 50 / 1.1, which is Leica M. Of course, it is interesting to compare its 1.1 and Zenitarovskaya 1.2, as well as Zenitarovskaya 1.4 and its 1.4.

        According to tests: at equal ISO, the shutter speeds at 1.1 Chinese and 1.2 Zenitar differ by 1/3 stop (the camera considers it necessary to compensate for the difference of 20%).

        With 1.4 Chinese against 1.2 Zenitar the difference is 1/3 step in favor of Zenitar.

        At 1.4 Chinese and 1.4 Zenitar the exposures are equal.

        Conclusion: either you are the disgruntled owner of the Nikon version, whose aperture is eaten by the bayonet. Or the owner of a frankly unsuccessful copy. Or ... There is a good word for this)))

        PS I think that after working with 7artisans this review will also be rewritten - it would still be nice to update it.
        PPS In sharpness in the center, the zenith is much ahead of 7artisans 50 / 1.1 with equal apertures.

  • Michael

    NIKON's lens mounts are all made of “unblacked metal” and this in no way results in a drop in contrast. Because everything is done humanly. And to release a fast lens without autofocus in the XNUMXst century - to whom and why? What should they shoot?

    • Dmitry K.

      It’s very convenient for them to shoot on fujah with focus picking.

    • Fedka

      So if you don’t need a lens with manual focus, etc. then why scribble here?

    • Vasya

      High-speed lenses without autofocus are successfully produced by Lake and Zeiss (probably not the most stupid capitalists), and high-quality manual lenses quickly go away. For example, it is very easy to focus on Fuji or Sony, unless of course you do not shoot reports, but such a task does not cost a considerable number of users.

  • Andrei

    I didn't see any “zest”, but it's more likely what hands were holding the camera, I like Helios 44 (I have white) much more, at first I got interested, but after looking at different reviews :) don't ... let them take who matters 1.2, brag, example of a photo from Helios 44

    • BB

      What about color? Why green?

      • Andrei

        :) Is color blind something about color can be explained?

        • Michael

          Oh well. Who is color blind yet another question

          • Eugene

            I confirm the dirty yellow-green color in the photo. Another person color blind calls names ..))))

    • 4ma

      Helios on ff the most it and on Crop well it is. shot on canon 7d and helios 77m4 now helios stands on Sony a7 s ii a completely different viewing angle and most importantly the bokeh has become generally skpzachnoe. one conclusion to shoot crop with lenses and on ff full-frame otherwise it makes no sense

      • Andrei

        There are no people who can determine the FF or crop, it has been checked many times among forum photo shooters, the photo above is taken in the second seven, I have both formats, I prefer to shoot Mark 7d on the Mark 2, it’s better only one, all fives are a compromise, I take the FF only when it comes a small distance for shooting, for the second seven you need to increase the distance by crop factor

      • Fedor

        the way it is, and it’s better not to take the kenon crop at all

  • Vsevolod

    This lens is already 4 years old, of intensive use, I can say that this lens loves straight arms and some dexterity, the drawing from it is expensive and not repeatable, pure sharpness that does not ring, perfect contrast and resolution, the lens is not for beginners, but for those who can work with light and composition, regime time.

  • Fedor

    I can say that on kenon the lens was soapy and limp on shitty kenon and Sigma art 50 1.4 showed no sharpness, but I bought kenon80d after crop (I am very glad that I got rid of this slag) Fujifilm x-t2 and the lens became sharp with completely open and not of the lameness that was on the canon, only one conclusion is to use the Fujifilm crop and then you can only understand how the lens removes. Good luck to everyone in Fuji))

    • Alexey

      You wrote nonsense. Chromatic aberration is a defect in the lens, not the camera. kenon 80d has nothing to do with it. if the problem with autofocus is specific to you, that's another question.

      • я

        on the canon, any lens gives out soap and not a picture, unlike other systems

  • Arthur

    Zenitar 1,2 / 50s acquired two months ago. Considered from the price segment up to 20 thousand rubles. Satisfied. Worth the purchase.

  • Jury

    Great lens. Anyone with whom it did not work out, I strongly advise you to try again. On a mirror very unusual things turn out. Directly at the swab can be purchased.

  • Nikita

    Gosh, what a beautiful model in some photos. Like her name is Sonya. With such a model, any lens is cool))

  • Alexander

    Judging by the photos of the boke, this lens is twisted like that of Helios, or am I mistaken?

    • Rodion

      Bokeh is a little twisted, but a little like Helios.

    • Igor

      He turns bokeh well on a full frame. But unfortunately it does not cover the corners in the full frame, you have to crop 10 percent.

  • я

    lens weight 680 grams, 2 pieces already hung

  • Igor

    I have 2 zeniters 50mm, one 85 years old f1.7 and this one f1.2. I shoot in full frame. F1.2 has a number of features: strong vignetting at the edges of the frame, black corners, barrel distortion and a twisted back :). In general, very cool glass for photo arts. In comparison with the grandfather f1.7, it has a higher contrast definitely. When you just need to take pictures and don't want to bother with processing, I wear an old f1.7. It's smaller, lighter, but boring. When you want to shoot portraits or something atmospheric, definitely f1.2. The difference in flu between lenses is not always perceptible, you can feel it when you go from 1.7 to 1.2. Also here in the comments wrote about the allegedly not real f1.2. From the very first click, the diaphragm is covered in diameter by about 2 mm. What else I want to say, without a matte focusing screen, adjusted, using this lens (like 1.7) on a DSLR is difficult, very difficult. Filmed only in series because you can't see nichrome, you hit the target or not. It's a pleasure on a mirrorless camera, every shot is on target. Therefore, to use this lens, it is still better to prepare a camera, either a ff bzk, or a matte focusing screen to see the grip.

    • Alexey

      ML to help with manual focusing. the convenience is almost the same as on a normal UPC.

  • Serg

    the picture is so-so. bokeshka is not interesting

    • Rodion Eshmakov

      Buy yourself an ancient 50 / 1.2 from the 1970s. A week after the purchase, play enough with bokeh and buy Zenitar.

      • Serg

        bokeshka just ordinary, nothing interesting.

  • Anonymous

    And what about the prices for zenith lenses? Did I miss something?

Add a comment

christening photographer price Photography for lovers

Copyright © Radojuva.com. Blog author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2021

English-version of this article https://radojuva.com/en/2015/12/zenitar-s-canon-50-1-2/