![\"Zeiss](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-29.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
The specs of the Carl Zeiss Sonnar 2.8\/90 sound great: Small, cheap, it’s from Zeiss so it should be very sharp and with the right adapter it even offers AF on the a7II! So how will it actually perform? Read on if you want to know.<\/p>\n
Thanks to Uwe\u00a0for loaning me the lens and Techart adapter for this review!<\/p>\n
![\"Zeiss](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-15.jpg\")
![\"Zeiss](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-24.jpg\")
![\"Zeiss](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-22.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
More information in Zeiss’ official data sheet.<\/a><\/p>\n The Carl Zeiss Sonnar 2.8\/90\u00a0usually sells for around $140-200<\/strong>\u00a0at ebay.com <\/a>(affiliate link).\u00a0<\/em> The \u00a0rarer black version sells for quite a bit more.<\/em><\/p>\n There is only one version of this lens. It comes in two colors: Titan and black but the black version is much rarer and therefore more expensive.<\/p>\n The optical design of the Sonnar 2.8\/90 is very closely related to the Zeiss Sonnar 2.8\/85 with\u00a0Zeiss C\/Y mount<\/a>.<\/p>\n The Sony 2.8\/85 A-mount\u00a0is rumored to have the same optical design as the Zeiss\u00a0 2.8\/90 and the cross section does indeed look nearly identical. The big difference is the build quality, the Sony is made from plastics and feels very cheap while this lens is very well made.<\/p>\n The Zeiss Sonnar 2.8\/90 was originally developed in the mid 90’s for the Contax G1 and it’s successor the Contax G2. Both are AF rangefinder cameras.<\/p>\n Adapting Contax G\u00a0lenses to modern digital cameras comes with two challenges<\/strong>.\u00a0Since the Contax G cameras\u00a0have a rather short flange focal distance of just 29mm you cannot adapt them to DSLRs<\/strong>. The advantage of this short flange focal distance is that adapters for mirrorless systems are only about 11mm thick. The other problem is that the\u00a0\u00a0lenses do not have a focusing ring<\/strong>, just AF coupling so\u00a0the adapter must provide some means to focus the lens<\/strong>.<\/p>\n There are two kinds of adapters, purely mechanical and electronic adapters which even provide AF with some Sony Alpha cameras.<\/p>\n Mechanical adapters<\/strong> are available for EOS M, Fuji X, M43 and Sony E-mount. They range in price<\/a> (affiliate link) from $25 to $140. I own a cheap adapter of the $25 class and it totally sucks, the focusing experience is awful. I have heard good things about the Kipon and Metabones adapters but I haven’t used them personally.<\/p>\n The Techart TA-GA3 adapter<\/strong> is very interesting because\u00a0you can use AF with newer Sony E-mount cameras<\/strong>! AF with the Sony a7, a7r and a7s is unusable (very slow and unreliable) but with the a7II it works quite okay as long as it isn’t too dark. The AF experience is certainly not as smooth as with native lenses. The screw driven AF is rather loud<\/strong> and while\u00a0it tracks small changes in focusing distances well<\/strong> it is quite slow to realize larger changes in focusing distance<\/strong>. Reliability<\/strong> was good enough not but not on the same level as the native lenses<\/strong>. It also fails when it is a bit darker<\/strong> in situations where native lenses still work reasonably well. I found it usable in some scenarios but often enough I changed to manual focusing which is realized with a small wheel at the 2 o’clock position. Manual focusing with this method works better than I would have expected but can be a bit fiddly at long distances. The Zeiss 2.8\/90 feels very nice and solid.<\/p>\n The barrel is made of metal, supposedly titanium.<\/p>\n All markings are engraved.<\/p>\n The Sonnar is made in Japan.<\/p>\n I did not diasassemble the lens so I can’t tell you how it looks on the inside and how reliable it’s construction is.<\/p>\n The Zeiss Sonnar\u00a0is very well well balanced on the Sony a7. At just 240g and with a very small diameter it is less obstrusive than most adapted 50mm lenses.<\/p>\n The Zeiss does not have a focusing ring<\/strong>.\u00a0How you focus depends on the kind of adapter you use. I used a Techart adapter. To manually focus you turn a small dial which you see to the left of the TECHART branding on the image above. The experience is of course not as nice as with a real focusing ring but it works well enough, I never had the urge\u00a0to throw adapter and lens into the narest\u00a0pond. I had that urge quite often with my all manual cheap $25 adapters.<\/p>\n The\u00a0aperture ring<\/strong> has full stops from f\/2.8 to f\/22 which register nicely but it isn’t too easy\u00a0to select half-stops because the aperture\u00a0ring doesn’t travels very\u00a0far. If you use the Techart adapter it won’t record the actual aperture you used. You can change the aperture in the camera but all this does is that it overexposes your image by as many stops as you have stopped down (e.g. f\/5.6 will result in a 2 stops overexposed image).<\/p>\n The Contax Metal Hood GG-3<\/em> has a little larger diameter than the lens and it is about 33mm deep.<\/p>\n The 46mm filter thread is made from metal<\/p>\n The front of the lens does not rotate so polarizers are easy to use.<\/p>\n At f\/2.8 vignetting is moderate\u00a0at 1.3 stops and at f\/4 is is very\u00a0low at 0.5 stops. From f\/5.6\u00a0the lens is virtually free from vignetting (less than 0.3 stops).<\/p>\n The flare resistance of the Zeiss 2.8\/90\u00a0is good but not perfect<\/strong>. \u00a0Under extreme conditions you can see some veiling flare which causes contrast loss less demanding situations. \u00a0I never saw any ghosting.<\/p>\n The Sonnar\u00a0shows a very small amount of\u00a0pincushion distortion, a setting of -1\u00a0corrects it very well in Lightroom.\u00a0So distortion is nothing to worry about.<\/p>\n There is some lateral CA and you will want to correct it. The Zeiss Sonnar 2.8\/90 turns in an average performance\u00a0here.<\/p>\n There is some purple fringing at f\/2.8 which is gone at f\/4.<\/p>\n In general the 2.8\/90 has quite good bokeh with very smooth backgrounds.<\/p>\n I had a few pictures though where I found the transition zone to be a bit nervous and a little distracting.<\/p>\n Thanks to 8 aperture blades oof highlights stay more ore less round stopped down.<\/p>\n Sunstars have 8 spikes and are not very well defined.<\/p>\n The full aperture series can be found at flickr<\/a>.<\/p>\n f\/2.8: <\/strong>Very good to excellent in the center very good in the midframe region and very good to good in the corners.<\/p>\n f\/4:\u00a0<\/strong>A little better everywhere.<\/p>\n f\/5.6: <\/strong>I think the Sonanr is sharpest at this setting with most of the frame beein excellent, only the very corners are a bit weaker and “only” very good.<\/p>\n f\/8: <\/strong>Maybe a tad less sharp but it doesn’t really matter, it is still a very strong performance.<\/p>\n f\/11:\u00a0<\/strong>A little less sharp due to diffraction.<\/p>\n At f\/2.8 you don’t have to worry about sharpness, almost the whole frame is very sharp only the corners are a bit softer but still quite good.\u00a0Stopping down doesn’t do too much,\u00a0but\u00a0if you are counting pixels f\/5.6 will give you the best results.<\/p>\n Sony a7II | Zeiss 2.8\/90 | f\/2.8 | full resolution<\/a><\/p>\n The Zeiss Sonnar 2.8\/90 performed very well at the minimum focusing distance of 1m with very good sharpness from f\/2.8 but you gain a little when stopping down to f\/4. A reproduction ratio of 1:9 is nothing to talk about though.<\/p>\n Tokina 2.5\/90 Macro<\/a>\u00a0– The Tokina is quite a bit heavier and has \u00a0less effective coatings so contrast is always a bit lower. At f\/2.5 it is a tad sharper in the very center but drops off quickly as you move towards the corners while the Zeiss is very sharp right to the edges. Stopped down the Tokina is excellent across the frame with zero CA and the Zeiss lags a bit behind but it still has more contrast.<\/p>\n Leica Summicron-M 2\/90 pre-ASPH<\/a>\u00a0– Quite a bit\u00a0heavier and much\u00a0more expensive but certainly nicer to handle and with excellent bokeh. When your focus is on landscapes the Zeiss Sonnar is definitely the better lens but for portraits I would prefer the Summicron.<\/p>\n
\nIn Germany\u00a0you can buy it for 130-190\u20ac<\/strong>\u00a0at ebay.de<\/a> (affiliate link).\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n![\"Zeiss](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-28.jpg\")
<\/p>\nVersions<\/h1>\n
Compatibility<\/b><\/h1>\n
![\"Zeiss](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-27.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
\nThe Techart TA-GA3 adapter sells for about $250 at ebay.com<\/a>\u00a0or amazon.com<\/a>\u00a0(affiliate links).<\/em><\/p>\nBuild<\/strong> Quality<\/strong><\/h1>\n
Size, Weight and Handling<\/strong>
\n<\/a><\/h1>\n![\"Zeiss](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-26.jpg\")
Lens Hood<\/h1>\n
![\"Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-33\"](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-33-300x229.jpg\")
<\/p>\nFilters<\/h1>\n
Image Quality<\/h1>\n
Vignetting<\/h3>\n
![\"Vorlage_f2p8_vignetting\"](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/Vorlage_f2p8_vignetting.jpg\")
<\/p>\nFlare Resistance<\/h1>\n
![\"Zeiss](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-17.jpg\")
![\"Zeiss](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-7.jpg\")
Distortion<\/h3>\n
![\"Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-35\"](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-35.jpg\")
Chromatic Aberrations<\/span><\/h3>\n
![\"LaCA\"](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/LaCA.jpg\")
![\"pf\"](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/pf.jpg\")
<\/p>\nBokeh<\/h3>\n
![\"Zeiss](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-11.jpg\")
![\"Zeiss](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-10.jpg\")
![\"Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-36\"](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-36.jpg\")
Sunstars<\/h1>\n
![\"Zeiss](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-25.jpg\")
![\"stars\"](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/stars.jpg\")
Sharpness<\/h3>\n
![\"zeiss-Sonnar_90mmf2p8_infinity\"](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/zeiss-Sonnar_90mmf2p8_infinity.jpg\")
<\/p>\nClose Focus Performance<\/h3>\n
![\"Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-34\"](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-34.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![\"clsoefocus\"](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/clsoefocus.jpg\")
Alternatives<\/h1>\n
![\"Zeiss](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-3.jpg\")
![\"Zeiss](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-5.jpg\")
![\"Zeiss](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-6.jpg\")
![\"Zeiss](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-21.jpg\")
![\"Zeiss](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-18.jpg\")
![\"Zeiss](\"http:\/\/phillipreeve.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/02\/Zeiss_Sonnar_135mm_f28-23.jpg\")