Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

[comparison] CZJ Biotar 58/2 T 1Q vs. Helios H44-2
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Jun 25, 2012 7:01 pm    Post subject: [comparison] CZJ Biotar 58/2 T 1Q vs. Helios H44-2 Reply with quote
Just bought a Carl Zeiss Jena Biotar 58/2 T 1Q here on a flea market in France for 7. Quite difficult to found (my second CZJ ever found) while russian copies H44-x are pretty common (I possessed maybe a dozen of them).
The first tests were for me pretty astonishing... until I perform some comparison with my H44-2 and realised that, whatever the "1Q" or the "T" (I didn't performed flare tests though), the CZJ does not really shines.

Are here some pictures. Taken with a Canon 450D (APS-C 12Mpix).
- library test on tripod, focus through live view
- tree test with free hands, focus thanks to MF confirmation beep.
- every shot wide open (f/2)









I'm rather disapointed.


PostPosted: Tue Jun 26, 2012 12:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Biotars had soft coatings and many of them have been ruined by improper cleaning (I picture the owner rubbing the end of his neck tie on the front element) so I would suspect it is the condition of your Biotar that is the culprit.

I have a Biotar T 2/58 with coatings in perfect order and a Helios 44-2 that is as good as you can find from this lens (I have shot 6 or 7 44-2s and 4 or 5 44M4s and this 44-2 I have kept is much better than any of the others) and I have found that the 44-2 is sharper than the Biotar but not by much. The Biotar has a smoother overall rendering and slightly more swirl to it's bokeh, which suggests to me that it is slightly less highly corrected for spherical abberation than the 44-2.

I suggest you examine closely the front glass of your Biotar for light cleaning marks and damage to the coating. Also look closely for haze. If you find these issues and the performance is not what you want, sell the Biotar, even in less than perfect condition optically it is worth much more than the 7eu you paid.

From my Biotar on NEX-3, wide open:




PostPosted: Tue Jun 26, 2012 5:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
For 7 euro I would not be that disappointed Smile Can I ask why you bought it, was there a specific purpose for buying both the helios and Biotar?...was it just to compare and see for yourself what they handle like?
I have the Biotar 2/58 1Q silver semi auto version.I can't say I have tested it for sharpness wide open.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 8:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Biotars had soft coatings and many of them have been ruined by improper cleaning (I picture the owner rubbing the end of his neck tie on the front element) so I would suspect it is the condition of your Biotar that is the culprit.

I have a Biotar T 2/58 with coatings in perfect order and a Helios 44-2 that is as good as you can find from this lens (I have shot 6 or 7 44-2s and 4 or 5 44M4s and this 44-2 I have kept is much better than any of the others) and I have found that the 44-2 is sharper than the Biotar but not by much. The Biotar has a smoother overall rendering and slightly more swirl to it's bokeh, which suggests to me that it is slightly less highly corrected for spherical abberation than the 44-2.

Thanks. I cannot post any photo of the lens right, but it is optically in a very good condition : no scratch at all (front and back). The coating gives a blue/purple color.
Until now I haven't tested further the lens, bokeh-wise and also its behavior when closed at 5.6 or 8 for example.

Quote:
Can I ask why you bought it

Sure. I'm a flea market fan, wake up at 6am on sunday morning to be one of the first in the streets of the surrounding towns and villages to get the best deals Smile
For 7 euros, I had absolutely no hesitation. I own a CZJ Pancolar 50/1.8 which is really amazing at 1.8, so when I saw it was a CZJ, it was a no brainer. I hoped for a better version than the Helios, because I'm really in love with the 44-2 swirly bokeh but slightly disapointed by its softness at f/2, and also because the Biotar is the "original". I know also that I won't have any difficulty to sell it if it does not please me.
Does that fully answer to your question Mo ?

Right now, I need to continue to discover this new lens, so as to know its advantages and drawbacks compared to the Helios 44-2. But being "red T" and "1Q" I really hoped for something better (even though the portraits I made with it do pleases me, it's all relative eh).


PostPosted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 9:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
mo wrote:
For 7 euro I would not be that disappointed Smile Can I ask why you bought it, was there a specific purpose for buying both the helios and Biotar?...was it just to compare and see for yourself what they handle like?
I have the Biotar 2/58 1Q silver semi auto version.I can't say I have tested it for sharpness wide open.


For 7 anything with the Zeiss name is worth the 6 a.m. walk! You can sell it for at least 6 times that much money even in bad shape.

I really hope something is missing from your copy because it is really not up to the Zeiss's legendary glass. For that IQ I take an Helios 44-2 any day of the week.

I would keep it thought, I suspect these are lenses that will always be worth heaps of money to someone somewhere.


PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 9:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yes it does explain clearly,Once you try one CZJ you are curious to see if the rest are the same. Cool Do take time and get used too how it handles...I made the mistake of mis-judging an Angenieux lens (I bought it on reputation) because I did not understand its characteristics and how best to use it. Embarassed Very Happy

Yes,It is relative to the users wants, needs and expectations....for 7 euro an excellent chance to try this lens out! What is the glass like inside? I only ask as mine had a milky haze inside but was easily cleaned when it went for a service.


PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 6:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The zeiss glass is almost like new optically-wise : coatings are perfect, there are just some dust spots inside just like any other old lens (I don't see any relevance in providing a photo of the optics since there are no defects to be seen).

I performed some still life tests on tripod today at f/2 and f/8. The Helios wins hands down at f/2 while at f/8 IQ is exactly the same. I don't seem to find any strong points for the Zeiss.


PostPosted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 6:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
All I can guess at is the Biotar is not assembled properly and one of the elements is not in the correct position.

Perhaps you can have it serviced, if the glass is in great condition with the coating intact, it would be worth having serviced I think.

This is a centre crop (sharpened) from by Biotar at f4. I have sharper 50mm lenses but the Biotar is definitely sharp enough and it has a character to it's rendering I really enjoy so for me it's a keeper.



PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 8:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
With lenses so old, it is never clear whether the observations you make characterize the model or just the sample that you have.

I have a Biotar and a Helios and while I never tried a side by side comparison, the Biotar, if anything, seemed slightly better. And my copy has heavy cleaning marks on the front coatings. I always use them with hoods though.

In the second test - center crop from the CD shelf shot, the Biotar does look as having less microcontrast. It's worth trying another one - if your copy looks great, it can be sold for 10x what you paid for it.


PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 9:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Laurentiu Cristofor wrote:
With lenses so old, it is never clear whether the observations you make characterize the model or just the sample that you have.

I have a Biotar and a Helios and while I never tried a side by side comparison, the Biotar, if anything, seemed slightly better. And my copy has heavy cleaning marks on the front coatings. I always use them with hoods though.

In the second test - center crop from the CD shelf shot, the Biotar does look as having less microcontrast. It's worth trying another one - if your copy looks great, it can be sold for 10x what you paid for it.


+1

easy to sell for 75eu in good condition.


PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 10:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Laurentiu Cristofor wrote:
With lenses so old, it is never clear whether the observations you make characterize the model or just the sample that you have.

No doubt. I guess here it's a copy problem. The deception mainly comes from the fact that it is labeled "1Q", which I realised afterwards what it meant.
As I'm not building a collection but try only to keep the lens I'd be using, I suppose I'm gonna sell it if it does show any particular strength against the helios.


PostPosted: Sun Jul 01, 2012 12:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I doubt it was a bad copy when it left the factory, it will be the life it has lead that is responsible.

A good Helios is as good as the Biotar, so don't feel too bad. I have a good Biotar and my Helios sees more use.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 9:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
for 7 euros I would by any Zeiss!
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1