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

discussing on Carl Zeiss Jena lenses ... Red MC vs White MC
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 11:49 am    Post subject: discussing on Carl Zeiss Jena lenses ... Red MC vs White MC Reply with quote

i have noticed that this topic has been mentioned in the past, but i never read a firm statement about the differences between red MC and white MC.

Some people think that red MC is better than the white MC version, and therefore, it has a higher resale value.

Is this true?

also, how to read the serial no on a CZJ lens, assume CZJ 35 2.4, one has 23086, the other 74496 ... which is newer? I guess the higher no means newer?

Or, CZJ 135 3.5, i got one which is 4148 (electric) another one is 54379 (not electric), which is newer?


PostPosted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 11:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Alex, the only thing I know about CZJ's serial numbers, they are not chronological.
This is my conclusion after having about 40 CZJ lenses. Very Happy

I am sure that Klaus knows better.

Red MC was during communist era, and white MC was later??? just kidding! Very Happy


PostPosted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 12:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

koji wrote:
Alex, the only thing I know about CZJ's serial numbers, they are not chronological.
This is my conclusion after having about 40 CZJ lenses. Very Happy

I am sure that Klaus knows better.

Red MC was during communist era, and white MC was later??? just kidding! Very Happy


Koji ... thx for the input, i also got lost ... lol.
i remember someone telling me that for pentacon 50 1.8 ... red MC was before white mc.

I think ... when they started doing MC on lenses, they put RED MC on the lenses, to show to the customers, later, it became white MC, and now ... i never seen the letters MC on a Canon EF 300L lens ...

it is i think like with cars ...
initially everyone put like 4 cyl Golf 1.6, 1.6 16V, but now most 4 cyl engines are at least 16V


PostPosted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 6:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

koji wrote:
Red MC was during communist era, and white MC was later??? just kidding! Very Happy


MC means Multi Communist . now you'll know the infamous truth Wink

The red lettering is great on black , in fact i don't mind having white one, but its a thin g i don't look too much it's rather the lense itself. Its damn sharp rendering !

5 digits represent the newer series , mine is 46201 for instance.
this does not mean it was built in 1946 ^.^


PostPosted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 6:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fine, 5 digits = newer than 8 digits. What about 4 digits? Some CZJ MC lenses have it... Smile


PostPosted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 6:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Pentacon and the CZJ had the MC red before the white ones.

In the ZCJ (not in pentacon) I found the red MC better than the newer MC

white. Casuality? Don't know.

Rino.


PostPosted: Tue Jul 14, 2009 7:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

no-X wrote:
What about 4 digits?


Simple : one letter is missing Wink


PostPosted: Sat Jul 10, 2010 2:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've been reading a lot of topics on Jena lenses lately. I have a short question so I'll post here instead of creating a special thread for it, hope you don't mind. Wink

I'm interested in whether the Carl Zeiss Jena lenses (m42 and P6) were considered as "premium" lenses in 1950s - 90s? I know that they aren't valued so much as the West Germany CZ today, but what was their price back in the days? Today most of them can be found for really cheap, were they that cheap when they were sold new? (relatively speaking of course, I know the same amount of money today isn't nowhere near the value in the 60s, 70s and so on). Maybe the answer is in the fact that they were much more mass produced then the West Germany lenses (for instance, I don't know if it's correct, but I read somewhere that Sonnar 135mm 3.5 was produced in over 4mil copies, so of course that fact has an effect on today's prices).


PostPosted: Sat Jul 10, 2010 2:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

After 10.000000 they started again, so a 4 digit lens is older than a 5 digit one.

Klaus


PostPosted: Sat Jul 10, 2010 4:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hk300 wrote:
i never seen the letters MC on a Canon EF 300L lens...


Canon have always had their own coating formula and the first version was called Spectra Coating, indicated by S.C. They improved it later and named it Super Spectra Coating (S.S.C.). These abbreviations you can see on Canon FD lenses. With the "New FD" line, they stopped using it because all their lenses used the same multicoating, which is also true for all Canon EF lenses that were ever released. Canon must have made improvements to their coatings, but they have never indicated it on their lenses and AFAIK only advertised with it with the new "Sub Wavelength Coating" (equivalent of Nikon's Nanocrystal coating) they use on the recently updated 24L II, TS-E 24L II, and TS-E 17L.


PostPosted: Sun Jul 11, 2010 9:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

No one remembers the price for CZJ lenses when they were released? For example, a Sonnar 135/3.5, Flektogon 35/2.4 etc?


PostPosted: Sun Jul 11, 2010 10:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Toni, if this helps at all, I bought a second hand Praktica in 1967 which had a Meyer Domiplan lens. I remember that the same camera could be bought new with two other lens options, the CZJ Tessar 2.8/50 and the CZJ Pancolar 1.8/50, both were beyond my budget as a 20 year-old. At that time the Tessar I think was about £10 more expensive than the Domi, I don't remember the Pancolar. So compared to the popular Japanese brands these lenses weren't expensive, even though the optical quality was about equal or better in some cases. A bit like the Russian lenses.


PostPosted: Sun Jul 11, 2010 11:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you Peter, any info is great! It's not that important at all, but I'm just curious to find out more on their original prices, to put them in perspective with today's prices. Most CZJ lenses are real gems. Smile


PostPosted: Sun Jul 11, 2010 2:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

symphonic wrote:
Thank you Peter, any info is great! It's not that important at all, but I'm just curious to find out more on their original prices, to put them in perspective with today's prices. Most CZJ lenses are real gems. Smile

The optical designs were superb, based on the long Zeiss experience and knowledge. What lets them down is the inconsistency (basically the quality control) and the design of the non-optical parts of the lenses, the main problem being sticky aperture blades and lens rings working loose.


PostPosted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 3:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi, I read on Wikipedia, " West German Zeiss products were labelled Opton for sale in the Eastern bloc, while East German Zeiss products where labelled "Zeiss Jena" for sale in Western countries " , I just wonder if Opton lenses are of good quality or just lemon ?


PostPosted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Krisgage wrote:
Hi, I read on Wikipedia, " West German Zeiss products were labelled Opton for sale in the Eastern bloc, while East German Zeiss products where labelled "Zeiss Jena" for sale in Western countries " , I just wonder if Opton lenses are of good quality or just lemon ?


Anything what made in Carl Zeiss factories just good, Opton lenses are best one and most expensive ones from all and I doubt about they are sold in Eastern block. Above paragraph from Wiki is complete bullshit.


PostPosted: Tue Jul 13, 2010 1:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attila wrote:
Krisgage wrote:
Hi, I read on Wikipedia, " West German Zeiss products were labelled Opton for sale in the Eastern bloc, while East German Zeiss products where labelled "Zeiss Jena" for sale in Western countries " , I just wonder if Opton lenses are of good quality or just lemon ?


Anything what made in Carl Zeiss factories just good, Opton lenses are best one and most expensive ones from all and I doubt about they are sold in Eastern block. Above paragraph from Wiki is complete bullshit.


Ok thanks. I did a search on Ebay, it seems the lenses are for Contax RF, Is there any for SLR ? Do you own one ? I am curious about the lens image quality.


PostPosted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 10:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

FYI I've seen the Rollei QBM HFT 85/1.4 sold as Opton and not Planar


PostPosted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 12:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oic ! Thanks for sharing Phenix