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

Olympic Sonnar 4/300 a disappointment
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Jan 24, 2020 9:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I own the medium format version calculated in 1963. My impression is that it is pretty good as also shown here:

https://zeissikonveb.de/start/objektive/objektivtests.html

Maybe stray light (don't use without lense shade...) could be a reason for the bad performing of the 1940 version in the beginning of the thread.

According to price: Maybe the 1940 version has some attraction to collectors. The 1963 version might be the best of all versions while the cheapest in the market.

According to comparison: does it make sense to compare a lense with another one having only the focal length in common?

And a technical question: when using a lense on a D-SLR rather than on a system camera could'nt there be the risk of optical influence of e.g. the sensor cover which is not seen on the ground glass screen?

A main difference between the versions from 1940 and 1963 by the way is an additional flat lense which has been added to protect the diaphragm mechanism.

26.01.20: PS: Here https://kievaholic.com/LensTestsLongTele2/ I found a comparision of medium format lenses in the range of 250mm-300mm almost all sharing the P6 mount with the MC "Sonnar" and the Tair for medium format contained but unfortunately neither the 1949 version nor the 1963 version of the Sonnar. Within the low cost lenses I do not see a clear winner. If I'd see a winner it might be the Schneider Tele-Xenar 5.6/250mm which is quite rare.