View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
horvlas
Joined: 30 Dec 2008 Posts: 202 Location: Budapest, Hungary
|
Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2009 7:26 am Post subject: Olympic Sonnar 4/300 a disappointment |
|
|
horvlas wrote:
Some days ago I get a Zeiss Olympic Sonnar 4/300 lens, manufactured around 1961-1964, with Q1 logo. Quickly I tested against my Tair-3s, manufactured in 1987. Attila said before, the Sonnar unsharp, and has horrible CA, the tair better, but I thought maybe this would be a better copy...
Here are the results, shot distance around 30-35m:
Sonnar f4:
Sonnar f4.5:
Sonnar f5.6:
Sonnar: f8:
Tair f4.5:
Tair f5.6:
Tair f8:
Conclusion: Tair has better resolution and contrast, with better CA controlling (look that horrible CA on sonnar f5.6 and f8!), lighter weight, automatic diaphragm, overall better lens than Zeiss Olympic Sonnar 4/300, and price 3x less! So I kept the tair for its performance |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Wormhandler
Joined: 19 May 2008 Posts: 106 Location: Sweden
|
Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2009 8:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Wormhandler wrote:
I have also noticed some faults wide open on my Sonnar MC version.
But WOW... that Tair is amazing wide open.
I have to get me one of those.
/Jan _________________
Those which I use:
Carl Zeiss Jena:Tessar 5cm 3,5 Tessar 2,8 50mm (3 versions), Sonnar 135mm 3,5, Tessar 135mm 4,5 (Compur), Flektogon 35mm 2,4, Sonnar 180mm 2,8, Sonnar 300mm 4
Cosina Voigtländer:125mm 2,5 Macro APO Lanthar.
Enna Werk Munchen:Tele-zoom 85-250mm
Ernst Leitz Wetzlar:Voort 90mm 4, Hektor 135mm 4,5
Helios:Helios 44-4 (& 44-2) 58mm 2
Industar:Industar 5cm 3,5, Industar-22 5cm 3,5-rangefinder
Isco Göttingen:Tele Westanar 180mm 4
Meyer Optik Görlitz:Lydith 30mm 3,5, Domiplan 50mm 2,8, Primotar 50 3,5, Orestor 135mm 2,8, Telemegor 150 5,5, Telemegor 180mm 5,5, Orestegor 200mm 4 Telemegor 400mm 5,6.
Mir:Mir 1B 37mm 2,8
Nikon:
Nikkor 35 1.4, Nikkor 85 2, Series E 35mm 2,5, Nikkor 35mm 2, Micro Nikkor 55mm 2,8, Series E 100mm 2,8, Nikkor 135m 2,8, Zoom-Nikkor 35-105mm.
Olympus:F-Zuiko Auto-S 50mm 1.8 (m42), E-zuiko Auto-T 135mm 2,5 (m42), Zuiko 85mm 2 MC (OM)
Panagor (Same as vivitar i Guess):28mm 2,5, 200mm 3,5
Pentacon29mm 2,8, 50mm 1,8, 135mm 2,8
Pentax:Auto takumar 35mm 3.5
SMC-takumar 28 3.5, SMC-Takumar 50mm 1.4, SMC-takumar 135mm 3.5, Takumar (bayonet) 135mm 2.5,Takumar 500mm 4
SMC M 35mm 3.5, SMC M 40 2.8, SMC M 50mm 2, SMC M 50mm 1.7, SMC A 50mm 2, SMC M 100 2.8, SMC M 100mm 4 Macro, SMC M 135mm 3,5 SMC M 200mm 4, SMC M 80-200mm 4,5
Shacht af Ulm:Edixa travenar 50mm 2,8, Edixa Travenar 135mm 3,5
Schneider KreuznachXenar 50mm 3,5, Xenar 50mm 2,8, Radionar 80mm 2,9 (Folder), Radionar 10,5cm 4,5 (Folder), Tele-Xenar 135mm 3,5, Symmar 150mm 5,6, Tele-Xenar 200mm 5,5.
Soligor:100-300mm 5 C/D.
Steinheil:Actinar 10,5cm 4,5 (Prontor)
Tamron:Adaptall2 28mm 2.5, Adaptall2 35-70 3.5, Auto Tamron 28 2.8, Auto.tamron 105 2.5, Auto-tamron 135 2.8, Auto Tamron 200 3.5, Auto Tamron 300 5.6 Tamron SP 70-210 3.5-4
Tokyo Koki:Tele-Tokina 135mm 2.8, Tele-Tokina 135mm 3.5 (brand kennex), Tele-Tokina 300 5.5.
Vivitar:Series 1 70-210 (Kiron)
Yashica:
Auto Yashinon-DX 50mm 1.7, Auto Yashinon-DX 50mm 2, Yashica ML 50mm 1.7, Yashica ML 50mm 2 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
poilu
Joined: 26 Aug 2007 Posts: 10469 Location: Greece
Expire: 2019-08-29
|
Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2009 8:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
poilu wrote:
I think the tair is focused on the front wall and the sonnar is front focused nowhere
even at f8 I don't find any focused point with the sonnar
do you focus with chipped adapter ? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2009 10:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
Just as a side note, the Sonnar 300 is not the Olympia Sonnar. _________________ Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
horvlas
Joined: 30 Dec 2008 Posts: 202 Location: Budapest, Hungary
|
Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2009 12:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
horvlas wrote:
The focus point was the same: The big crack point of the concrete on the upper side of the chimney, not the wall! I used tripod, and a Nikon D80 with split screen. The body indicates the correct focus point and controlled with split screen, so the misfocusing is impossible.
The tair is sharper at wide open than sonnar at f8.
The Zeiss lens was the Olympic version of 4/300. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
estudleon
Joined: 15 May 2008 Posts: 3754 Location: Argentina
|
Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2009 1:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
estudleon wrote:
Orio wrote: |
Just as a side note, the Sonnar 300 is not the Olympia Sonnar. |
Orio, What avatar!!!!
Wanderfull
Beautyfull girl (well, I suspect it) . _________________ Konica 2,8/100
CZJ: 4/20, 2,4/35, 1,8/50 aus jena, 3,5/135MC, Pentacon 1,8/50
Pentax S-M-C-1,4/50
Helios 44-3
Mamiya 2,8/135
Misc. : jupiter 9
Stuff used:
A) SRL
Alpa 10 D - kern macro Switar 1,9/50 -black, Kilffit apochromat 2/100.
Asahi pentax spotmatic super takumar 1,4/50
Contaflex super B tessar 2,8/50 Pro-tessar 115
Leica R3 electronic summicron 2/50 elmarit 2,8/35
Konica Autoreflex 3 (2 black and chrome one), TC, T4. 2,8/24, 3,5/28 not MC and MC, 1,8/40, 1,4/50, 1,7/50 MC and not MC, 1,8/85, 3,2/135, 3,5/135, 4/200
Minolta XG9 2,8/35, 2/45, 3,5/135
Nikkormat FTn 1,4/50, 2,8/135
Fujica ST 801, 605, 705n. 3,5/19, 1,4/50, 1,8/55, 4/85, 3,5/135.
Praktica MTL 5 and a lot of M42 lenses.
Voigtlander. Bessamatic m, bessamatix de luxe, bessamatic cs, ultramatic and ultramatic cs.
Skoparex 3,5/35, skopagon 2/40, skopar 2,8/50, skopar X 2,8/50, super lanthar (out of catalogue) 2,8/50, dinarex 3,4/90, dinarex 4,8/100, super dinarex 4/135, super dinarex 4/200, zoomar 2,8/36-83, portrait lens 0, 1 and 2. Curtagon 4/28 and 2,8/35
Canon AV1, 1,8/50
Rolleiflex SL35 and SL35 E. 2,8/35 angulon, 2,8/35 distagon, 1,4/55 rolleinar, 1,8/50 planar, 4/135 tessar, 2,8/135 rolleinar, x2 rollei, M42 to rollei adap.
Etc.
RF
Yashica Minister III
Voightlander Vito, vitomatic I, Vito C, etc.
Leica M. M2, M3 (d.s.) and M4. Schenider 3,4/21, 2/35 summaron 2,8/35 (with eyes). Summicron 2/35 (8 elements with eyes), 2/35 chrome, 2/35 black, 1,4/35 pre asph and aspheric - old -, 2/40 summicron, 2,8/50 elmar, 2/50 7 elements, 2/50 DR, 2/50 - minolta version, 1,4/50 summilux 1966 version, 1,4/75 summilux, 2/90 large version, 2/90 reduced version of 1987, 2,8/90 elmarit large version, 4/135 elmar. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
poilu
Joined: 26 Aug 2007 Posts: 10469 Location: Greece
Expire: 2019-08-29
|
Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2009 1:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
poilu wrote:
horvlas wrote: |
on the upper side of the chimney, not the wall! |
yes, I was meaning the chimney and I called it wall by mistake
sorry if I offended you but most of internet lens test are badly focused
in this case the sonnar could be defective |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2009 1:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
I don't want to sound picky, but the true Olimpia Sonnar is the 2.8/180.
The 300mm lens is a later design, it's always a Sonnar (like many other lenses by the way), but it's not the same lens that was launched for the Berlin Olympics. _________________ Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
horvlas
Joined: 30 Dec 2008 Posts: 202 Location: Budapest, Hungary
|
Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2009 1:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
horvlas wrote:
Orio: Yes now I understand that you're saying, but I definied the lens by this:
http://www.mflenses.com/index.php/Carl-Zeiss-Jena-DDR/Carl-Zeiss-Jena-Olympic-Sonnar-300mm-f/4-Lens-Review.html
At the lens gallery:
http://www.mflenses.com/gallery/v/german/zeiss/sonnar/olympic_sonnar_300mm/
Maybe defective, maybe not, you can see the same unsharp and horrible CA pictures as mine at the lens gallery! Just click pink flowers on the tree. (Attila's copy) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2009 1:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
CA is the drawback of Sonnars, and the longer the focal lenght, the more visible the problem.
This is the reason why Zeiss Oberkochen often preferred the Tessar design for their long teles even in the quite recent Contax line (see for instance Tele-Tessar 200, Tele-Tessar 400 and the outstanding Apo-Tessars 450 and 600). Leica made the same choice (the Telyts are Tessar designs).
Tair is even simpler than Tessar, it is a triplet.
Actually Zeiss Ob. also designed a custom Apo-Sonnar 1700mm, but that was for a super rich client and I think the cost of the lens is more or less the cost of my house _________________ Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PaulC
Joined: 23 Dec 2008 Posts: 2318
|
Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2009 2:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
PaulC wrote:
Orio wrote: |
Actually Zeiss Ob. also designed a custom Apo-Sonnar 1700mm, but that was for a super rich client and I think the cost of the lens is more or less the cost of my house |
A hell of a lot more than your house unless you are surprisingly rich ... I know who it was built for - one of the sheikhs here in Qatar. I doubt if it has ever been used (or is even really usable). _________________ View or buy my photos at:
http://shutterstock.com/g/paulcowan |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2009 2:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
PaulC wrote: |
Orio wrote: |
Actually Zeiss Ob. also designed a custom Apo-Sonnar 1700mm, but that was for a super rich client and I think the cost of the lens is more or less the cost of my house |
A hell of a lot more than your house unless you are surprisingly rich ... I know who it was built for - one of the sheikhs here in Qatar. I doubt if it has ever been used (or is even really usable). |
The most expensive chromatic aberrations ever known to mankind! _________________ Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PaulC
Joined: 23 Dec 2008 Posts: 2318
|
Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2009 5:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
PaulC wrote:
Nice one!
The sheikh got done for stealing somewhere between US$200 million and US$500 million from the Emir (depending which version you like to believe) ... I'm not sure what he needed it for but the lens might have something to do with it. _________________ View or buy my photos at:
http://shutterstock.com/g/paulcowan |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PaulC
Joined: 23 Dec 2008 Posts: 2318
|
Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2009 5:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
PaulC wrote:
I've just noticed rather obvious sharpening "jaggies" on the f2.8 image from the Tair (top of the cement, top left on chimney), while I'm not seeing those on the f5.6 Sonnar image. Have all these images been processed in the same way? _________________ View or buy my photos at:
http://shutterstock.com/g/paulcowan |
|
Back to top |
|
|
horvlas
Joined: 30 Dec 2008 Posts: 202 Location: Budapest, Hungary
|
Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2009 5:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
horvlas wrote:
Yes, the same minor sharpening added for all pictures. Same postprocessing parameters for all pictures! With this minor sharpening, differences more visible between them.
I think on sonnar pictures you can't see this jags, because unsharpness covers it. I strictly observed that same WB, exposition, focus point, post processing for all shot to make a real comparsion. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57839 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2021-11-18
|
Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2009 6:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
I think 4/300mm Olympic Sonnar done by Carl Zeiss Jena in those years when their engineers were in Russian captivity. This is explain why they have huge difference. 180mm was done by Jena best engineers they issued for Olympic Games. I think 300mm f4 MC black one is a trully powerful lens they are not comparable, BUT Olympic Sonnar is very , very rare highly collectible item. _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Wormhandler
Joined: 19 May 2008 Posts: 106 Location: Sweden
|
Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2009 8:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Wormhandler wrote:
Mine is the black MC Sonnar.
It is sharp enough but suffers from CA wide open. The Tair seems to be a better choice.
crop
/ Jan _________________
Those which I use:
Carl Zeiss Jena:Tessar 5cm 3,5 Tessar 2,8 50mm (3 versions), Sonnar 135mm 3,5, Tessar 135mm 4,5 (Compur), Flektogon 35mm 2,4, Sonnar 180mm 2,8, Sonnar 300mm 4
Cosina Voigtländer:125mm 2,5 Macro APO Lanthar.
Enna Werk Munchen:Tele-zoom 85-250mm
Ernst Leitz Wetzlar:Voort 90mm 4, Hektor 135mm 4,5
Helios:Helios 44-4 (& 44-2) 58mm 2
Industar:Industar 5cm 3,5, Industar-22 5cm 3,5-rangefinder
Isco Göttingen:Tele Westanar 180mm 4
Meyer Optik Görlitz:Lydith 30mm 3,5, Domiplan 50mm 2,8, Primotar 50 3,5, Orestor 135mm 2,8, Telemegor 150 5,5, Telemegor 180mm 5,5, Orestegor 200mm 4 Telemegor 400mm 5,6.
Mir:Mir 1B 37mm 2,8
Nikon:
Nikkor 35 1.4, Nikkor 85 2, Series E 35mm 2,5, Nikkor 35mm 2, Micro Nikkor 55mm 2,8, Series E 100mm 2,8, Nikkor 135m 2,8, Zoom-Nikkor 35-105mm.
Olympus:F-Zuiko Auto-S 50mm 1.8 (m42), E-zuiko Auto-T 135mm 2,5 (m42), Zuiko 85mm 2 MC (OM)
Panagor (Same as vivitar i Guess):28mm 2,5, 200mm 3,5
Pentacon29mm 2,8, 50mm 1,8, 135mm 2,8
Pentax:Auto takumar 35mm 3.5
SMC-takumar 28 3.5, SMC-Takumar 50mm 1.4, SMC-takumar 135mm 3.5, Takumar (bayonet) 135mm 2.5,Takumar 500mm 4
SMC M 35mm 3.5, SMC M 40 2.8, SMC M 50mm 2, SMC M 50mm 1.7, SMC A 50mm 2, SMC M 100 2.8, SMC M 100mm 4 Macro, SMC M 135mm 3,5 SMC M 200mm 4, SMC M 80-200mm 4,5
Shacht af Ulm:Edixa travenar 50mm 2,8, Edixa Travenar 135mm 3,5
Schneider KreuznachXenar 50mm 3,5, Xenar 50mm 2,8, Radionar 80mm 2,9 (Folder), Radionar 10,5cm 4,5 (Folder), Tele-Xenar 135mm 3,5, Symmar 150mm 5,6, Tele-Xenar 200mm 5,5.
Soligor:100-300mm 5 C/D.
Steinheil:Actinar 10,5cm 4,5 (Prontor)
Tamron:Adaptall2 28mm 2.5, Adaptall2 35-70 3.5, Auto Tamron 28 2.8, Auto.tamron 105 2.5, Auto-tamron 135 2.8, Auto Tamron 200 3.5, Auto Tamron 300 5.6 Tamron SP 70-210 3.5-4
Tokyo Koki:Tele-Tokina 135mm 2.8, Tele-Tokina 135mm 3.5 (brand kennex), Tele-Tokina 300 5.5.
Vivitar:Series 1 70-210 (Kiron)
Yashica:
Auto Yashinon-DX 50mm 1.7, Auto Yashinon-DX 50mm 2, Yashica ML 50mm 1.7, Yashica ML 50mm 2 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
estudleon
Joined: 15 May 2008 Posts: 3754 Location: Argentina
|
Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2009 8:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
estudleon wrote:
Wormhandler wrote: |
Mine is the black MC Sonnar.
It is sharp enough but suffers from CA wide open. The Tair seems to be a better choice.
crop
/ Jan |
Only wide open? _________________ Konica 2,8/100
CZJ: 4/20, 2,4/35, 1,8/50 aus jena, 3,5/135MC, Pentacon 1,8/50
Pentax S-M-C-1,4/50
Helios 44-3
Mamiya 2,8/135
Misc. : jupiter 9
Stuff used:
A) SRL
Alpa 10 D - kern macro Switar 1,9/50 -black, Kilffit apochromat 2/100.
Asahi pentax spotmatic super takumar 1,4/50
Contaflex super B tessar 2,8/50 Pro-tessar 115
Leica R3 electronic summicron 2/50 elmarit 2,8/35
Konica Autoreflex 3 (2 black and chrome one), TC, T4. 2,8/24, 3,5/28 not MC and MC, 1,8/40, 1,4/50, 1,7/50 MC and not MC, 1,8/85, 3,2/135, 3,5/135, 4/200
Minolta XG9 2,8/35, 2/45, 3,5/135
Nikkormat FTn 1,4/50, 2,8/135
Fujica ST 801, 605, 705n. 3,5/19, 1,4/50, 1,8/55, 4/85, 3,5/135.
Praktica MTL 5 and a lot of M42 lenses.
Voigtlander. Bessamatic m, bessamatix de luxe, bessamatic cs, ultramatic and ultramatic cs.
Skoparex 3,5/35, skopagon 2/40, skopar 2,8/50, skopar X 2,8/50, super lanthar (out of catalogue) 2,8/50, dinarex 3,4/90, dinarex 4,8/100, super dinarex 4/135, super dinarex 4/200, zoomar 2,8/36-83, portrait lens 0, 1 and 2. Curtagon 4/28 and 2,8/35
Canon AV1, 1,8/50
Rolleiflex SL35 and SL35 E. 2,8/35 angulon, 2,8/35 distagon, 1,4/55 rolleinar, 1,8/50 planar, 4/135 tessar, 2,8/135 rolleinar, x2 rollei, M42 to rollei adap.
Etc.
RF
Yashica Minister III
Voightlander Vito, vitomatic I, Vito C, etc.
Leica M. M2, M3 (d.s.) and M4. Schenider 3,4/21, 2/35 summaron 2,8/35 (with eyes). Summicron 2/35 (8 elements with eyes), 2/35 chrome, 2/35 black, 1,4/35 pre asph and aspheric - old -, 2/40 summicron, 2,8/50 elmar, 2/50 7 elements, 2/50 DR, 2/50 - minolta version, 1,4/50 summilux 1966 version, 1,4/75 summilux, 2/90 large version, 2/90 reduced version of 1987, 2,8/90 elmarit large version, 4/135 elmar. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Wormhandler
Joined: 19 May 2008 Posts: 106 Location: Sweden
|
Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2009 10:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Wormhandler wrote:
I am not sure on the apartures used on my pictures. But it seems to show up even stopped down to 5.6.
I will try to take some pictures under controlled circumstances and post the results.
/ Jan _________________
Those which I use:
Carl Zeiss Jena:Tessar 5cm 3,5 Tessar 2,8 50mm (3 versions), Sonnar 135mm 3,5, Tessar 135mm 4,5 (Compur), Flektogon 35mm 2,4, Sonnar 180mm 2,8, Sonnar 300mm 4
Cosina Voigtländer:125mm 2,5 Macro APO Lanthar.
Enna Werk Munchen:Tele-zoom 85-250mm
Ernst Leitz Wetzlar:Voort 90mm 4, Hektor 135mm 4,5
Helios:Helios 44-4 (& 44-2) 58mm 2
Industar:Industar 5cm 3,5, Industar-22 5cm 3,5-rangefinder
Isco Göttingen:Tele Westanar 180mm 4
Meyer Optik Görlitz:Lydith 30mm 3,5, Domiplan 50mm 2,8, Primotar 50 3,5, Orestor 135mm 2,8, Telemegor 150 5,5, Telemegor 180mm 5,5, Orestegor 200mm 4 Telemegor 400mm 5,6.
Mir:Mir 1B 37mm 2,8
Nikon:
Nikkor 35 1.4, Nikkor 85 2, Series E 35mm 2,5, Nikkor 35mm 2, Micro Nikkor 55mm 2,8, Series E 100mm 2,8, Nikkor 135m 2,8, Zoom-Nikkor 35-105mm.
Olympus:F-Zuiko Auto-S 50mm 1.8 (m42), E-zuiko Auto-T 135mm 2,5 (m42), Zuiko 85mm 2 MC (OM)
Panagor (Same as vivitar i Guess):28mm 2,5, 200mm 3,5
Pentacon29mm 2,8, 50mm 1,8, 135mm 2,8
Pentax:Auto takumar 35mm 3.5
SMC-takumar 28 3.5, SMC-Takumar 50mm 1.4, SMC-takumar 135mm 3.5, Takumar (bayonet) 135mm 2.5,Takumar 500mm 4
SMC M 35mm 3.5, SMC M 40 2.8, SMC M 50mm 2, SMC M 50mm 1.7, SMC A 50mm 2, SMC M 100 2.8, SMC M 100mm 4 Macro, SMC M 135mm 3,5 SMC M 200mm 4, SMC M 80-200mm 4,5
Shacht af Ulm:Edixa travenar 50mm 2,8, Edixa Travenar 135mm 3,5
Schneider KreuznachXenar 50mm 3,5, Xenar 50mm 2,8, Radionar 80mm 2,9 (Folder), Radionar 10,5cm 4,5 (Folder), Tele-Xenar 135mm 3,5, Symmar 150mm 5,6, Tele-Xenar 200mm 5,5.
Soligor:100-300mm 5 C/D.
Steinheil:Actinar 10,5cm 4,5 (Prontor)
Tamron:Adaptall2 28mm 2.5, Adaptall2 35-70 3.5, Auto Tamron 28 2.8, Auto.tamron 105 2.5, Auto-tamron 135 2.8, Auto Tamron 200 3.5, Auto Tamron 300 5.6 Tamron SP 70-210 3.5-4
Tokyo Koki:Tele-Tokina 135mm 2.8, Tele-Tokina 135mm 3.5 (brand kennex), Tele-Tokina 300 5.5.
Vivitar:Series 1 70-210 (Kiron)
Yashica:
Auto Yashinon-DX 50mm 1.7, Auto Yashinon-DX 50mm 2, Yashica ML 50mm 1.7, Yashica ML 50mm 2 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ChrisLilley
Joined: 01 Jan 2008 Posts: 1767 Location: Nice, France
|
Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2009 11:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ChrisLilley wrote:
Comparing both lenses at f/4.5 and 100%, first of all the Tair has far better contrast. The Sonnar shows bad veiling flare, as well as general smeariness with no real fine detail and poorly rendered texture.
Also looking at the objects in the background, the Sonnar has fairly bad axial CA (dark green and some purple which should not be there) while the Tair has some, but much less.
And yes, the Tair is sharper also. _________________ Camera (ˈkæ mə rə), n. Device for taking pictures in bright light
There are 10 kinds of people in the world: those who understand binary, and those who don’t. Key: Ai-P, Ai, Ai'ed, AiS
Camera: Nikon D90, D40, DK-21M eyepiece, ML-3 remote MF lenses: Nikkor 20mm f/4 K, AI'ed | N.K. Nikkor-N 24mm f/2.8 | Nikkor-N.C 24mm f/2.8 | Nikkor 28mm f/2.8 AiS late model | Арсенал (Arsenal) Мир-24Н (Mir-24N) 35mm f/2 | Cosina Voigtländer Ultron SL II 40mm f/2.0 | Micro-Nikkor 55mm f/2.8 AiS | Zoom-Nikkor 80-200 f/4.5 Ai | ЛЗОС (LZOS) Юпитер-9 (Jupiter-9) 85mm f/2 | Cosina Voigtländer APO-Lanthar 90mm f/3.5 SL | Nikkor-P 105mm f/2.5 pre-Ai, Ai'ed | Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/4 | Schneider Kreuznach Componon 105mm f/5.6 | Nikkor 135mm f/2.8, Ai'ed 1976 model | Nikkor 180mm f/2.8 ED AiS | Арсенал (Arsenal) ТЕЛЕАР-Н (Telear-n) 200mm f/3.5 | Nikkor 300 mm f/4.5 Ai (full equipment list) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
horvlas
Joined: 30 Dec 2008 Posts: 202 Location: Budapest, Hungary
|
Posted: Sun Apr 12, 2009 6:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
horvlas wrote:
With this sonnar CA more visible when stopped down. Look at f8 the left concerte side of the chimney. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lucse
Joined: 22 Jul 2015 Posts: 166 Location: EU
|
Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2018 7:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lucse wrote:
This thread really shows what a single reviewers-opinion is worth on the internet. It means nothing really, as we all know...
But as long that it's the only review on the internet it means everything, to us all...
I have two of these Carl Zeiss Sonnar (Olympia) 300mm f/4 lenses. I tested my latest aquired one and I do NOT agree at all with the conclusions in this thread.
Just judge for yourself.
All pictures are JPEG's taken wide open (f/4), out of hand (no tripod used) with a Sony A7II (I just took a few pictures of the same subject and simply selected the best one).
Straight out of the camera, no post-editing done at all (except if mentioned), no in-camera sharpening either, 100% crops (my apologies for the different size, I cropped them freehand).
The first picture is the least sharp, but I am rather sure that it's slightly front-focussed.
Now, tell me if that is sharp or not.
About the same picture as the above (wide-open as well) but this time with a very small amount of post-editing (just like the thread-starter did !), to have a correct compairison:
One more, also wide-open etcetera:
Another dull brick-shot. This time a double one, taken with my two copy's of this lens (also JPEG's, wide-open, no post-editing done etcetera).
I sure can't see any difference between them.
Edit: For the fun of it just measured the distance on Google-maps (satellite-view) and the pictures of this brick wall are taken at a distance of 115 meters. Not bad huh?
Edit 2: I just noticed that there is a fly sitting on the hinge (upper-right corner of the picture) and if you look carefully you can see that one of it's wings is damaged.
If I find the time I will post some pictures taken with my copy's of the Tair 3s as well.
Last edited by Lucse on Sun Aug 05, 2018 1:17 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lucse
Joined: 22 Jul 2015 Posts: 166 Location: EU
|
Posted: Sat Aug 04, 2018 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lucse wrote:
These pictures in the 'lens gallery' look VERY unsharp indeed.
They have a maximum size of about 3000 X 2000 pix.
At that size, are these the full size pictures? Crops? Or resized? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pancolart
Joined: 04 Feb 2008 Posts: 3693 Location: Slovenia, EU
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
Posted: Thu Dec 05, 2019 10:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pancolart wrote:
Do you know what is max coverage of Olympic Sonnar 300mm? 6x6? _________________ ---------------------------------
The Peculiar Apparatus Of Victorian Steampunk Photography: 100+ Genuine Steampunk Camera Designs https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0B92829NS |
|
Back to top |
|
|
pandreas68
Joined: 24 Jan 2020 Posts: 95
|
Posted: Fri Jan 24, 2020 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
pandreas68 wrote:
Pancolart wrote: |
Do you know what is max coverage of Olympic Sonnar 300mm? 6x6? |
Yes 6x6. To my knowledge it was mounted however by a special adapter to the PraktiSix or by respective changes (https://zeissikonveb.de/start/objektive/wechselobjektive1950er/carl%20zeiss%20jena.html). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|