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

Pancolar or other lens?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2023 8:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
OK guys, thanks a lot for your help.
I finally decided on buying a Zenitar 50/1.7, after checking out images on Flickr.


Good choice.
I think it is an Ultron inspired design.
Tom


PostPosted: Thu Nov 02, 2023 9:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
amazing lens you won't be disappointed


PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2023 10:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oldhand wrote:
caspert79 wrote:
OK guys, thanks a lot for your help.
I finally decided on buying a Zenitar 50/1.7, after checking out images on Flickr.


Good choice.
I think it is an Ultron inspired design.
Tom


Poor man's Ultron, but that is kind of a misnomer since the Takumar 55/1.8 /2 and the SMC Pentax-m 50/1.7 are also Ultron based and can be found cheaper.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2023 10:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
D1N0 wrote:
Oldhand wrote:
caspert79 wrote:
OK guys, thanks a lot for your help.
I finally decided on buying a Zenitar 50/1.7, after checking out images on Flickr.


Good choice.
I think it is an Ultron inspired design.
Tom


Poor man's Ultron, but that is kind of a misnomer since the Takumar 55/1.8 /2 and the SMC Pentax-m 50/1.7 are also Ultron based and can be found cheaper.


Yeah, I'm quite curious how the Pentax compares to the Zenitar. My guess right now is that the Zenitar is sharper, but lower contrast. Also curious whether bokeh is comparable. Will definitely put both to the test, and probably throw in the Mamiya E 50/1.7 as well, which is a very nice lens IMO, I believe also an Ultron design.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2023 11:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
D1N0 wrote:
Oldhand wrote:
caspert79 wrote:
OK guys, thanks a lot for your help.
I finally decided on buying a Zenitar 50/1.7, after checking out images on Flickr.


Good choice.
I think it is an Ultron inspired design.
Tom


Poor man's Ultron, but that is kind of a misnomer since the Takumar 55/1.8 /2 and the SMC Pentax-m 50/1.7 are also Ultron based and can be found cheaper.


Yeah, I'm quite curious how the Pentax compares to the Zenitar. My guess right now is that the Zenitar is sharper, but lower contrast. Also curious whether bokeh is comparable. Will definitely put both to the test, and probably throw in the Mamiya E 50/1.7 as well, which is a very nice lens IMO, I believe also an Ultron design.


Depends on the lighting I guess. The Zenitar is prone to flare, the Pentax less so, probably due to the SMC coating. Both lenses are plenty sharp.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2023 2:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have both, and while the Takumar (SMC 1,8 ) is for sale (good but not astonishing glass), the Zenitar will stay with me. I can't promise 100% that, but if I will have some time I'll make a face to face test.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2023 2:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Sorry for messing up my image previews.

I don't know what "Ultron based" could actually mean in the context of this era f1.7 - f2.0 SLR 50mm lenses for performance. Not to the extent of naming it.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2023 2:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ultrapix wrote:
I have both, and while the Takumar (SMC 1,8 ) is for sale (good but not astonishing glass), the Zenitar will stay with me. I can't promise 100% that, but if I will have some time I'll make a face to face test.


I have a bad copy of your the Tak 55/1.8 (although not SMC), but I have a good copy of its 10-bladed predecessor, which is optically similar. I didn’t compare the Tak with the Pentax-M 50/1.7 one on one, but I can say with confidence that the M is the overall better lens. From the images I’ve seen, the Zenitar should be superior to the Tak, but I’m more curious how it will compare to the Pentax-M.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2023 3:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
Ultrapix wrote:
I have both, and while the Takumar (SMC 1,8 ) is for sale (good but not astonishing glass), the Zenitar will stay with me. I can't promise 100% that, but if I will have some time I'll make a face to face test.


I have a bad copy of your the Tak 55/1.8 (although not SMC), but I have a good copy of its 10-bladed predecessor, which is optically similar. I didn’t compare the Tak with the Pentax-M 50/1.7 one on one, but I can say with confidence that the M is the overall better lens. From the images I’ve seen, the Zenitar should be superior to the Tak, but I’m more curious how it will compare to the Pentax-M.


I no longer own the M- version, but I had several copies in the past. While I like it once stopped down, when wide open I find it a bit weak in the peripheral areas. No worse than many other similar lenses, but still not plenty satisfying. The Zuiko 1.8 and the Rokkor 1.7 are probably better in this way, and the Pancolar itself is obviously sharper (but it shows harsher bokeh). If you can live with a slight stopping down, one of my favorite not-mainstream lens is still the Cosina 55/1.4 (Revue/Chinon, etc); ultra sharp from 2,8, and a bit dreamy (glowy, but the detail is there) wide open.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2023 6:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
There was an old web page in Russian language belonging to KMZ factory where they explained that Zenitar 50mm f1.7 is Ultron design. I couldn't find that page now to show the evidence though. And with regards to the mentioned comparison between equivalent Pentax 50mm f1.7 and Zenitar 50mm f1.7, I have both and made a brief comparison in my short review of Zenitar here: https://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/kmz-50mm-1-7-zenitar-m.html?#review7611

As it can be seen, Zenitar definitely has "better" bokeh than Pentax, more smooth. Zenitar is very sharp wide open but the antireflective coating are not that good like with Pentax. That is not shown in the photos here - you have to trust my words.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2023 7:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
This is a comparison between the diagrams of Zenitar Pentax-m SMC Pentax 55 (=Takumar) and the original Ultron design.
Clearly the Zenitar departed from the original in the front three elements and Pentax modified the cemented group to a flat connection.



PostPosted: Fri Nov 03, 2023 8:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ultrapix wrote:

I no longer own the M- version, but I had several copies in the past. While I like it once stopped down, when wide open I find it a bit weak in the peripheral areas. No worse than many other similar lenses, but still not plenty satisfying. The Zuiko 1.8 and the Rokkor 1.7 are probably better in this way, and the Pancolar itself is obviously sharper (but it shows harsher bokeh). If you can live with a slight stopping down, one of my favorite not-mainstream lens is still the Cosina 55/1.4 (Revue/Chinon, etc); ultra sharp from 2,8, and a bit dreamy (glowy, but the detail is there) wide open.


True, the Pentax-M needs some stopping down for sharp corners. It’s not my favorite landscape lens for that reason, although it’s still very usable for that. But it’s very sharp and contrasty in the center at f/2. This is a test I did earlier:
http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=83689
It probably explains why it produces images with good 3D pop.

I have the Chinon 55/1.4, and it’s definitely a keeper. Although my favorite in that category is the Mamiya EF 50/1.4, which is already sharp wide open, and therefore very useful.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2023 7:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Indigo82 wrote:
There was an old web page in Russian language belonging to KMZ factory where they explained that Zenitar 50mm f1.7 is Ultron design. I couldn't find that page now to show the evidence though. And with regards to the mentioned comparison between equivalent Pentax 50mm f1.7 and Zenitar 50mm f1.7, I have both and made a brief comparison in my short review of Zenitar here: https://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/kmz-50mm-1-7-zenitar-m.html?#review7611

As it can be seen, Zenitar definitely has "better" bokeh than Pentax, more smooth. Zenitar is very sharp wide open but the antireflective coating are not that good like with Pentax. That is not shown in the photos here - you have to trust my words.


Thanks for your link. Bokeh balls of the Zenitar seem a bit more uniform than those of the Pentax. However, not a night and day difference IMO: both are pretty good in this regard.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2023 8:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
Indigo82 wrote:
There was an old web page in Russian language belonging to KMZ factory where they explained that Zenitar 50mm f1.7 is Ultron design. I couldn't find that page now to show the evidence though. And with regards to the mentioned comparison between equivalent Pentax 50mm f1.7 and Zenitar 50mm f1.7, I have both and made a brief comparison in my short review of Zenitar here: https://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/kmz-50mm-1-7-zenitar-m.html?#review7611

As it can be seen, Zenitar definitely has "better" bokeh than Pentax, more smooth. Zenitar is very sharp wide open but the antireflective coating are not that good like with Pentax. That is not shown in the photos here - you have to trust my words.


Thanks for your link. Bokeh balls of the Zenitar seem a bit more uniform than those of the Pentax. However, not a night and day difference IMO: both are pretty good in this regard.


Well, in the various scenarios, the backgrounds of the Zenitar lets you often think that you have used an 85mm, not a 50. This especially in the central area, while in the edges the amount of OOF is more usual.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2023 8:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ultrapix wrote:
caspert79 wrote:
Indigo82 wrote:
There was an old web page in Russian language belonging to KMZ factory where they explained that Zenitar 50mm f1.7 is Ultron design. I couldn't find that page now to show the evidence though. And with regards to the mentioned comparison between equivalent Pentax 50mm f1.7 and Zenitar 50mm f1.7, I have both and made a brief comparison in my short review of Zenitar here: https://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/kmz-50mm-1-7-zenitar-m.html?#review7611

As it can be seen, Zenitar definitely has "better" bokeh than Pentax, more smooth. Zenitar is very sharp wide open but the antireflective coating are not that good like with Pentax. That is not shown in the photos here - you have to trust my words.


Thanks for your link. Bokeh balls of the Zenitar seem a bit more uniform than those of the Pentax. However, not a night and day difference IMO: both are pretty good in this regard.


Well, in the various scenarios, the backgrounds of the Zenitar lets you often think that you have used an 85mm, not a 50. This especially in the central area, while in the edges the amount of OOF is more usual.

Are you saying the Zenitar has noticeable field curvature on the edges?

Last edited by calvin83 on Sat Nov 04, 2023 9:07 am; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2023 9:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
calvin83 wrote:
Ultrapix wrote:
caspert79 wrote:
Indigo82 wrote:
There was an old web page in Russian language belonging to KMZ factory where they explained that Zenitar 50mm f1.7 is Ultron design. I couldn't find that page now to show the evidence though. And with regards to the mentioned comparison between equivalent Pentax 50mm f1.7 and Zenitar 50mm f1.7, I have both and made a brief comparison in my short review of Zenitar here: https://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/kmz-50mm-1-7-zenitar-m.html?#review7611

As it can be seen, Zenitar definitely has "better" bokeh than Pentax, more smooth. Zenitar is very sharp wide open but the antireflective coating are not that good like with Pentax. That is not shown in the photos here - you have to trust my words.


Thanks for your link. Bokeh balls of the Zenitar seem a bit more uniform than those of the Pentax. However, not a night and day difference IMO: both are pretty good in this regard.


Well, in the various scenarios, the backgrounds of the Zenitar lets you often think that you have used an 85mm, not a 50. This especially in the central area, while in the edges the amount of OOF is more usual.

Are you saying the Zenitar has noticeable field curvature on the edges?


The out of focus field yes, not the same can be said on the focus plane

https://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/kmz-50mm-1-7-zenitar-m.html?#review7611

scroll down and check the girl with hat in front of a gate, and look at the gate


PostPosted: Sat Nov 04, 2023 12:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Indigo82 wrote:
There was an old web page in Russian language belonging to KMZ factory where they explained that Zenitar 50mm f1.7 is Ultron design. I couldn't find that page now to show the evidence though.


http://www.zenitcamera.com/archive/lenses/zenitar-1-7-50.html

Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2