 |
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
simbon4o
Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 156
Location: Bulgaria
|
 Posted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 8:53 am Post subject: Pentacon 50 1.8 MC vs Pancolar 50 1.8 MC vs Zenitar-M 50 1.7 |
 |
|
resolution test
With the Pentacon I still have focused on every aperture, for the others I focused the 1.8 and only changed the position of the aperture ring... so they are not all focused right but it is enough to get an idea what the lens are made of  .
The crops will be seen in 100% when you download the whole image from the options bellow it is a 9.3МР file. There is not sharpening, no cleaning CAs, ... nothing they are natural from the convertor(ACR6).
I hope you like it!
_________________
______________
SMC-PENTAX-M 50 1.7 / SMC-PENTAX-А 50 1.2 / SMC-PENTAX-M 28 2.8 II / CZJ MC Flektogon 35 2.4 / CZJ MC Pancolar 50 1.8 / KMZ Zenitar-M 50 1.7 / KMZ Tair 3s 300 4.5 / Samyang 85 1.4 IF / Micro Nikkor 55 2.8 AIS |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
verdurina
Joined: 16 May 2010
Posts: 57
Location: Italy
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 9:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
 very interested!!
i have mc zenitar f1.9 50mm. I take only few pic but i can say that is very impressive! sharp and funny to use like no other lenses!!
_________________
if you like photography, maybe you should visit my site!
MY FLICKR
Canon EOS 450D / Digital Rebel XSi
M42 lenses: Pentacon 200mm f4 / Helios 44-2 / Helios 44m-4 MC / Helios 44m-7 / Zeiss Aus Jena DDR Tessar / Marep 135mm f3.5/ MC Zenitar 50mm f1.9 / Jupiter 37AM 135mm f3.5/ Mir-1b 37mm f2.8 / |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dimitrygo
Joined: 01 Apr 2009
Posts: 429
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The file is 1.7 MB. What am I doing wrong? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
simbon4o
Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 156
Location: Bulgaria
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 3:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dimitrygo wrote: | | The file is 1.7 MB. What am I doing wrong? |
nothing it is the right file 9.3MP which is 1.7MB
_________________
______________
SMC-PENTAX-M 50 1.7 / SMC-PENTAX-А 50 1.2 / SMC-PENTAX-M 28 2.8 II / CZJ MC Flektogon 35 2.4 / CZJ MC Pancolar 50 1.8 / KMZ Zenitar-M 50 1.7 / KMZ Tair 3s 300 4.5 / Samyang 85 1.4 IF / Micro Nikkor 55 2.8 AIS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dimitrygo
Joined: 01 Apr 2009
Posts: 429
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 3:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| simbon4o wrote: | | dimitrygo wrote: | | The file is 1.7 MB. What am I doing wrong? |
nothing it is the right file 9.3MP which is 1.7MB |
Ah, didn't pay attention, though it is 9.3 MB |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
anscochrome
Joined: 23 Dec 2010
Posts: 63
Location: Omaha, NE
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 6:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I didn't bother downloading the files, but a cursory look sure makes that Pancolor look bad by comparison. I always thought the Pancolor was way to overerly praised anyway, any number of 50mm lenses can equal or better it. The Oreston (Pentacon) looks pretty blecch compared to both. How rare are these 50mm F 1.7 Zenitars anyway, compared to a garden variety 58mm F 2.0 Helios? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
simbon4o
Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 156
Location: Bulgaria
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 10:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| anscochrome wrote: | | I didn't bother downloading the files, but a cursory look sure makes that Pancolor look bad by comparison. I always thought the Pancolor was way to overerly praised anyway, any number of 50mm lenses can equal or better it. The Oreston (Pentacon) looks pretty blecch compared to both. How rare are these 50mm F 1.7 Zenitars anyway, compared to a garden variety 58mm F 2.0 Helios? |
Well the Pancolar have some special skills curved bokeh like helios 44 but much more sharper and contrasty and ...better in every way than a helios 44. Overal it is great lens! About the price - yes I think the name Zeiss sells it more than perfect .
But it is not a bad lens, not for sure, It has unique render, great colors(for it's age the colors are quite nice on digital body), contrast is very nice without any PP, the resolution is great without any CA(I mean zero CA!!!) especially after F4.0 and down to F16. Yes this lens like the CZJ Flektogon 35 2.4 has this ability to make sharp images even at F16 I don't know how but it is like diffraction is not a problem for it. I have many great portraits with it and it is very sharp for macro(when closed to 8.0 the resolution is great even on many tubes for extreme macro).
About the pentacon - it is a cheap lens. In it's time it was the cheap option of the Pancolar and the lens is nothing special but the prices on market shows this perfectly. It is very soft wide open compared to Pancolar and the corners even on 1.5x crop are soft even at F5.6. Personally me - I don't like it and prefer the Helios 44-2!
The Zenitar-M 50 1.7 - yeees it is a rare lens. To the day I found this one I have never knew about the existence of such lens. It was very strange for me to find that it was not G.D.R. lens replica like many other Russian lenses. It looked different and I think it is Japanese design. The lenses looked pretty much like Chinon 50 1.7, the aperture settings and ring too, it is different. When I searched for the history of the lens it was like a expensive for production lens and the Russians stopped it in some years at the edge to make it multi coated and replaced it with helios 77(which is cheaper and pretty much like Pentacon 50 1.8 MC). But the lens itself is something unique for me. The render is very different from anything I have seen. The closest looks have the render of the Chinon 50 1.7 but even the chinon is not that smooth. This Zenitar has a version with 2 bladed diaphragm - the Zenitar-ME 50 1.7 which makes odd bokeh with squared shape which is very strange.
So it is single coated very sharp with a little CA(very little), poor contrast and gets poorer when closed down, sounds like bad lens... but the low contrast is very nice for portraits sometimes, landscapes are nice with it. The sharpness in combination with its great smooth render makes it perfect for portrait shots wide open - It separates the model perfectly from background in every condition.
I think it is perfect art instrument!
PS Here you can see a bokeh samples.
_________________
______________
SMC-PENTAX-M 50 1.7 / SMC-PENTAX-А 50 1.2 / SMC-PENTAX-M 28 2.8 II / CZJ MC Flektogon 35 2.4 / CZJ MC Pancolar 50 1.8 / KMZ Zenitar-M 50 1.7 / KMZ Tair 3s 300 4.5 / Samyang 85 1.4 IF / Micro Nikkor 55 2.8 AIS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eddieitman
Joined: 12 Apr 2011
Posts: 874
Location: United Kingdom
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 10:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Agree the Zenitar has that character the Chinon has, I love the chinon 1.7 for the oil like paintings i can render when the right conditions are present, I nickname it the Monet,
I like it so much i have 2 my original leather clad version and the newer Multicoated version.
If i had to choose one lens from that setup it would be the zenitar.
Agree with what you say on the pancolar its a great lens and its the character that it brings to the images, yes technicly there is a million times better 50's but like the chinon it brings something to the table.
_________________
Cameras
Digital
Sony A700, Sony Nex 3, Sony A55
Manual Cameras
Minolta X300, Fujica ST801, Yashica FX-D
Manual Lenses
Russian
M42 Jupiter 11A 135 F4, Helios 44M-4, Helios 44M-2, Industar 50/2 F3.5, Vega 12b, Mir 1B, Jupiter 8 chrome version. Jupiter 9 m39 chrome version.
German
Aus Jena Pancolar 50mm F1.8
Biotar f2
Japanese
Yashicas
Yashica ML 28-85, Yashica 50mm F2 ML
M42/M39 Mounts
Chinon 55mm F1.7, Cosinon F2.8 MC 28mm, Asahi Pentax Takumar 105mm f2.8, Auto Takumar 55mm F2.2 (10 Blade version 1961) Carenar F2.8 135, Fujinon EBC 55mm, Hanimex 400mm F6.3, Petri 55mm F2.0, Vivitar 24mm F2.8, Seriese 35mm F2.8 (Sankor), soligor 105mm f4(m39),Vivitar 90mmMacro f2.8 (komine)
Minolta MD Mount
Minolta Rokkor-X 50mm F1.4 PG,Minolta 58mm F1.4 PF, Minolta MD 50mm F1.7, Kenlock MC Tor 28mm,minolta 35-70 f3.5 macro.
Konica AR Mount
Konica Hexanon 40 F1.8, Konica Hexanon 135mm, Konica Hexanon 28mm F3.5, Konica Hexanon 50mm f1.7 (2 copies), Konica AR 50mm F1.8
Pentax PK mount
Pentax-m 50mm f1.7, Pentax-m 28mm f2.8, kiron 28mm f2
Olympus OM mount
Super Paragon 24mm f2.8, Tokina 28mm pmc II f2.8
My web site www.digital-darkroom.weebly.com
Life is like a camera. Focus on what's important, capture the good times, develop from the negatives and if things don't work out, just take another shot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laurentiu Cristofor
Joined: 23 Oct 2010
Posts: 422
Location: WA, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2012 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| simbon4o wrote: |
About the pentacon - it is a cheap lens. In it's time it was the cheap option of the Pancolar and the lens is nothing special but the prices on market shows this perfectly. It is very soft wide open compared to Pancolar and the corners even on 1.5x crop are soft even at F5.6. Personally me - I don't like it and prefer the Helios 44-2!
|
I finally obtained a clean copy - Meyer Optik Oreston version - after several attempts that failed due to those lenses having fungus.
I like it wide open. It is vulnerable to frontal light (or reflected light) and can give a glow, but if that is avoided sharpness seemed OK to me. I also like the bokeh - seemed special, but I'll need to use the lens more.
I agree that the Helios is a better lens, but the Oreston has the advantage of a closer focusing distance and a bit wider aperture. The Oreston is definitely the better of the Meyer lenses I tried so far - the others being the Domiplan and a 135mm electric Pentacon. Interestingly, while I hated the Domiplan on digital, it has produced very nice images when I used it on film. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
simbon4o
Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 156
Location: Bulgaria
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2012 7:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Laurentiu Cristofor wrote: | I finally obtained a clean copy - Meyer Optik Oreston version - after several attempts that failed due to those lenses having fungus.
I like it wide open. It is vulnerable to frontal light (or reflected light) and can give a glow, but if that is avoided sharpness seemed OK to me. I also like the bokeh - seemed special, but I'll need to use the lens more.
I agree that the Helios is a better lens, but the Oreston has the advantage of a closer focusing distance and a bit wider aperture. The Oreston is definitely the better of the Meyer lenses I tried so far - the others being the Domiplan and a 135mm electric Pentacon. Interestingly, while I hated the Domiplan on digital, it has produced very nice images when I used it on film. |
Fungus is problem not of the lens but the owner and how he stores it or works with it. So being a cheap lens nobody cares about it which is not nice but... that's the situation. Oreston is the early version of pentacon and everybody says it is sharper which is normal because the coatings takes away some of the resolution if they are not set fine. And the PFs are mostly appearing on the MC versions of the lenses and they take resolution too. Another thing is that Oreston is made by Meyer perhaps with more care and quality control. But yes the single coating is a problem when the front element is not deep inside the barrel like in the helios 44, every stronger light makes problems. About bokeh - it depends very much by the personal taste. For me the Pentacon and Oreston are very nervous in OOF areas for a 1.8 lens.
Have you noticed the softness in corners in the Oreston?
_________________
______________
SMC-PENTAX-M 50 1.7 / SMC-PENTAX-А 50 1.2 / SMC-PENTAX-M 28 2.8 II / CZJ MC Flektogon 35 2.4 / CZJ MC Pancolar 50 1.8 / KMZ Zenitar-M 50 1.7 / KMZ Tair 3s 300 4.5 / Samyang 85 1.4 IF / Micro Nikkor 55 2.8 AIS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laurentiu Cristofor
Joined: 23 Oct 2010
Posts: 422
Location: WA, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2012 3:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| simbon4o wrote: |
Fungus is problem not of the lens but the owner and how he stores it or works with it. So being a cheap lens nobody cares about it which is not nice but... that's the situation. Oreston is the early version of pentacon and everybody says it is sharper which is normal because the coatings takes away some of the resolution if they are not set fine. And the PFs are mostly appearing on the MC versions of the lenses and they take resolution too. Another thing is that Oreston is made by Meyer perhaps with more care and quality control. But yes the single coating is a problem when the front element is not deep inside the barrel like in the helios 44, every stronger light makes problems. About bokeh - it depends very much by the personal taste. For me the Pentacon and Oreston are very nervous in OOF areas for a 1.8 lens.
Have you noticed the softness in corners in the Oreston? |
The fungus was not a critique - just a description of my adventure in getting this lens. I have only used the Oreston wide open for one afternoon, so corners were usually out of focus and I didn't get time to experiment more with it - I'll do that when weather will allow me to get out. But what I saw so far was promising. As for the bokeh, I am looking for lenses that are distinctive in this area - the main reason I looked for this lens is because I hoped it would have an out of ordinary bokeh. Nervous bokeh can make for some great shots when the subject is the bokeh itself. See Trioplan shots, for example. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hood
Joined: 26 Jan 2012
Posts: 353
Location: Perth, Australia
Expire: 2013-09-16
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2012 3:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have a Zenitar 50 f2 only shot it once so far, seemed pretty sharp, maybe a tad lackluster on colour. Don't quote me on that as I need to test it more. What is interesting about this lens is the design. My good friend Max Dellaway seems to think they modelled it off a Konica Hexanon.
I have never tried a Pancolar, so cannot comment.
However I do own both a Pentacon electric 50 1.8 and Meyer-Gerlitz Oreston 50 1.8 and have found these 2 beauties to be very different beasts. I will try and do a comparison for you guys in the future. 
_________________
-Josh
Currently shooting:
Digital:Sony Nex-5, Nex-5n, Pentax KX, Pentax K30 and Fuji JZ100
Film: Minolta x700, Contax 137MD, Chinon Memotron, Minolta 500si, Minolta 700si, Canon Ex-auto, Minolta 35DL weathermatic, Pentax espio 738, Minolta Himatic-G, Olympus Trip 35, Elixa Reflex-B, Pentax MZ-60
Lens Collection:Slr Magic 28/2.8, Slr Magic 35/1.7, Minolta Rokkor 45/2, Minolta Rokkor 50/1.4, Minolta W-Rokkor-sg 28/3.5, Minolta 35-70/3.5, Minolta Rokkor-PF 55/1.9, Minolta W.Rokkor 28/3.5, Monolta MD 50/2*2, Minolta 50/1.7, Minolta zealox bellows, Minolta e.Rokkor 75/4.5, Sony 18-55 3.5/5.6, Sony 16/2.8, Asahi Smc Takumar 55/1.8, Asahi Smc Takumar 50/1.5, Meyer Gerlitz Dimoplan 50/2.8,Meyer Gerlitz Orestegon 50/1.8, Tamron 35/2.8, Tamron 70-220/4, Tamron aspherical 28-200 3.8-5.6, Seimar 28/2.8, Aus Jena Tessar 50/2.8, Industar 50/3.5, Industar 26m 50/2.8, Industar 61 55/2.8, Industar 69 28/2.8, Carenar 45/2.8, Pentacon electric 50/1.8, Pentacon 30/3.5, Pentacon 29/2.8, Helios 44m 58/2, Miida 35/2.8, Miida 75-205/3.8, Cosina 28/2.8, Kenlock 135/2.8, Kenlock 35/2.8, Kenlock Mc-tor 28/2.8, Jupiter 8 50/2, Vivitar 28-85 3.5-4.5 macro, Vivitar 28-80 3.5-5.6 macro, Exacta 35-70 3.5-4.8 macro, Sigma 35-70 2.8-4, Sigma 100-200 4.5, SamYong 18-28 4-4.5, Photax-Pharagon 35/2.8, Travenar 35/2.8, Travenar 50/1.8, Tokina 70-210 4-5.6, Tokina 28/2.8, Promura 200/3.5, Sirius 20-200 3.9, Soligor 200/3.5, Canon FL 50/1.8, Canon FD 35-70 3.5-4.5, Auto Focal 75-200/4.5, Zenit Zenitar 50/2,Tokina353 35-300mm(KX), Pentax 18-55(KX), Pentax 35-80(KX), Sigma 14mm F2.8(KX), Sigma 70-200mm(KX), Sigma 24-70mm(KX), Pentax 35-135 macro(KX), plus I have a few in for service right now and I'm always collecting more...
It's been a few months now, I need to sit down and update this list...it has grown! haha
My Blog:
http://joshpereraphoto.com
And here is my Facebook page, please check out my photos if you are a facebook user:
https://www.facebook.com/amomentintimeimagery
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
simbon4o
Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 156
Location: Bulgaria
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2012 7:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Laurentiu Cristofor wrote: | | The fungus was not a critique - just a description of my adventure in getting this lens. I have only used the Oreston wide open for one afternoon, so corners were usually out of focus and I didn't get time to experiment more with it - I'll do that when weather will allow me to get out. But what I saw so far was promising. As for the bokeh, I am looking for lenses that are distinctive in this area - the main reason I looked for this lens is because I hoped it would have an out of ordinary bokeh. Nervous bokeh can make for some great shots when the subject is the bokeh itself. See Trioplan shots, for example. |
I was talking about the previous owners of the lenses it is not a good thing to leave a lens (any lens) to be eaten by fungus or whatever other methods of destruction.
If you like nervous bokeh, get a Nikkor-S 50 1.4 it is amazing!
| Hood wrote: | I have a Zenitar 50 f2 only shot it once so far, seemed pretty sharp, maybe a tad lackluster on colour. Don't quote me on that as I need to test it more. What is interesting about this lens is the design. My good friend Max Dellaway seems to think they modelled it off a Konica Hexanon.
I have never tried a Pancolar, so cannot comment.
However I do own both a Pentacon electric 50 1.8 and Meyer-Gerlitz Oreston 50 1.8 and have found these 2 beauties to be very different beasts. I will try and do a comparison for you guys in the future. |
About zenitar - it is for sure Japanese lens made in Russia but I'm still not sure which one.
A comparison of the early and late Oreston will be interesting!
_________________
______________
SMC-PENTAX-M 50 1.7 / SMC-PENTAX-А 50 1.2 / SMC-PENTAX-M 28 2.8 II / CZJ MC Flektogon 35 2.4 / CZJ MC Pancolar 50 1.8 / KMZ Zenitar-M 50 1.7 / KMZ Tair 3s 300 4.5 / Samyang 85 1.4 IF / Micro Nikkor 55 2.8 AIS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alex H
Joined: 25 Dec 2011
Posts: 102
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2012 10:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| simbon4o wrote: | About zenitar - it is for sure Japanese lens made in Russia but I'm still not sure which one.
A comparison of the early and late Oreston will be interesting! |
I do not see how can You be sure that Zenitar is a Japanese lens made in Russia - do You have any evidence of it?
Here are two sites describing Zenitar-M 50/1.7, sorry they are both in Russian, but Google translate can help:
http://www.photohistory.ru/1207248188609933.html
http://www.zenitcamera.com/archive/lenses/zenitar-1-7-50.html
Zenitar-M 50/1.7 is not as rare as it might look. Usually there are at least few on eBay. It was a kit lens for Zenit 19.
The rare version is Zenitar-ME1 50/1.7 with electronically controlled aperture with square blades - only about 7000 were made.
I have both, I posted some samples from Zenitar-ME1 some time ago on this forum.
_________________
SONY CAMERAS: A77, NEX-6, NEX-5N (full spectrum).
SLR LENSES: Zenitar 16mm F/2.8; W. Acall Kyoei 35mm F/3.5; Zenitar-ME1 50mm F/1.7; Voigtländer Apo-Lanthar 125mm F/2.5; Canon nFD 500mm F/4.5 (modified to MAF).
RF LENSES: Jupiter-8 50mm F/2.0; Voigtländer Apo-Lanthar 85mm F/3.5.
BELLOWS LENSES: Tominon 17mm F/4.0; Tominon 35mm F/4.5; Apo-Rodagon 50mm F/2.8; Voigtländer Apo-Skopar 75mm F/8; El-Nikkor 80mm F/5.6; Fax-Nikkor 160mm F/5.6.
My gallery |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
simbon4o
Joined: 19 Dec 2011
Posts: 156
Location: Bulgaria
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 23, 2012 7:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Alex H wrote: | I do not see how can You be sure that Zenitar is a Japanese lens made in Russia - do You have any evidence of it?
Here are two sites describing Zenitar-M 50/1.7, sorry they are both in Russian, but Google translate can help:
http://www.photohistory.ru/1207248188609933.html
http://www.zenitcamera.com/archive/lenses/zenitar-1-7-50.html
Zenitar-M 50/1.7 is not as rare as it might look. Usually there are at least few on eBay. It was a kit lens for Zenit 19.
The rare version is Zenitar-ME1 50/1.7 with electronically controlled aperture with square blades - only about 7000 were made.
I have both, I posted some samples from Zenitar-ME1 some time ago on this forum. |
After a search in the German lenses which are the originals of most Russian lenses I was not able to find anything like this Zenitar so I was forced to go to the other place where lenses were born .
I was searching for information and found that in some years Japanese companies was using Russian optic glass for production lenses and the Russians was probably using their knowledge to produce their own versions of the lenses.
The Auto Chinon 50 1.7 MC looks exactly the same in optic terms, the lenses, the aperture ring and positions, aperture blades, ... of course the Russian version is single coated, heavier, hard to turn focus ring, aperture blades have no treatment, ... looks like a part of tank not photographic instrument , but it shoots almost like the Japanese version.
About the rareness in my country it is not that easy to find one(I didn't even knew about its existence). Most of the sources says that it was in production for only 2-3 years. The MC version never came - there are only 15 made of them for one exhibition and that's it(they are rare for sure!). About the ME1 - yes it was with only 2 aperture blades - no idea why they have done this but...
There were more Zenitar models which never came to mass production - 50 1.4, 85 1.4, ...
_________________
______________
SMC-PENTAX-M 50 1.7 / SMC-PENTAX-А 50 1.2 / SMC-PENTAX-M 28 2.8 II / CZJ MC Flektogon 35 2.4 / CZJ MC Pancolar 50 1.8 / KMZ Zenitar-M 50 1.7 / KMZ Tair 3s 300 4.5 / Samyang 85 1.4 IF / Micro Nikkor 55 2.8 AIS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Rss feed
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
