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

She's a beauty...
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat May 10, 2008 10:25 am    Post subject: She's a beauty... Reply with quote
... but I had to rebuild her. Sad Confused Wink



It is a Carl Zeiss Super-Dynarex 4/135 (which I got for about € 10,- - € 17,- incl. shipping). The "problem" was that is came in a Zeiss Ikon Icarex mount, not in M42. That's probably why it went so cheap.

This mount is a very strange, automatic one. So, in oder to mount it to my Canon, I had to remove the aperture mechanism (the blades are stil there) and I had to change the focus tube (everything is reversable).

I can focus from about 1,50m to infinity, but can only use f4. Well...

It still is a beauty. Wink

Example shots will follow...


PostPosted: Sat May 10, 2008 10:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
It should be similar to the Zeiss Rollei Tele-Tessar which I have.


PostPosted: Sat May 10, 2008 11:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
OK, here are some shots (350D, all of course f4, see above):

1. Indoors, ISO800
...

2. ISO100... Highlight bokeh, well... It's wide open!


3.


4. Infinity test


5.


5. 100% crop


6.


7.


Last edited by LucisPictor on Mon Dec 31, 2018 1:22 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sat May 10, 2008 1:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The picture quality is excellent, even if you only have f/4.


PostPosted: Sat May 10, 2008 1:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Your Pictures looks great, this Carl Zeiss Super-Dynarex 4/135 is one of the best 135mm, I see.
What´s about the distance from sensor to lens (germany: Auflagemaß), is this like M42. you wrote, you had to trick.

I like your enthuisasmus, thank´s for this report.

respectfully Peter


PostPosted: Sat May 10, 2008 2:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The rear part of the lens looks like this:


Unfortunately, the diameter of this mount is a lot bigger than M42.


I first thought about widening an M42-EOS-adapter, but that would not have left much material, since the diameter of the EOS-mount is not much bigger.

So I had to remove the bulky rear part. Unfortunately, this system is an automatic one that enables the cam to control the aperture. And thus the whole aperture control mechanism had to go.


I then thought about fixing the internal aperture bolt to the aperture ring. Thus would have been possible and by turning the ring I could have changed the f-stop. But then I would not have been able to focus anymore.
So I had to decide between a fixed aperture and a fix-focus. This was an easy decision for me and I chose f4, because this lens is more than just useable wide open.. Wink

This is what it looks like now (with an EOS-bayonet):


PostPosted: Sat May 10, 2008 2:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Excellent presentation Carsten! Many thanks!


PostPosted: Sat May 10, 2008 2:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Carsten, great shots with the lens, and an excellent conversion!

Thanks for sharing!

Bill


PostPosted: Sat May 10, 2008 3:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
And a little nice shot of the lens...


PostPosted: Sat May 10, 2008 3:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I find the focus ring interesting, is that pebble grain comfortable to use?

Great glamor shot of the lens!


PostPosted: Sat May 10, 2008 4:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nice quality to the pics. I have a Voigtlander Super-Dynarex 135/4 which I've not got an EOS adapter for yet, but I will try it out with film. There's a similarity to the two lenses, I suppose the Voigt S-D was probably Zeiss built too.


PostPosted: Sat May 10, 2008 6:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Farside wrote:
Nice quality to the pics. I have a Voigtlander Super-Dynarex 135/4 which I've not got an EOS adapter for yet, but I will try it out with film. There's a similarity to the two lenses, I suppose the Voigt S-D was probably Zeiss built too.

As far as I know, these two lenses are similar.

Katastrofo wrote:
I find the focus ring interesting, is that pebble grain comfortable to use?

Actually, that's not the focus ring, it's a sliding lens hood. I also was surprised about that, since I thought it to be the focus ring as well.


PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2008 8:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
great pics Carsten!


PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2008 9:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Fotal wrote:
great pics Carsten!


It's easy to shoot nice pics when the weather is so nice. Wink


PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2008 12:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Farside wrote:
I have a Voigtlander Super-Dynarex 135/4 which I've not got an EOS adapter for yet, but I will try it out with film. There's a similarity to the two lenses, I suppose the Voigt S-D was probably Zeiss built too.


They are indeed the same lens. When Zeiss Ikon acquired Voigtländer, many Voigtländer cameras and lenses were sold under the "Zeiss" brand. As Zeiss needed a cheap telephoto for its entry level Icarex SLR, it used the Super-Dynarex that was previously available for the Voigtländer Bessamatic series.

Cheers!

Abbazz


PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2008 1:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Abbazz wrote:

They are indeed the same lens. When Zeiss Ikon acquired Voigtländer, many Voigtländer cameras and lenses were sold under the "Zeiss" brand. As Zeiss needed a cheap telephoto for its entry level Icarex SLR, it used the Super-Dynarex that was previously available for the Voigtländer Bessamatic series.


Handy, thanks. I wasn't sure if Voigtlander did their own glass at the time. Must've been decent enough for Zeiss to carry it on.


PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2008 2:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Abbazz wrote:
Farside wrote:
I have a Voigtlander Super-Dynarex 135/4 which I've not got an EOS adapter for yet, but I will try it out with film. There's a similarity to the two lenses, I suppose the Voigt S-D was probably Zeiss built too.


They are indeed the same lens. When Zeiss Ikon acquired Voigtländer, many Voigtländer cameras and lenses were sold under the "Zeiss" brand. As Zeiss needed a cheap telephoto for its entry level Icarex SLR, it used the Super-Dynarex that was previously available for the Voigtländer Bessamatic series.

Cheers!

Abbazz


Interesting. "Cheap" as in "money" and "f-stop" but not as in "performance", I guess. Wink


PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2008 3:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
That looks great, and gives me ideas for my Voigtlander Super-Dynarex that I got in a "grab-bag". It had the mount removed.

Voigtlander made great lenses, "strange" bodies. Zeiss bought the company when they were going out in the late 60s or early 70s.


PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2008 5:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Carsten

Amazing. The lens is a real performer.


patrickh


PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2008 1:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
LucisPictor wrote:
Interesting. "Cheap" as in "money" and "f-stop" but not as in "performance", I guess. Wink


Of course. Zeiss doesn't rhyme with bad lens.

What I meant was that the top of the line lenses (Biogon, Distagon, Planar, Sonnar) marketed for the Contarex series were too expensive for the average user. The Skoparex, Ultron, Dynarex and Super-Dynarex lenses had a simpler design, so Zeiss Ikon was able to sell them at a price level more affordable for the average Icarex camera user.

Cheers!

Abbazz


PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2008 7:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Abbazz wrote:
What I meant was that the top of the line lenses (Biogon, Distagon, Planar, Sonnar) marketed for the Contarex series were too expensive for the average user...


And thus for me! Wink


PostPosted: Tue May 13, 2008 7:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
You seen the current family tree:
http://www.cosina.co.jp/sitemap/index.html
Looks cool doesn't it? Twisted Evil
EDIT: Remember to click the links on the map ..


PostPosted: Sat May 17, 2008 10:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Great, Carsten. Voigtlander was a great company. They produced in 1840 the first lens for portrait in modern design. In 1936 some reviews had photography with it. They had your own glasses, and produced the skopagon 40 mm F/2 in the 60's that was one of the sharpest and contrastier lens ever made and unfortunatelly today is an collector item. Your super dinarex, by Zeiss factory, has schoot glass and voigtlander design with little modification. It's better than the original (for the bessamatics and ultramatics series). And isn't the same lens that the tessar 135 mm F/4, because this is a zeiss design for the contax of the 30's (and then for the contarex and the same for the CZJ). Differences: the voigtlander had 4 elements, 2 in front an 2 in rear. The last 2 rear to improvement the corners of the picture; and the classic tessar design had 4 elements, 3 in front and 1 rear. All of them are OK.


PostPosted: Sun May 18, 2008 7:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks for these interesting information! Very Happy
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1