| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
yadisl
Joined: 03 Dec 2009
Posts: 180
Location: the Netherlands
|
 Posted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 1:13 pm Post subject: Zuiko 135/3.5 vs. Carl Zeiss aus Jena 135/3.5 |
 |
|
yadisl wrote:
I mount them both on Olympus E510 so the focal length is doubled (but and also increase the DOF). The zuiko is so pleasant to focus and razor sharp wide open. What I like the most is the compact size and it has attached hood!
Zuiko
Color rendition of the Zeiss I guess is more 'calm' - I just love it (I know I shot different animals, so it's not a good comparison). But I found the focusing mechanism not as smooth as my Zuiko.
What do you guys think?
_________________
Tell me what you love, I will tell you who you are (Proust)
TLR yashica 635, 124
Canon canonet 1.9
Olympus E500
KM Dynax 7D
Sigma DP1
Rokkor MD 200/4, MD 50/1.4, MC PF 50/1.4, MD 135/3.5, Pentax SMC-M 50/4 macro, Takumar 105/2.8, Jena DDR 135/3.5, Porst 135/2.8, Prinzgalaxy 300/4, Mamiya ZE 300/4, Jena Tessar 50/2.8, Pancolar 50/1.8, CZJ Flektogon 4/20, Helios 58/2, Konica Hexar AR 50/1.4, Wollensak Velostigmat 90/4.5, Voigtlander Heliar 18 cm / 4.5, Heliar 15 cm / 4.5, APO Lanthar 15 cm / 4.5, Zeiss Tessar 105/3.5, Zeiss Opton 75/3.5, Mamiya 55/2.8, ZD 14-42, Minolta 17-35/2.8-4 D, Petri 35/3.5, Leica-R 35/2.8, Minolta 70-210/4, Minolta 35-70/4, Minolta 50/1.7. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
martinsmith99
Joined: 31 Aug 2008
Posts: 6943
Location: S Glos, UK
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 5:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
martinsmith99 wrote:
Good pics!
Yes, I have the CZJ and the focus is a little stiff. In cold weather I sometimes unscrew the lens when trying to focus.
_________________
Casual attendance these days |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
patrickh
Joined: 23 Aug 2007
Posts: 8551
Location: Oregon
Expire: 2011-11-18
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
patrickh wrote:
The goat has highlights blown so it is difficult to compare the two, since so much detail is lost. I prefer the CZJ in this comparison, but I would expect much more from a zuiko
patrickh
_________________
DSLR: Nikon D300 Nikon D200 Nex 5N
MF Zooms: Kiron 28-85/3.5, 28-105/3.2, 75-150/3.5, Nikkor 50-135/3.5 AIS // MF Primes: Nikkor 20/4 AI, 24/2 AI, 28/2 AI, 28/2.8 AIS, 28/3.5 AI, 35/1.4 AIS, 35/2 AIS, 35/2.8 PC, 45/2.8 P, 50/1.4 AIS, 50/1.8 AIS, 50/2 AI, 55/2.8 AIS micro, 55/3.5 AI micro, 85/2 AI, 100/2,8 E, 105/1,8 AIS, 105/2,5 AIS, 135/2 AIS, 135/2.8 AIS, 200/4 AI, 200/4 AIS micro, 300/4.5 AI, 300/4.5 AI ED, Arsat 50/1.4, Kiron 28/2, Vivitar 28/2.5, Panagor 135/2.8, Tamron 28/2.5, Tamron 90/2.5 macro, Vivitar 90/2.5 macro (Tokina) Voigtlander 90/3.5 Vivitar 105/2.5 macro (Kiron) Kaleinar 100/2.8 AI Tamron 135/2.5, Vivitar 135/2.8CF, 200/3.5, Tokina 400/5,6
M42: Vivitar 28/2.5, Tamron 28/2.5, Formula5 28/2.8, Mamiya 28/2.8, Pentacon 29/2.8, Flektogon 35/2.4, Flektogon 35/2.8, Takumar 35/3.5, Curtagon 35/4, Takumar 50/1.4, Volna-6 50/2.8 macro, Mamiya 50/1.4, CZJ Pancolar 50/1,8, Oreston 50/1.8, Takumar 50/2, Industar 50/3.5, Sears 55/1.4, Helios 58/2, Jupiter 85/2, Helios 85/1.5, Takumar 105/2.8, Steinheil macro 105/4.5, Tamron 135/2.5, Jupiter 135/4, CZ 135/4, Steinheil Culminar 135/4,5, Jupiter 135/3.5, Takumar 135/3.5, Tair 135/2.8, Pentacon 135/2.8, CZ 135/2.8, Taika 135/3.5, Takumar 150/4, Jupiter 200/4, Takumar 200/4
Exakta: Topcon 100/2.8(M42), 35/2.8, 58/1.8, 135/2.8, 135/2.8 (M42), Kyoei Acall 135/3.5
C/Y: Yashica 28/2.8, 50/1.7, 135/2.8, Zeiss Planar 50/1.4, Distagon 25/2.8
Hexanon: 28/3.5, 35/2.8, 40/1.8, 50/1.7, 52/1.8, 135/3.2, 135/3.5, 35-70/3.5, 200/3.5
P6 : Mir 38 65/3.5, Biometar 80/2.8, Kaleinar 150/2.8, Sonnar 180/2.8
Minolta SR: 28/2.8, 28/3.5, 35/2.8, 45/2, 50/2, 58/1.4, 50/1.7, 135/2.8, 200/3.5
RF: Industar 53/2.8, Jupiter 8 50/2
Enlarg: Rodagon 50/5,6, 80/5,6, 105/5.6, Vario 44-52/4, 150/5.6 180/5.6 El Nikkor 50/2,8,63/2.8,75/4, 80/5,6, 105/5.6, 135/5.6 Schneider 60/5.6, 80/5.6, 80/4S,100/5.6S,105/5.6,135/5.6, 135/5.6S, 150/5.6S, Leica 95/4 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LucisPictor
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 17633
Location: Oberhessen, Germany / Maidstone ('95-'96)
Expire: 2013-12-03
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LucisPictor wrote:
I used to have the Zuiko 3.5/135 and somehow I regret selling it. 
_________________
Personal forum activity on pause every now and again (due to job obligations)!
Carsten, former Moderator 
Things ON SALE
Carsten = "KAPCTEH" = "Karusutenu" | T-shirt?.........................My photos from Emilia: http://www.schouler.net/emilia/emilia2011.html
My gear: http://retrocameracs.wordpress.com/ausrustung/
Old list: http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=65 (Not up-to-date, sorry!) | http://www.lucispictor.de | http://www.alensaweek.wordpress.com |
http://www.retrocamera.de |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 5017
Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
The goat picture looks weird and fuzzy on my screen?
_________________
Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
poilu
Joined: 26 Aug 2007
Posts: 10471
Location: Greece
Expire: 2019-08-29
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 7:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
poilu wrote:
| Excalibur wrote: |
| The goat picture looks weird and fuzzy on my screen? |
+1
| Patrick wrote: |
| The goat has highlights blown so it is difficult to compare the two, since so much detail is lost |
+2 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laurence
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
Posts: 4809
Location: Western Washington State
Expire: 2016-06-19
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 7:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Laurence wrote:
I agree on the difficulty of getting a fair view of the goat image because of blown highlights. Also, it has taken on a green cast on the white areas.
It would be fun to see more comparisons.
_________________
Assent, and you are sane;
Demur,—you ’re straightway dangerous,
And handled with a chain.
Emily Dickinson
Cameras and Lenses in Use:
Yashica Mat 124 w/ Yashinon 80/3.5,
CV Apo-Lanthar 90/3.5SL, (Thank you Klaus),
Pentax 645,
Flek 50,
Pentax-A 150
Pentax-A 120 Macro
Voigtlander Vitomatic I w/Color Skopar 50/2.8
Konica TC and zoom lenses (thanks Carsten)
Contax AX
Yashica ML 50/2
Yashica ML 35/2.8
Carl Zeiss Contax 50/1.4
Tamron Adaptall SP 17/3.5
Tamron Adaptall 28/2.5
Tamron Adaptall SP 300/2.8 LD (IF)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009
Posts: 5017
Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 06, 2009 8:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
| Laurence wrote: |
I agree on the difficulty of getting a fair view of the goat image because of blown highlights. Also, it has taken on a green cast on the white areas.
It would be fun to see more comparisons. |
....but even the grass is OOF or blurred from camera shake.
_________________
Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yadisl
Joined: 03 Dec 2009
Posts: 180
Location: the Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 07, 2009 9:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
yadisl wrote:
This is another shot, I'm afraid it has highlight blown too. 
_________________
Tell me what you love, I will tell you who you are (Proust)
TLR yashica 635, 124
Canon canonet 1.9
Olympus E500
KM Dynax 7D
Sigma DP1
Rokkor MD 200/4, MD 50/1.4, MC PF 50/1.4, MD 135/3.5, Pentax SMC-M 50/4 macro, Takumar 105/2.8, Jena DDR 135/3.5, Porst 135/2.8, Prinzgalaxy 300/4, Mamiya ZE 300/4, Jena Tessar 50/2.8, Pancolar 50/1.8, CZJ Flektogon 4/20, Helios 58/2, Konica Hexar AR 50/1.4, Wollensak Velostigmat 90/4.5, Voigtlander Heliar 18 cm / 4.5, Heliar 15 cm / 4.5, APO Lanthar 15 cm / 4.5, Zeiss Tessar 105/3.5, Zeiss Opton 75/3.5, Mamiya 55/2.8, ZD 14-42, Minolta 17-35/2.8-4 D, Petri 35/3.5, Leica-R 35/2.8, Minolta 70-210/4, Minolta 35-70/4, Minolta 50/1.7. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ManualFocus-G
Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Posts: 6622
Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-24
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 07, 2009 9:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
ManualFocus-G wrote:
That's a much better shot  Shadow / Highlights adjustments in PS may sort some of the highlights out. Anyway, both lenses are obviously excellent. I'm lazy in this respect and generally always take my best 135 of the same mount of the rest of my lenses for the day
Edit: Not sure that made sense  If I was out with a Zuiko 28/2.8 and 50/1.8, I'd take a Zuika 135. If I was out with a Flek and a Takumar, I'd take the Carl Zeiss. Sames changing the mount around. I think I understand myself now
_________________
Graham - Moderator 
Shooter of choice: Fujifilm X-T20 with M42, PB and C/Y lenses
See my Flickr photos at http://www.flickr.com/photos/manualfocus-g |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
francotirador
Joined: 17 Sep 2009
Posts: 894
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 08, 2009 4:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
francotirador wrote:
For me, much better CZJ. The focus and beautiful bokeh. Typical of a Sonnar.
Great lens, congrats 
_________________
Canon 5D II-Sony nex 6
Canon L 80-200 f 2.8 - Canon L 135 f2 - Canon FD 135/2.5 convert to EOS - Yashica 50 1.4 ML - Canon FD 50 1.2 - Distagon 35mm 2.8 T AEJ - Minolta MC 24mm f 2.8 - Canon LTM 85 1.9- Canon LTM 85mm 1.9 convert to EOS - Rodenstock Heligon 50 1.9 - Color Skopar 50 2.8 & MAte Box & filters 4X4
Contax RTS II y Minolta SRT 303 - 28-135 3.6 Tokina - Minolta MD 45 f2.0 - Minolta Zoom 80 200 4.5 (Leica)
www.isgleasphoto.com
The life is more easy with this forum .... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yadisl
Joined: 03 Dec 2009
Posts: 180
Location: the Netherlands
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 08, 2009 1:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
yadisl wrote:
I got the CZ very cheap: euro 25. From a generous collector who own too much of it.
It has some ex-fungus or coating defect at the edge - but who cares
_________________
Tell me what you love, I will tell you who you are (Proust)
TLR yashica 635, 124
Canon canonet 1.9
Olympus E500
KM Dynax 7D
Sigma DP1
Rokkor MD 200/4, MD 50/1.4, MC PF 50/1.4, MD 135/3.5, Pentax SMC-M 50/4 macro, Takumar 105/2.8, Jena DDR 135/3.5, Porst 135/2.8, Prinzgalaxy 300/4, Mamiya ZE 300/4, Jena Tessar 50/2.8, Pancolar 50/1.8, CZJ Flektogon 4/20, Helios 58/2, Konica Hexar AR 50/1.4, Wollensak Velostigmat 90/4.5, Voigtlander Heliar 18 cm / 4.5, Heliar 15 cm / 4.5, APO Lanthar 15 cm / 4.5, Zeiss Tessar 105/3.5, Zeiss Opton 75/3.5, Mamiya 55/2.8, ZD 14-42, Minolta 17-35/2.8-4 D, Petri 35/3.5, Leica-R 35/2.8, Minolta 70-210/4, Minolta 35-70/4, Minolta 50/1.7. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mflex-on
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 08, 2009 2:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
mflex-on wrote:
I had both and could compare them under several aspects:
Resolution and sharpness, CA, bokeh.
The Sonnar was better in every category. Isn't close distance much better (closer) too?
Nevertheless the Zuiko is a good lens I think. Maybe my copy was not so good.
both are sold meanwhile. I prefer the older Sonnar 4/135. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
