Home
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Meyer Goerlitz Orestegor 200mm f/4 on Canon 50D
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Apr 24, 2013 2:55 pm    Post subject: Meyer Goerlitz Orestegor 200mm f/4 on Canon 50D Reply with quote

How comes such an old lens can produce such colorful and 3D pictures!?





























































PostPosted: Wed Apr 24, 2013 4:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Amazing, me too, love this lens. I have a Pentacon 200/4 and it's - i think - the same optical formula.

Such beautiful colors!

Renato


PostPosted: Wed Apr 24, 2013 5:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well presented! This lens price / performance ratio still unbeatable.


PostPosted: Wed Apr 24, 2013 6:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have the Pentacon 200/4 as well, and these fantastic shots just make me want to get out and use it a lot more..


PostPosted: Wed Apr 24, 2013 9:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have the preset pentacon too, the bokeh is indeed very good, along with sharpness and color.


PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 2:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RSalles wrote:
Amazing, me too, love this lens. I have a Pentacon 200/4 and it's - i think - the same optical formula.

Such beautiful colors!

Renato


Pentacon 200/4 is the same optical formula? I got one too but it seems it does not perform as well as the Meyer.


PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 2:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pancolart wrote:
Well presented! This lens price / performance ratio still unbeatable.


Agree! x2! Very Happy Very Happy


PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 2:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kyonthinh wrote:
I have the preset pentacon too, the bokeh is indeed very good, along with sharpness and color.

I must try my Pentacon 200/4 next time then! Very Happy Very Happy


PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 5:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ferrick,

This information i had picked from the extinct and nearly reborn praktica-users website (thanks Atilla!):

http://www.praktica-users.org/lens/mlenses/morp4_200.html


Hope it's a good information, i'm relying on it.

Had shot some nice photos with it, guess author doesn't mind the interference,


_MG_4127_web por Renato Augusto Salles, no Flickr


PR013JAN-0210-web por Renato Augusto Salles, no Flickr

Cheers,

Renato


PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 5:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have both the Meyer and the Pentacon. Sale price vs performance is among the best and difficult to beat Wink


PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 5:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well as a film user I usually carry two cameras, one for tele end and one for WA end, and have the Meyer zebra 200mm and Fuji EBC 200mm......but I can't find a use for them Sad and find a 70-210 or 80-200 zoom more useful. Maybe if I started bird watching I might use em Question


PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 6:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Meyer/Pentacon 4/200 is a great lens, the Meyer ones are generally better because the QC became spotty from the mid-70s onwards so less than stellar copies of the Pentacon version are sadly too common. I've never seen a zoom that could compete at the 200mm end with the 4/200, even the Konica UC Zoom-Hexanon 3.5/80-200 isn't as good at the 200mm end and it's a lot bigger and probably twice the weight.


PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 6:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
The Meyer/Pentacon 4/200 is a great lens, the Meyer ones are generally better because the QC became spotty from the mid-70s onwards so less than stellar copies of the Pentacon version are sadly too common. I've never seen a zoom that could compete at the 200mm end with the 4/200, even the Konica UC Zoom-Hexanon 3.5/80-200 isn't as good at the 200mm end and it's a lot bigger and probably twice the weight.


...but being stuck with a 200mm prime on your camera is not convenient for general shots (and remember 1/250 sec is about min to prevent camera shake).....so it would have to be used for a specific reason like full length shots of a person etc
Today I took a few shots with my zoom at 200mm with 200 ISO film and with UK spring sunshine was juggling f no and depth of field with shutter speed...and took a chance at 1/250 sec and between f5.6 and f8 for shots of moving ducklings.


PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 6:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd rather just change lens than settle for inferior performance, which is what you get with 95% of old zoom lenses.


PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 6:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I'd rather just change lens than settle for inferior performance, which is what you get with 95% of old zoom lenses.


h'mm screw lenses are the worst for a quick change Wink, anyway my Kiron 80-200 and Tamron 46a are very good at 200mm.


PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 8:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ferrick wrote:
RSalles wrote:
Amazing, me too, love this lens. I have a Pentacon 200/4 and it's - i think - the same optical formula.

Such beautiful colors!

Renato


Pentacon 200/4 is the same optical formula? I got one too but it seems it does not perform as well as the Meyer.


Yup they are optically (an also mechanically) identical. I had several copies, all slightly different in IQ. Quality (-control) in sovjet occupied GDR was very so-so, especially in the later years.
The poor guys in the Pentacon factories had to make everything on their own, from the lubricant to every single srew mainly only with very overaged mashines from <=WWII times. Meyer-Grlitz was dispossessed by sovjets and combined with Pentacon VEB in 1968 - so Meyer lenses are generally older (=better quality control).

Also here's a 5D used as body, which has a FF-sensor. That supresses CAs and increases sharpness.

To get a lot better IQ you have to pay much more. Price/performance is good indeed.


Last edited by ForenSeil on Fri Apr 26, 2013 1:21 pm; edited 4 times in total


PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 9:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Excalibur wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I'd rather just change lens than settle for inferior performance, which is what you get with 95% of old zoom lenses.


h'mm screw lenses are the worst for a quick change Wink, anyway my Kiron 80-200 and Tamron 46a are very good at 200mm.


Thats why I always bring a set of at least two adapters for screw mount lenses pre mounted for quick change when using multiple screw mount lenses on digital system cam Wink


PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RSalles wrote:
Ferrick,

This information i had picked from the extinct and nearly reborn praktica-users website (thanks Atilla!):

http://www.praktica-users.org/lens/mlenses/morp4_200.html


Hope it's a good information, i'm relying on it.

Had shot some nice photos with it, guess author doesn't mind the interference,


_MG_4127_web por Renato Augusto Salles, no Flickr


PR013JAN-0210-web por Renato Augusto Salles, no Flickr

Cheers,

Renato


Really impressive! Thanks for sharing!


PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nordentro wrote:
Excalibur wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I'd rather just change lens than settle for inferior performance, which is what you get with 95% of old zoom lenses.


h'mm screw lenses are the worst for a quick change Wink, anyway my Kiron 80-200 and Tamron 46a are very good at 200mm.


Thats why I always bring a set of at least two adapters for screw mount lenses pre mounted for quick change when using multiple screw mount lenses on digital system cam Wink


Good idea for a digital camera, but it's so natural to put a M42 lens on a M42 film camera and no mucking around with stopping down on the auto lenses Wink but do put up with the inconvenience of stopping down on my film cameras with adapters, and the Meyer 135mm and 200mm are quite good in that you can preset the lens aperture, then view\focus wide open, then quickly stop down to the aperture you have chosen.


PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ForenSeil wrote:
ferrick wrote:
RSalles wrote:
Amazing, me too, love this lens. I have a Pentacon 200/4 and it's - i think - the same optical formula.

Such beautiful colors!

Renato


Pentacon 200/4 is the same optical formula? I got one too but it seems it does not perform as well as the Meyer.


Yup they are optically (an also mechanically) identical. I had several copies, all slightly different in IQ. Quality (-control) in sovjet occupied GDR was very so-so, especially in the later years.
The poor guys in the factories had to make everything on their own, from the lube to every single srew mainly only with very overaged mashines from <=WWII times. Meyer-Grlitz 200/4 was dispossessed by sovjets and combined with Pentacon VEB 1968 - so Meyer lenses are generally older (=better quality control).

Also here's a 5D used as body, which has a FF-sensor. That supresses CAs and increases sharpness.

To get a lot better IQ you have to pay much more. Price/performance is good indeed.


Very informative indeed! Thank for sharing! Smile Smile


PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

For my copies... the Fuji ebc 200mm seems to give sharper results compared to my Meyer 200mm....but I can't remember if I used a tripod so it's not very scientific. But then should a 200mm lens be used for close ups....................

Meyer 200mm


Fuji EBC 200mm


PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 10:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Excalibur wrote:
But then should a 200mm lens be used for close ups....................


Whatever works for you.
There are of course 200mm micro lenses, but all lenses are tools for painting with light.
Use what works.
Cool!
OH


PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 11:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oldhand wrote:
Excalibur wrote:
But then should a 200mm lens be used for close ups....................


Whatever works for you.
There are of course 200mm micro lenses, but all lenses are tools for painting with light.
Use what works.
Cool!
OH


Well less depth of field could be a reason against 200mm primes for close up work Question


PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 11:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Excalibur wrote:
Oldhand wrote:
Excalibur wrote:
But then should a 200mm lens be used for close ups....................


Whatever works for you.
There are of course 200mm micro lenses, but all lenses are tools for painting with light.
Use what works.
Cool!
OH


Well less depth of field could be a reason against 200mm primes for close up work Question

Yes, indeed, and it is used to advantage because of this in some cases.
If you want long DOF you choose a different lens. Getting to know the strengths and weaknesses of lenses is an important part of the photographic craft, and helps us with our art.
OH


PostPosted: Thu Apr 25, 2013 11:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oldhand wrote:
Getting to know the strengths and weaknesses of lenses is an important part of the photographic craft, and helps us with our art.
OH


Ah true...in the old days, I could only afford a Pentax Auto Tak 55mm and had it for years and knew it very well...but now have so many lenses that only a few do I know fairly well. Wink