Carl Zeiss Jena Biometar 120mm lenses

[Attila]

What is your experience with these lenses ?

[convert1]

Hi Attila, concerning your question, I 've loaded comparison of CZJ Biometar 120mm with Hasselblad Planar 120mm, so you can build your own opinion.
First Biometar, second Hasselblad
Regards

[Attila]

I see no real difference , what is your opinion ?

[F16SUNSHINE]

Differences are tiny at most.
My understanding is the biometer is a Planar/Sonnar hybrid.
I'm on my PDA and won't search for a diagram to link.
Maybe someone has it handy ( Jiri, Klaus )

edit
Well now on the bigger screen I see the hassie is smoother in transition/OOF and sharper.
Still though the Biometer looks pretty nice. It can be quite inexpensive at times although the adapter for DSLR is an expense.

[edumad]

I like the hassy better, the bokeh is less agressive for this subject.

[no-X]

I like the Hasselblad lens more, bokeh is smoother and white flowers are sharper (less glow). Are both shots thaken at the same aperture value?

I have never bought Biometar 120/2.8 - I don't use medium format camera and this lens is quite expensive to use it as SLR/DSLR lens via adapter. Many 135mm lenses are cheaper and more suitable for DSLR (smaller, no need of expensive P6 adapter, some of them have smoother bokeh).

As I remember, 120/2.8 P6 Biometar, 80/2.8 P6 Biometar, old M42/exakta 80/2.8 Biometar and Tomioka Macro Yashinon 60/2.8 are all based on hybrid 5/4 planar/sonnar design, which is in fact reversed Meyer Macro-Plasmat or Zeiss Macro Prakticar

[estudleon]

1- the biometar, like almost all the CZJ lenses is in the warm side (a bit, yes, but warm) and the planar is in the neutral/cold one. Difference: the pics with the CZJ are more yellowish tone. See the background and the "white" flowers.

2- As the biometar 80, the 120 is an hybrid (planar-sonnar) and what is it? This characteristic do: the borders in the planar pics could be sharper at F/ 2,8, 4, 5,6 and 8 than the biometar ones, and the planar's F/2,8, 4 and 5,6 centers are sharpers too. The biometar can win at f/ 11-16.

3- I think that The differences can't be watch totality in the monitor. With print, proytection slides, etc. the lenses can operate all its potentiality.

I prefer the´planar design.

Rino.

[kds315*]

let me simply cite my lens-buddy Marc James Small who elaborated on that lens in 1997 in a forum I was part of:
<<start>>
Prior to the Second War, Ernst Wandersleb, head of optical design at Carl Zeiss Jena, began to re-examine the six-element symmetrical Planar to see whether its flare problem could be tamed by lens coating. He assigned a young assistance, Dr Hans Sauer, to do the actual work. When the Zeiss's split in the later 1940's, Sauer went west to Oberkochen but much of his work stayed behind at Jena. Thus, both companies built the same design. As Western Courts awarded ownership of Zeiss trademarks to Oberkochen, the Jena lenses had to be marked 'Biometar' when sold in the West, while Carl Zeiss lenses sold in the East were marked as 'Opton T' or 'P' as late as 1989.

The Biometar and Planar are thus identical lenses with identical performance. Jena lacked quality metals and fine lubricants, so some Jena lenses of the period suffer from poor lensmounts, but then, Oberkochen did not enjoy as fine a supply of optical glasses until the late 1950's, so it all evened out in the end. <<end>>

Designs ( (c) Frank Mechelhoff ):

Biometar:


Planar:


Well, but there are some tests, which speak another language ( (c) Rick Denny):


Cited from his excellent site: http://www.rickdenney.com/mother_lens_test.htm There is much more detail testing done there, certainly worth reading esp. Eastern Bloc lenses vs. Western lenses!!

Cheers,

[Attila]

Thank you guys to make it clear to me!

[estudleon]

[gcrimmins]

To my eye the Planar looks sharper, cooler, and has better bokeh.

--Geoff

[Oldhand]

Yes, even though this thread is out of the dark ages, here are some images of 120mm Biometar on Nikon.
Cheers
OH





100% crop
OUCH - very sharp:D



100% crop

[uddhava]

[Oldhand]

[Attila]

120mm was one of the best portrait lens in Eastern block on medium format with 180mm Sonnar I love them both. I still like best to use it on Pentacon Six and P645

[themoleman342]

It was hardly the dark ages! F16sunshine and no-x were amazing, knowledgeable members and now don't post anymore.

What is actually missing out of that mother-of-all-lens-tests chart is the Vega 120. I always enjoyed my copy immensely and it compares favorably in other test Rick Denny has done. This is a pretty old one from a Kiev 6c:

[rbelyell]

wow, that vega is indeed awesome, and as i recall, very similar to the rendering i got from the biometar 120. that biometar was simply put one of the top 2-3 lenses i ever used, i just loved it. do i recall that vega was some offshoot of zeiss? i say this be ause i remember distinctly the vega 80 being compared to the biometar 80 again yielding astoundingly similar results....

[themoleman342]

The Vega 120 must be a different design. No doubt 5 elements since the "Vega" name almost always denotes that but the profile is significantly different than the Biometar. The B120 is more than twice the length of the V120. Actually the V120 is only slightly longer than the Volna 80. The Vega 90mm, in my personal opinion, has a similar character to the Biometar 80, while the Volna 80 draws a picture with a dissimilar quality.

[Aanything]

[iangreenhalgh1]

The Vega lenses are not all Biometars but they are all similar to the Biometar type:



Biometar 2.8/120:



Vega-9 2.1/50:

[themoleman342]

Ah, I didn't realize the V120 was a 6-element design. Always assumed 5 since it was named a Vega. Even though I've taken a couple apart, I guess I never noted that. Thanks for the info.