View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
bernhardas
Joined: 01 Jan 2013 Posts: 1437
Expire: 2017-05-23
|
Posted: Sun Oct 13, 2013 5:38 am Post subject: E |
|
|
bernhardas wrote:
Edited
Last edited by bernhardas on Tue May 03, 2016 10:10 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013 Posts: 6006 Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
Posted: Sun Oct 13, 2013 8:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
The CZJ Biometar 80mm is a fine lens and gives excellent results.
I have the MC version and use a standard P6-Nikon adapter. This has no problems with infinity focus.
I haven't tried a tilt shift adapter so can't help you with a suitable replacement for yours.
Which lens do you have - out of interest?
OH |
|
Back to top |
|
|
bernhardas
Joined: 01 Jan 2013 Posts: 1437
Expire: 2017-05-23
|
Posted: Sun Oct 13, 2013 9:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
bernhardas wrote:
Edited
Last edited by bernhardas on Tue May 03, 2016 10:10 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013 Posts: 6006 Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
Posted: Sun Oct 13, 2013 9:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
Here is the adapter that I use.
I have found it to be excellent. There is also an M42 adapter which works well.
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/121100147186?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649
Cheers
OH |
|
Back to top |
|
|
bernhardas
Joined: 01 Jan 2013 Posts: 1437
Expire: 2017-05-23
|
Posted: Sun Oct 13, 2013 10:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
bernhardas wrote:
Thanks |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DR.JUAN
Joined: 08 Feb 2013 Posts: 661
|
Posted: Sun Oct 13, 2013 5:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DR.JUAN wrote:
I used it (single coat one) with film in the end of 80's.
Good lens. In my records, the best of it was at f/11-16.
Did you try yours at f/11-16? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
bernhardas
Joined: 01 Jan 2013 Posts: 1437
Expire: 2017-05-23
|
Posted: Sun Oct 13, 2013 7:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
bernhardas wrote:
Edited
Last edited by bernhardas on Tue May 03, 2016 10:10 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013 Posts: 6006 Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2013 10:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
I'm going north today and will take the CZJ Biometar with me. Will post some images when I get home.
Here is a sample - only my second bella donna of the season:
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Tue Oct 15, 2013 12:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
Do not expect top sharpness from medium format lenses on small format digital cameras. They simply won't give it.
Those lenses were conceived for a format where the frame size counted a lot more than the optical quality for the final result.
It would be extremely costly to produce medium format lenses that can perform as sharply as small format lenses.
Even the best lenses ever made for medium format (Zeiss for Hasselblad) do never reach the same performance
of the same-time lenses made for SLR (Contax/Yashica system).
Check the MTFs here: http://lenses.zeiss.com/camera-lenses/en_de/service/download_center/hasselblad_c.html
and compare with: http://lenses.zeiss.com/camera-lenses/en_de/service/download_center/contax_yashica.html
The Jena Biometar is a sort of "hybrid" optical scheme that combines aspects of Planar-type lens with aspects of Sonnar-type lens,
in order to reduce the manufacturing costs and to reduce the problem of contrast loss inherent to double-Gauss optical scheme
made of all glass-to-air surfaces applied to large diameter lenses (such as those required to cover the frame area of a 6x6 camera).
The performance of the Biometar 80 is widely known to be modest unfortunately. The Italian magazine "Nadir" says openly in their
review of Jena medium format lenses that the Soviet equivalent (the Vega-12) is a better performer than the Biometar 80:
http://lenses.zeiss.com/camera-lenses/en_de/service/download_center/hasselblad_c.html
The Biometar 80 has a good bokeh and I recommend it for such use. As a sharpness performer, I think most medium teles made
for small format (including the excellent and cheap Series E Nikon 2.8/100) will outperform it. _________________ Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013 Posts: 6006 Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
Posted: Tue Oct 15, 2013 2:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
Orio wrote: |
Do not expect top sharpness from medium format lenses on small format digital cameras. They simply won't give it.
Those lenses were conceived for a format where the frame size counted a lot more than the optical quality for the final result.
It would be extremely costly to produce medium format lenses that can perform as sharply as small format lenses.
Even the best lenses ever made for medium format (Zeiss for Hasselblad) do never reach the same performance
of the same-time lenses made for SLR (Contax/Yashica system).
Check the MTFs here: http://lenses.zeiss.com/camera-lenses/en_de/service/download_center/hasselblad_c.html
and compare with: http://lenses.zeiss.com/camera-lenses/en_de/service/download_center/contax_yashica.html
The Jena Biometar is a sort of "hybrid" optical scheme that combines aspects of Planar-type lens with aspects of Sonnar-type lens,
in order to reduce the manufacturing costs and to reduce the problem of contrast loss inherent to double-Gauss optical scheme
made of all glass-to-air surfaces applied to large diameter lenses (such as those required to cover the frame area of a 6x6 camera).
The performance of the Biometar 80 is widely known to be modest unfortunately. The Italian magazine "Nadir" says openly in their
review of Jena medium format lenses that the Soviet equivalent (the Vega-12) is a better performer than the Biometar 80:
http://lenses.zeiss.com/camera-lenses/en_de/service/download_center/hasselblad_c.html
The Biometar 80 has a good bokeh and I recommend it for such use. As a sharpness performer, I think most medium teles made
for small format (including the excellent and cheap Series E Nikon 2.8/100) will outperform it. |
You may well be right.
Here are some other more distant images:
[/i] |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Tue Oct 15, 2013 7:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
If you have a compatible medium format camera (a Pentacon 6, a Hasselblad, a Pentax 645, etc) use the Biometar on it,
it will not disappoint you there. _________________ Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Jesito
Joined: 24 Aug 2007 Posts: 5745 Location: Olivella, Catalonia, (Spain)
Expire: 2015-01-07
|
Posted: Tue Oct 15, 2013 2:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jesito wrote:
How would you compare it against the Volna-3 (80mm f/2.8 ) ?.
I used it on the NEX some time ago and found it quite sharp...
http://forum.mflenses.com/volna-3-80mm-f2-8-on-the-nex-5-t39843,highlight,%2Bvolna.html _________________ Jesito, Moderator
Jesito's backsack:
Zooms Sigma 70-300, Tamron 35-135 and 70-210 short, 70-210 long, 28-70 CF Macro, 35-70, 35-80, Vivitar 70-210 KA, Tamron 70-250.
Fixed Industar-50, , Tamron 24mm, Tamron 135mm, Sands Hunter 135mm, Pancolar 50mm, Volna-3, many Exakta lenses
DSLR SIGMA SD9 & SD14, EOS 5D, Sony A700 and NEXF3, Oly E-330, E-400, E-450, E-1
TLR/6x6/645 YashicaMat, Petri 6x45, Nettar, Franka Solida, Brilliant
SLR Minolta X300, Fuji STX II, Praktica VLC3, Pentax P30t, EXA500, EXA 1A, Spotmatic(2), Chinon CM-4S, Ricoh, Contax, Konica TC-X , Minolta 5000, 7000i, 3Sxi, EOS 500 and CX
Rangefinders Chinon 35EE, Konica C35 auto, Canonet 28, Yashica Lynx, FED-2, Yashica electro 35, Argus C3 & C4, Regula Cita III, Voigtlander Vitoret (many), Welta Welti-I, Kodak Signette 35, Zorki-4, Bessa-R & L, Minolta Weathermatic, olympus XA2
Compact Film Konica C35V, Voigtlander Vitorets, Canon Prima Super 105, Olympus XA2 and XA3
Compact Digital Olympus C-5050, Aiptek Slim 3000, Canon Powershot A540, Nikon 5200, SIGMA DP1s, Polaroid X530, IXUS55, Kodak 6490, Powershot G9 and G10
CSCCanon EOS-M, Samsung NX100 and NX210, Lumix G5, NEX-F3 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Tue Oct 15, 2013 2:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
Jesito wrote: |
How would you compare it against the Volna-3 (80mm f/2.8 ) ?. |
hi Jes
I had both. I personally prefer the Volna-3. The Volna-3 (also known as Arsat) is a true double Gauss lens.
The optical scheme is different than the Biometar:
Biometar 2.8/80 :
Volna-3 2.8/80 :
_________________ Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009 Posts: 5019 Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
Posted: Tue Oct 15, 2013 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
Indeed I would agree as they were saying that about 30 -40 years ago, and wouldn't know if modern Medium format lenses are better, as I'm in a time warp of yesteryear _________________ 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 |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Tue Oct 15, 2013 4:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
Excalibur wrote: |
Indeed I would agree as they were saying that about 30 -40 years ago, and wouldn't know if modern Medium format lenses are better, as I'm in a time warp of yesteryear |
At the time, nobody was pixel-peeping
Today, it's possible that the new Hasselblad lenses may be better (don't really know), but for sure the overall concept remains valid. _________________ Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15685
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Tue Oct 15, 2013 5:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
20 years ago we were examining 6x6 transparencies and BW negatives on lightboxes with 20 and 30x loupes, if that counts.
I'll have to try my Mamiya K/L 140mm Macro on digital sometime, if the MTF charts are correct, it easily matches 35mm lenses.
But I agree, in general, most MF lenses are a little lower in resolution than 35mm ones. There are some exceptions though, the Kodak Special Anastigmat 4.5/100 resolution figures would raise more than a few eyebrows. I'll try to dig them out. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it!
Last edited by iangreenhalgh1 on Tue Oct 15, 2013 5:29 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15685
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Tue Oct 15, 2013 5:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Here you go, pretty strong results for a 1940s Tessar type:
http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/cameras/kodak.html
Quote: |
Kodak 620 Special with 100mm f/4.5 Anastigmat
Resolution in Lines per mm (center/middle/edge)
With target distance set at 12 feet
40 63 45 f/11 at 13' on lens scale
63 57 31 f/11 at 11' on lens scale
57 63 36 f/16 at 12' on lens scale
63 57 50 f/22 at 12' on lens scale |
Chris Perez also lists many other MF lens resolution tests:
http://www.hevanet.com/cperez/MF_testing.html
I picked out some of the best:
Quote: |
Rolleiflex 2.8E Model 1 US (serial #1,62x,xxx) 80mm f/2.8 Schneider Xenotar
54 30 13 f/2.8
107 96 13 f/4
120 68 17 f/5.6
107 96 27 f/8
85 68 48 f/11
76 76 54 f/16
54 54 48 f/22
Mamiya 7 80mm f/4
120 120 60 f/4
120 120 68 f5.6
120 107 68 f/8
107 107 76 f/11
76 76 68 f/16
60 60 60 f/22
Mamiya 7 50mm f/4.5 68 76 68 f/4.5
107 96 42 f5.6
107 107 48 f/8
96 96 68 f/11
85 85 68 f/16
54 54 60 f/22
Hasselblad 500CM (late 1980's) 80mm f/2.8 Planar CT*
68 68 38 f/2.8
60 60 34 f/4
96 96 54 f/5.6
96 107 60 f/8
85 76 60 f/11
68 68 60 f/16
54 48 48 f/22
Hasselblad 903 SWC 38mm f/4.5 Biogon T*
68 76 54 f/4.5
96 96 60 f/5.6
85 106 76 f/8
68 76 68 f/11
60 60 60 f/16 |
_________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009 Posts: 5019 Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
Posted: Tue Oct 15, 2013 5:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
H'mm I suppose after posting this all medium format lenses will shoot up in price...better get my Etrs lenses quick _________________ 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 |
|
|
DR.JUAN
Joined: 08 Feb 2013 Posts: 661
|
Posted: Wed Oct 16, 2013 1:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
DR.JUAN wrote:
There were some lenses with mediocre lpm but great IQ, like the Heliar, dagor, old summicrons M, thambar, etc.
Don't know viceversa. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Jesito
Joined: 24 Aug 2007 Posts: 5745 Location: Olivella, Catalonia, (Spain)
Expire: 2015-01-07
|
Posted: Wed Oct 16, 2013 7:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jesito wrote:
Orio wrote: |
hi Jes
I had both. I personally prefer the Volna-3. The Volna-3 (also known as Arsat) is a true double Gauss lens.
The optical scheme is different than the Biometar:
...
|
Thanks for the explanation, Orio. I also prefer the Volna. _________________ Jesito, Moderator
Jesito's backsack:
Zooms Sigma 70-300, Tamron 35-135 and 70-210 short, 70-210 long, 28-70 CF Macro, 35-70, 35-80, Vivitar 70-210 KA, Tamron 70-250.
Fixed Industar-50, , Tamron 24mm, Tamron 135mm, Sands Hunter 135mm, Pancolar 50mm, Volna-3, many Exakta lenses
DSLR SIGMA SD9 & SD14, EOS 5D, Sony A700 and NEXF3, Oly E-330, E-400, E-450, E-1
TLR/6x6/645 YashicaMat, Petri 6x45, Nettar, Franka Solida, Brilliant
SLR Minolta X300, Fuji STX II, Praktica VLC3, Pentax P30t, EXA500, EXA 1A, Spotmatic(2), Chinon CM-4S, Ricoh, Contax, Konica TC-X , Minolta 5000, 7000i, 3Sxi, EOS 500 and CX
Rangefinders Chinon 35EE, Konica C35 auto, Canonet 28, Yashica Lynx, FED-2, Yashica electro 35, Argus C3 & C4, Regula Cita III, Voigtlander Vitoret (many), Welta Welti-I, Kodak Signette 35, Zorki-4, Bessa-R & L, Minolta Weathermatic, olympus XA2
Compact Film Konica C35V, Voigtlander Vitorets, Canon Prima Super 105, Olympus XA2 and XA3
Compact Digital Olympus C-5050, Aiptek Slim 3000, Canon Powershot A540, Nikon 5200, SIGMA DP1s, Polaroid X530, IXUS55, Kodak 6490, Powershot G9 and G10
CSCCanon EOS-M, Samsung NX100 and NX210, Lumix G5, NEX-F3 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
themoleman342
Joined: 21 Oct 2007 Posts: 2190 Location: East Coast (CT), U.S.A.
Expire: 2013-01-24
|
Posted: Sat Oct 19, 2013 1:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
themoleman342 wrote:
I decided to write this here instead of creating a whole new post. For probably a year now I've been looking for a Biometar with a serial number between 42,000-48,000. Apparently this particular batch of 6000 lenses was built using a optical re-calculation done in 1979 while all the other Biometars were made using a calculation done in 1956. More can be read here: http://www.pentaconsix.com/zeissdes.htm and http://forums.delphiforums.com/n/main.asp?webtag=kievreport&ctx=&cacheTag=7-9&msg=8120.39.
I would like to compare the two, on 6x6, as best I can. The verdict is still out as to whether re-calculation actually meant improvement or cost-cutting. Hopefully I can share my findings soon. The new Biometar is on its way to me now. Thanks! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15685
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Sat Oct 19, 2013 1:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I still need to get the Hasselblad Planar 2.8/80 I picked up for peanuts because the shutter is bust converted to P6 so I can compare it to my Biometar. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
sichko
Joined: 20 Jun 2008 Posts: 2475 Location: South West UK
|
Posted: Sat Oct 19, 2013 2:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
sichko wrote:
Orio wrote: |
The Jena Biometar is a sort of "hybrid" optical scheme that combines aspects of Planar-type lens with aspects of Sonnar-type lens, in order to reduce the manufacturing costs and to reduce the problem of contrast loss inherent to double-Gauss optical scheme made of all glass-to-air surfaces applied to large diameter lenses (such as those required to cover the frame area of a 6x6 camera). |
Oberkochen simply calls it a 5-element Gauss. See : http://blogs.zeiss.com/photo/en/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/en_CLB_40_Nasse_Lens_Names_Planar.pdf _________________ John |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15685
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Sat Oct 19, 2013 2:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Sickho, please DO NOT ruin yet another thread with pointless pedantry. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Sat Oct 19, 2013 3:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
John, it's not the same design. The Biometar has two cemented elements. The Planar in the scheme has 5 elements
in 5 groups.
Having that said, it's still possible that lens designers consider that a gauss lens. Definition depends on the way the light
is transmitted and not necessarily in the physical position of the elements. In order to know we should ask a lens designer,
but I don't know any _________________ Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|