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

Zenitar 50 f/1.7 vs Pancolar 50 f/1/8
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 7:11 am    Post subject: Zenitar 50 f/1.7 vs Pancolar 50 f/1/8 Reply with quote

Hi All,

I have read countless postings, blogs and have seen many images from both lenses, and still cannot decide between them.
I have been using Sigma 50 Ex f/1.4, very sharp wide open and newly acquired Hilios 44m-5 sharp wide open and love the bokeh character.

Now looking to pick-up my third 50 with somewhat unique bokeh character (for creamy bokeh I already have my Sigma f1.4), mainly for full body portraiture.
Now the pricing is pretty even between the 2 lens: Zenitar and Pancolar. What are the advantages one has over the other? mainly: resolution, bokeh character, color and contrast (I prefer softer vintage like looks).

Thanks,
-Michael.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 9:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have owned both and can understand your hesitation. They are both excellent lenses with similar rendering. I don't think I can make a recommendation, just a few items that you might consider.

Pancolar is larger and heavier than Zenitar.
Zenitar has more modern coatings.
Pancolar has amazing close focus capability.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 10:12 am    Post subject: Re: Zenitar 50 f/1.7 vs Pancolar 50 f/1/8 Reply with quote

michaelanburaj wrote:
Hi All,

I have read countless postings, blogs and have seen many images from both lenses, and still cannot decide between them.
I have been using Sigma 50 Ex f/1.4, very sharp wide open and newly acquired Hilios 44m-5 sharp wide open and love the bokeh character.

Now looking to pick-up my third 50 with somewhat unique bokeh character (for creamy bokeh I already have my Sigma f1.4), mainly for full body portraiture.
Now the pricing is pretty even between the 2 lens: Zenitar and Pancolar. What are the advantages one has over the other? mainly: resolution, bokeh character, color and contrast (I prefer softer vintage like looks).

Thanks,
-Michael.

Wait, the Helios 44 doesn't have unique bokeh character? Or you want something different from that too?


PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 12:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

How about Primoplan 58/1.9?


PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 12:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Pancolar 1.8/50 comes in two different optical versions.

One with thorium glass and one without.

I have a direct comparison between the Zenitar and non radioactive Pancolar here: #26 and #31.
http://forum.mflenses.com/42-lens-mega-bokeh-test-t78383.html


PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 12:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pick Zenitar if you are into calm bokeh. All my Pancolars tend to have double-lining issues from time to time.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 2:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

They are not very expensive - buy both Wink


PostPosted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 12:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm with D.P. I have a couple of pancolar that I love. The zenit 50 1.7 is on my wish list....


PostPosted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 2:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hello All,

Very useful info., thanks for sharing.
My Hilios 44m-5 does exhibit the famous "swirl" bokeh, other times bokeh it produces is very smooth and painting like. I love it! On the next ($100 range) lens I am looking for something special but different, that brought me to these 2 lenses.
I will take a look at the Primoplan 58/1.9 as well.

Zenitar is on its way. I will probably end-up buying them both.

on the pancolar: besides the thorium, non-thorium difference - I see electric, non-electric, auto, non-auto, MC and without MC. Regardless are they all optically same? Or should I pay attention to certain details / version when buying?

Thanks,
-Michael.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 2:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

michaelanburaj wrote:
Zenitar is on its way. I will probably end-up buying them both.

on the pancolar: besides the thorium, non-thorium difference - I see electric, non-electric, auto, non-auto, MC and without MC. Regardless are they all optically same? Or should I pay attention to certain details / version when buying?


The Zenitar is indeed a good choice. I was rather impressed after my first session with it, particularly the bokeh is very nice. A very good buy for little money. My introduction of this lens: http://forum.mflenses.com/zenitar-50mm-f1-7-domestic-version-on-ricoh-gxr-m-t71542.html

However, I can't comment on the Pancolar as I never had one myself.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 17, 2018 8:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

michaelanburaj wrote:
on the pancolar: besides the thorium, non-thorium difference - I see electric, non-electric, auto, non-auto, MC and without MC. Regardless are they all optically same? Or should I pay attention to certain details / version when buying?

The oldest f/1.8 version is "Zebra" styled, thoriated and features 8 aperture blades. The newer "Zebra" has a changed non-thoriated design and 6 aperture blades only. The rest of "black" versions are multi-coated (relatively weak tech comapred to T* or SMC) and optically the same. The only differences are barrel length and maybe multi-coating quality.

A few people prefers the black version with red 'MC' mark. This one is said to be the sharpest and aesthetically best of M42 Pancolars. However, there is no conclusive proof, IIRC.

You might also try to look for a "MC Carl Zeiss Jena Prakticar 50/1.8". That one is the final development of Pancolar. It exists in PB mount only. Just don't confuse this lens with the common "MC Prakticar 50/1.8".


PostPosted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 12:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks a lot to you both for sharing pictures from Zenitar and detailed Pancolar information, this will guide me very well on my next buy.

All, Thanks for sharing info. I will share pictures and thoughts back on the forum.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 5:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You can also try a dirt cheap Fujinon 55mm f/2.2 for nice bokeh.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 6:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cabessius wrote:
You can also try a dirt cheap Fujinon 55mm f/2.2 for nice bokeh.

This lens is not dirty cheap anymore. Sometime, it cost as much as other 55/1.4. It will take sometime to find one for less than $30.


PostPosted: Thu Jan 18, 2018 6:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

calvin83 wrote:
Cabessius wrote:
You can also try a dirt cheap Fujinon 55mm f/2.2 for nice bokeh.

This lens is not dirty cheap anymore. Sometime, it cost as much as other 55/1.4. It will take sometime to find one for less than $30.

You are probably right, mine costed me close to nothing but that was long ago.
Maybe attached to a Fujica camera it can be found cheaper.

Other options for funny bokeh in 50mm could be a Volna-9 of a Industar 61 L/Z.