| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
 Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2012 1:52 am Post subject: |
 |
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Zeiss started coating the Tessar in 1937 so aren't all 2.8/50s coated? I've got the alu one, a zebra one in Exakta and an M42 zebra, all three are excellent. I also have an Industar-50 rigid 1966, an I-50 1959 collapsible, an I-26M 1954 and an I-61LD 1988, they are all excellent too, all really sharp. The I-50 1959 is possibly the sharpest of the lot.
I just like the Tessar, every bit as good as a double-gauss type 50 imho.
_________________
I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ForenSeil
Joined: 15 Apr 2011
Posts: 2726
Location: Kiel, Germany.
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2012 10:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ForenSeil wrote:
| iangreenhalgh1 wrote: |
| Zeiss started coating the Tessar in 1937 so aren't all 2.8/50s coated? |
No I had several uncoated Tessars even from later G.D.R. times.
(at least I think they were uncoated as I couldn't see any colored reflections and there was no red T on the labeling)
I think most Tessars are uncoated.
As far as I know most Carl Zeiss lenses were available both in uncoated and for an extra price coated versions.
_________________
I'm not a collector, I'm a tester 
My camera: Sony A7+Zeiss Sonnar 55/1.8
Current favourite lenses (I have many more):
A few macro-Tominons, Samyang 12/2.8, Noritsu 50.7/9.5, Rodagon 105/5.6 on bellows, Samyang 135/2, Nikon ED 180/2.8, Leitz Elmar-R 250/4, Celestron C8 2000mm F10
Most wanted: Samyang 24/1.4, Samyang 35/1.4, Nikon 200/2 ED
My Blog: http://picturechemistry.own-blog.com/
(German language) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 1:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I don't know about the coatings, I have seen them with and without the red T but I don't think the ones the ones without T are uncoated, none of mine have the red T but they are all coated, a pale purple tint to the glass similar to the coating on Russian lenses but slightly paler.
I'm no expert though...
_________________
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: Sun Apr 01, 2012 1:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
Zeiss lenses without the T are uncoated.
Like Forensell wrote, in the early years after WWII coating was still optional on the lenses and was pretty much a premium that you paid for with price.
It was later, probably in the second half of the 50s, or even beginning of the 60s, that coating became standard on all Zeiss lenses.
_________________
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: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 1:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Thanks Orio. That alu one I have came to me with a Praktica FX2, I think it is coated as it has the pale purple tint, not sure how old it is.
_________________
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: Sun Apr 01, 2012 1:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
| iangreenhalgh1 wrote: |
| Thanks Orio. That alu one I have came to me with a Praktica FX2, I think it is coated as it has the pale purple tint, not sure how old it is. |
That is certainly an Eastern Zeiss (Zeiss Jena) and therefore a different story.
Although Zeiss Jena should have kept the distinction too, it is possible I think that due to part supply problems or simply unaccurate quality check,
they might have used unmarked barrels with coated lenses.
_________________
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: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 1:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Yes, mine is a Jena, all my Tessars are Jena ones, I don't have any Western Zeiss lenses, sadly.
_________________
I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aanything
Joined: 27 Aug 2011
Posts: 2187
Location: Piacenza, Italy
Expire: 2014-05-30
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Aanything wrote:
Reviving this old thread just to say I bought one of those, it looks exactly the same as Orio's, just slightly more recent (serial no. 3467483) and with a bit more used look, optics look great tho, with no evident scratches or coating damage. I'm really excited about it, since first shots i took look promising. I Hope I'll be able to post a series soon.
If it wasn't for this thread I wouldn't have noticed it, as it was on a table at a local camera fair in a black KMZ box with a torn sticker on it saying "Tessar 50 3.5", and I would surely overlooked it. It was also cheap 
_________________
C&C and editing of my pics are always welcome
Samples from my lenses
My gear
My Flickr |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mos6502
Joined: 20 Jun 2011
Posts: 960
Location: Austin
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mos6502 wrote:
I have a 3.5/50 in the aluminum preset mount. Although I have frequently heard the 3.5 is better than the 2.8 I don't really remember it being a standout lens. I'll have to give it another go. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aanything
Joined: 27 Aug 2011
Posts: 2187
Location: Piacenza, Italy
Expire: 2014-05-30
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 15, 2013 9:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Aanything wrote:
| Mos6502 wrote: |
| I have a 3.5/50 in the aluminum preset mount. Although I have frequently heard the 3.5 is better than the 2.8 I don't really remember it being a standout lens. I'll have to give it another go. |
As far as I've seen so far, it's a lens with a strong character, that usually means many flaws (it's more than 60 years old, after all), but it can give some unique results: I like it a lot so far, but I would understand if someone finds it not for his tastes.
I hope to have some times to shoot some showable pics soon, just to back up my words with pictures.
_________________
C&C and editing of my pics are always welcome
Samples from my lenses
My gear
My Flickr |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
