Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

CZJ ultron 50 1.8 on A7ii
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2015 1:16 am    Post subject: CZJ ultron 50 1.8 on A7ii Reply with quote
Some test shots with the ultron on the new camera.


resized100 % crop




Images are minimally processed resized for bandwidth on the 1st two which were taken with auto setting on camera. brighten and contrast on 2nd two for bad photographer settings for exposure (oops).


PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2015 1:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Those are wide open, In the shade hand held out over the pond. If I get a chance I'll resize some I took stopped down to 5.6. LOvin' this camera.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2015 3:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Congrat's to your new camera.

Don't you mix it up somehow? I've never heard anything about an Ultron from Jena (GDR).

So if your lens is marked Zeiss and Ultron then it's the Icarex lens which was built in Braunschweig at the Voigtländer factory 1968-72. Actually a Voigtländer development from A.W. Tronnier.
It's btw. an really excellent lens. It has the rather uncommon concave front element like the contemporary Voigtländer 35/1.7 Ultron lens in LTM from Cosina/Japan.
Is this the M42 or QBM version?

Except the Distagon 25mm lens all other Zeiss Ikon Icarex lenses came from Voigtländer as the camera as well.
Your Ultron is the predecessor of the Zeiss Planar/Rollei Planar/Voigtländer Ultron lens which was and is available in 1.8, 1.7 and 1.4.

However, the pictures don't appear really tack sharp to me. I think it could be a little bit better with this lens. For such pictures you should rather stop down as much as you can and go even a little bit closer.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2015 5:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
Congrat's to your new camera.

Don't you mix it up somehow? I've never heard anything about an Ultron from Jena (GDR).

So if your lens is marked Zeiss and Ultron then it's the Icarex lens which was built in Braunschweig at the Voigtländer factory 1968-72. Actually a Voigtländer development from A.W. Tronnier.
It's btw. an really excellent lens. It has the rather uncommon concave front element like the contemporary Voigtländer 35/1.7 Ultron lens in LTM from Cosina/Japan.
Is this the M42 or QBM version?


I was wondering the same thing- I believe it is just a mix-up.
I have an M42 Carl Zeiss Ultron 1.8/50 off an Icarex- it is probably my favorite lens because of its sharpness wide open and micro contrast.
Looks like some good shots.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2015 5:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Congrats! Must be hard to focus, as it is missed unfortunately. I remember my Ultron to be razor sharp
and very easy to focus, as it just pops right at you. Is your lens OK as it seems to front focus?


PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2015 11:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
Your Ultron is the predecessor of the Zeiss Planar/Rollei Planar/Voigtländer Ultron lens which was and is available in 1.8, 1.7 and 1.4.


It's the predecessor of the 1.8/50 but the 1.7/50 and 1.4/50 are descendants of the Planar 2/50 for Contarex.

The 1.8 is an Ultron type with four elements in the front group, all air spaced; the 1.4 and 1.7 are Planar types with four elements in the rear group.

It might seem a bit like splitting hairs, but there are two design lineages, albeit similar.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2015 1:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
tb_a wrote:
Your Ultron is the predecessor of the Zeiss Planar/Rollei Planar/Voigtländer Ultron lens which was and is available in 1.8, 1.7 and 1.4.


It's the predecessor of the 1.8/50 but the 1.7/50 and 1.4/50 are descendants of the Planar 2/50 for Contarex.

The 1.8 is an Ultron type with four elements in the front group, all air spaced; the 1.4 and 1.7 are Planar types with four elements in the rear group.

It might seem a bit like splitting hairs, but there are two design lineages, albeit similar.


The 1,7 planar have four elements in the rear group but in the last versión (#8xxxxxx). The first version of the c/y planar was an updated Ultron/icarex With 4 front elements.

And the Ultron/icarex was a New design of zeiss, who had the computarse to design lenses. Voigtlander hadn't them. made in the ex-voigtlander factory (from 1965 member of zeiss group).

The last voigtlander design normal lens was the excellent septon 2/50 with the same design of the Planar 2,8/80 for hassy. The last chance to voigtlander srl cameras (ultramatic cs and bessamatic cs) to have better position in the market.

The two better lenses of Voigtländer 35 mm srl, the skopagon 2/40 and the Septon 2/50 died with that last proyect.

With the icarex sistema, zeiss used New computarse to design New lenses like the Ultron 1,8/50 and super dynarex 4/200 and telomar 400 mm, and redisegn others, like the skopar 2,8/50 (tessar for icarex), skoparex 35/3,4, super dynarex 135/4 and dynarex 90/3,4. The fórmulas weren't change but the type of glass and distance internal of the elements


PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2015 3:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
papasito wrote:

And the Ultron/icarex was a New design of zeiss, who had the computarse to design lenses. Voigtlander hadn't them. made in the ex-voigtlander factory (from 1965 member of zeiss group).


Nitpicker's delight!

However, if you really want to split some hairs, then I also have to correct you.

The Icarex line of camera and lenses have been designed and made by Voigtländer, who was owned by the Zeiss Trust at that time until it was sold to Rollei in the early 70's.
However, the "Ultron" was a design of the optical design agency of A.W. Tronnier, who at that time was still alive and acting. Later on his son (A. Tronnier jr.) took over the duties.
So as a matter of fact A.W. Tronnier has designed all the Ultrons for Voigtländer and as you might wish then later on under Zeiss ownership of Voigtländer indirectly for Zeiss. However, all was manufactured by Voigtländer in Braunschweig (also under Zeiss ownership and after change of ownership in the beginning also for Rollei in Braunschweig and later in Singapore - with different front lens).
Nevertheless the Ultron is till date a Voigtländer owned design. Zeiss named this 7 lens design for the later lenses as "Planar" instead, although it's a different design from the original Planar design from Zeiss from 1897 which was still a 6 lens design opposite to Tronnier's 7 lens design (also the Septon from Voigtländer falls into this "Ultron" category). Though, I don't want to argue about the Planar evolution of lenses of Zeiss, as I never looked into those details. Maybe some Zeiss fanboys have better insight in this subject.
Basically it's a development from Tronnier originally for the Schneider/Kreuznach Xenon lens from 1925 (double gauss type) and when Tronnier changed to Voigtländer the Ultron 50/2 was invented as an evolution of the Xenon concept.
That's more or less the whole story. So Zeiss had very little to do with it except that this group of companies (Zeiss, Voigtländer, Deckel) was owned by the Zeiss Trust/Oberkochen in the 1960's and the Voigtländer Icarex was marked as "Zeiss Ikon Voigtländer" in the beginning and later on only as "Zeiss Icon". Only the 25mm lens for this camera system came from Zeiss, as Voigtländer had nothing comparable at this time. Consequently the lenses for the Icarex have been marked as "Zeiss" instead of "Voigtländer".

So the statement that the Ultron was a "new design of Zeiss" is unfortunately not correct, at least my sources are telling something different and are referring to A.W. Tronnier's agency.
BTW, according A. Tronnier jr. the tested resolution of this lens was at 380 lines per mm which at that time was more than 1st class (1969) and better than any other tested lens, even any other real Zeiss lens.

P.S.: Voigtländer/Tronnier used already in the 50's "ZUSE" computers to calculate lenses, though I don't know whether Voigtländer owned them; most probably not.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2015 4:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb_a wrote:
papasito wrote:

And the Ultron/icarex was a New design of zeiss, who had the computarse to design lenses. Voigtlander hadn't them. made in the ex-voigtlander factory (from 1965 member of zeiss group).


Nitpicker's delight!

However, if you really want to split some hairs, then I also have to correct you.

The Icarex line of camera and lenses have been designed and made by Voigtländer, who was owned by the Zeiss Trust at that time until it was sold to Rollei in the early 70's.
However, the "Ultron" was a design of the optical design agency of A.W. Tronnier, who at that time was still alive and acting. Later on his son (A. Tronnier jr.) took over the duties.
So as a matter of fact A.W. Tronnier has designed all the Ultrons for Voigtländer and as you might wish then later on under Zeiss ownership of Voigtländer indirectly for Zeiss. However, all was manufactured by Voigtländer in Braunschweig (also under Zeiss ownership and after change of ownership in the beginning also for Rollei in Braunschweig and later in Singapore - with different front lens).
Nevertheless the Ultron is till date a Voigtländer owned design. Zeiss named this 7 lens design for the later lenses as "Planar" instead, although it's a different design from the original Planar design from Zeiss from 1897 which was still a 6 lens design opposite to Tronnier's 7 lens design (also the Septon from Voigtländer falls into this "Ultron" category). Though, I don't want to argue about the Planar evolution of lenses of Zeiss, as I never looked into those details. Maybe some Zeiss fanboys have better insight in this subject.
Basically it's a development from Tronnier originally for the Schneider/Kreuznach Xenon lens from 1925 (double gauss type) and when Tronnier changed to Voigtländer the Ultron 50/2 was invented as an evolution of the Xenon concept.
That's more or less the whole story. So Zeiss had very little to do with it except that this group of companies (Zeiss, Voigtländer, Deckel) was owned by the Zeiss Trust/Oberkochen in the 1960's and the Voigtländer Icarex was marked as "Zeiss Ikon Voigtländer" in the beginning and later on only as "Zeiss Icon". Only the 25mm lens for this camera system came from Zeiss, as Voigtländer had nothing comparable at this time. Consequently the lenses for the Icarex have been marked as "Zeiss" instead of "Voigtländer".

So the statement that the Ultron was a "new design of Zeiss" is unfortunately not correct, at least my sources are telling something different and are referring to A.W. Tronnier's agency.
BTW, according A. Tronnier jr. the tested resolution of this lens was at 380 lines per mm which at that time was more than 1st class (1969) and better than any other tested lens, even any other real Zeiss lens.

P.S.: Voigtländer/Tronnier used already in the 50's "ZUSE" computers to calculate lenses, though I don't know whether Voigtländer owned them; most probably not.


Besides some others, I'd rather only correct the obvious mistake: it was NOT 380 linepairs per millimeter, it was lines per millimeter i.e. 190lppm


PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2015 5:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kds315* wrote:
tb_a wrote:

BTW, according A. Tronnier jr. the tested resolution of this lens was at 380 lines per mm which at that time was more than 1st class (1969) and better than any other tested lens, even any other real Zeiss lens.


Besides some others, I'd rather only correct the obvious mistake: it was NOT 380 linepairs per millimeter, it was lines per millimeter i.e. 190lppm


Where did I state something about 380 linepairs?

However, If you doubt my statements then rather discuss that further with:

1. Frank Mechelhoff from klassik-cameras.de, and
2. Claus Prochnow, the author of "Voigtländer Report 2: Spiegelreflex- und Stereokameras 1902-1982"

That shouldn't be a problem for you in terms of language concerned.

I for sure wasn't there personally during this "legendary" times, at no time whatsoever and I didn't ever speak to Mr. Tronnier sen. or jun. personally.

I simply did some shortening and translation work for the community here.


PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2015 8:28 pm    Post subject: question Reply with quote
first very wonderful photos well done . I was wondering if you would not mind my asking. could you tell me if the sony AR 7 II is it possible. to tether this camera directly to a computer and use your mouse to take pictures. like one can with the canon and Nikon. here I have not been able to find one of these camera to look it over and see how it works. I have a Nikon d7100 and canon t1i. they are both able to tether. thank you


PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2015 10:12 pm    Post subject: Re: question Reply with quote
rockycarter wrote:
first very wonderful photos well done . I was wondering if you would not mind my asking. could you tell me if the sony AR 7 II is it possible. to tether this camera directly to a computer and use your mouse to take pictures. like one can with the canon and Nikon. here I have not been able to find one of these camera to look it over and see how it works. I have a Nikon d7100 and canon t1i. they are both able to tether. thank you


Mr. google's first line answer to your question: http://briansmith.com/how-to-tether-sony-a7-a7r-a7s/

In other words: YES


PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2015 10:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
tb-a thank you very much for your help. I am going to think about buying this camera. I like the images. I like that one has a lot of room to be able to mount other lens plus the older lens. the registry distance on the canon and Nikon. limit the infinity focus on some of the older lens. again thank you


PostPosted: Fri Aug 21, 2015 11:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
rockycarter wrote:
I like that one has a lot of room to be able to mount other lens plus the older lens. the registry distance on the canon and Nikon. limit the infinity focus on some of the older lens.


But you should also be aware that the bigger sensor of the A7 series is more demanding on the lenses side and that there are certain limitations when using RF lenses, especially wide angles.
In other words: If the registry distance is your main argument, then you still have some alternatives available which are not bad either and are probably less critical on the lenses side (APS-C or MFT) as on the smaller sensor formats mainly the best part (center) of the older lens is used (besides other format based differences).
Therefore for me it still makes sense to have different formats available (MFT, APS-C and FF) for the use of my old MF lenses as well and I wouldn't rate the biggest sensor format always as the best. Sometimes it may be exactly the opposite.

Just my 2 cents.


PostPosted: Sun Aug 23, 2015 2:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
jamaeolus sorry not trying to take your thread in a different direction. wonderful photos. tb-a thank you I understand what you are saying. yes I agree and I know what you mean. I have done a lot of reading on the sony ar7 and find it to be a very good camera. I like the image quality. I find that it works well with other lens and I hope it might be a little more user friendly. I am new to using DSLR camera and it was quit the learning curve. I still don't know that much about them. but I am learning thank you sorry jamaeolus. hope you don't mind just looking for help. it great the way you member help one another. thank you


PostPosted: Tue Aug 25, 2015 3:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yes, sorry so late back to the party. No its not Jena. as pointed out its the West German Carl Zeiss. I probably did miss focus, or was moving enough that it it was beyond the capabilities of the OSS. It was a challenging spot to shoot, leaning out over the pond and I could not get a better vantage point. I will try again on a more suitable subject. The colors of the lily are what attracted me.


PostPosted: Tue Aug 25, 2015 3:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Rocky, Thomas no I don't mind at all, I too am learning and I do have to agree with Thomas regarding format. It greatly depends on what you intend to do with the photos as far as format size goes. For most things APS-C is more than big enough, eg a screensaver on a typical 15 inch monitor. If you plan to crop out pieces or enlarge of course bigger is better. Some of my favorite photos were taken with a 5MP pentax Optio S50 point and shoot which must have a pretty small sensor as the zoom lens is about the diameter of he old 35mm film cartridges and the whole camera is about the size of a pack of cigarettes.
Seattle skyline with Optio S50 straight from camera resize only for download to this site.


PostPosted: Tue Aug 25, 2015 7:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
thank you jamaeolus . great photo, I like to know your thoughts on the sony a7 II. how do you find that works and does it do what you thought it would. I like to know is it a hard camera to set or can one just mount a lens turn it on and its ready to go. what I am finding here is I believe is there are a lot of great photographers. see coin photography is a lot more difficult than most think see some of the coins are like mirrors. while other with low lustre are very easy some can really put a person to the test. one of the really good coin photographer on the other forum tried a sony a7r. lets say that image is off the scale. totally excellent. but he is really excellent photographer of coins. I can tell you given time these guys will put the sony to the test . I would like to purchase a camera in the future. that may be a little more user friendly. I was hope that would be what the sony would work like. any help from you would be greatly appreciated. thank you
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1