Pentacon Prakticar 2.8 28

pandreas68 · Joined: 24 Jan 2020 Posts: 96

Hi,

I saw here already many posts about the Lydith respectively Pentacon 3.5 30 lens.

I did not see posts about the Pentacon Prakticar 2.8 28. Though it is seemingly derived from the Pentacon 2.8 29 it is another class of quality and maybe a little overlooked. It is a little flare prone (different to the 3.5 30) but otherwise quite good with only very mild distortion (all pictures taken at approx aperture 4):

#1

#2

#3

#4

Maybe I once find the time to do a direct comparision to the Lydith. Best regards, Andreas

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

I agree that the 28 is a whole level above the 29, which I always thought was a quite poor lens.

stevemark · Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 4087 Location: Switzerland

kiddo · Joined: 29 Jun 2018 Posts: 1275

What you guys are calling poor,might be considered character by others lol.
There's a preset early soligor wich is worse than the 29 pentacon lol, definitely none of them would fit to compare distagon ,nFD etc 28mm
I wonder if the real intention of lens result it was what maker looked after when he built it,because at that time ,there were much better lenses with overall good image quality (corner sharpness and not only). Now the difference of the soligor and this pentacon 29 is ,there were many years between them,so could it be bad QC or just using leftover glass from other lens that wouldn't fit for best quality ?

alex ph · Joined: 16 Mar 2013 Posts: 1674

Pentacon (Orestegon) 2.8/29 does not come out to be that bad. Here is a very nice series by a forum member which confirms my own experience. Giving a "vintage" feel, the 29 lens is pretty sharp and colourful.

#1

#2

pandreas68 · Joined: 24 Jan 2020 Posts: 96

Hi, my intention was not to make the 29 bad for those who like it. Indeed I use Pentax 110 lenses, including the 2.8 18, and its quality / characteristics is more like the 29 as the 28, though a much younger lens design, but of course not compareable due to intended film format and so on.

My message was more intended to encourage to use the 28 if one has it and maybe just to think on the flare issue or to take a piece of black paper with one or to invest in a cheap Chinese sun shade which in Germany are sold for some 8 Euro in Amazon and good for lenses down to 24mm. And of course to share some pictures, so that there its not just me to show pictures from the Prakticar 2.8 28.

The Prakticar 2.8 28 is the only Meyer/Pentacon lens I personally know and use but based on its rendering (at least so far) I would not say that it is Meyer but CZJ. There are others from them which I like very much for their combination of quality, characteristics and handling, which clearly behave as Meyer; to these I count the Lydith 3.5/30 and the Pentacon auto 4/200.

Best regards
Andreas

PS: Quality and characteristics of course can be seen especially at open aperture. At aperture 8 and 11 I'd expect all wide angles just being sharp without bubbles etc...

Pancolart · Expire: 2013-11-18

Some samples and other topic related info here: http://forum.mflenses.com/contax-distagon-2-8-28-vs-jena-2-8-28-t46845,start,15.html

D1N0 · Joined: 07 Aug 2012 Posts: 2537

Judging by the rendering this is a german made one related to the 29/2.8 and not a rebranded Sigma mini-wide.

pandreas68 · Joined: 24 Jan 2020 Posts: 96

Thanks for this link to the other thread. The name of the thread is a little missleading since the 28 was not made by Carl Zeiss Jena but from Pentacon as the 29; the differences are shown by Koji:

pandreas68 · Joined: 24 Jan 2020 Posts: 96

Here a first comparision of the Prakticar 2.8 28 and the 3.5 30 (Lydith) This is the only subject where I changed my point of view in order to take acount of the difference in focal length. All pictures are 10MPx as they come out of the camera. All pictures are taken without tripod.

3.5/28

3.5/30

4/28

4/30

5.6/28

5.6/30

8/28

8/30

11/28

11/30

16/28

16/30

What to learn from this comparision? The 28 has a higher over all initial sharpness than the 30. After 5.6 the difference in sharpness is not relevant anymore. Focussing with the 28 is easier and quicker due to the initial aperture of 2.8. Both have a barrel distortion, only mild for the 28 but quite visible for the 30. I needed to stand back several steps for the pictures with the 30; space maybe just missing. The difference in focal length is quite considerable.

In total for architecture I'd regard the Prakticar 2.8 28 as the better lens.

pandreas68 · Joined: 24 Jan 2020 Posts: 96

Here another subject for comparision; let's call it the "vacation case". Unfortuantely I did not take care for the different focal lengths. The point of view was chosen with the 30 and is somehow not optimal for the 28. One thing I did not notice was that due to higher amount of darkness for the 28 the house is overexposed there. Pictures again with 10MPx as they came out of the camera. Further obviously I have different points of focus. The focus should be in the middle of the bridge but for the 28 it is more at its beginning.

3.5/28

3.5/30

4/28

4/30

5.6/28

5.6/30

8/28

8/30

11/28

11/30

16/28

16/30

For the vacation picture case I'd say that both are more or less identical.

pandreas68 · Joined: 24 Jan 2020 Posts: 96

Here the comparision for a detail of an old Francis turbine. The difference in focal length is a little taken into acount.

3.5/28

3.5/30

4/28

4/30

5.6/28

5.6/30

8/28

8/30

11/28

11/30

16/28

16/30

What to learn? Again the impression for both lenses for me is more or less the same. If zooming into details then one may notice that the 30 tends to create more bubbles than the 28 in the oof areas. When looking to the picture as a whole however I wan't notice this. Also the better initial (corner) sharpness of the 28 is here not visible for me. Also when looking into details at the right side it is not visible. Beside different point of focus an explanation may also be that the 28 looses its high sharpness outside of the centre for close distances.

pandreas68 · Joined: 24 Jan 2020 Posts: 96

Now a comparision with direct sun.

3.5/28

3.5/30

4/28

4/30

5.6/28

5.6/30

8/28

8/30

11/28

11/30

16/28

16/30

Direct sun and strong contrast like trees against blue heaven is clearly the field of the 3.5 30 Lydith. This it handles in a quite good way with a certain character which I like. By the way similarily the Pentacon Auto 200. Here the Prakticar 2.8 28 is always behind for my taste.

The Lydith also behaves better when there is sun from the side leading to flare. Sunshades of course may level this out.

pandreas68 · Joined: 24 Jan 2020 Posts: 96

What to learn in total from this comparision?

In many cases both lenses may lead to quite similar results.

For architecture the 2.8 28 has the advantage of lower distortion and lower focal length which may be decisive.

For pictures involving direct sun or high contrast the Lydith for my taste behaves better by leading to a visibly higher contrast.

Both lenses are quite cheap. Even for pupils it should be no big problem to give both of them a try. With which to start may be the question of the used camera system and personal preferences.

alex ph · Joined: 16 Mar 2013 Posts: 1674

alex ph · Joined: 16 Mar 2013 Posts: 1674

Andreas, your nice illustration of the 2.8/28 Prakticar lens left me intrigued. I recently got a good looking copy for a modest price. Tested it and confirm the pleasure of the use and the image quality. It is certainly a great lens to be better explored. And, my dear, I almost forgot how wide a 28mm renders on FF! That is a nice feeling.

A couple of quick samples on Sony A7, first WO, then at f5.6, with minimal exposure / contrast tweaks.

#1 Near infinity

#2

#3 Near MFD

#4

#5 MFD

alex_d · Joined: 19 Jan 2019 Posts: 424

you should give a bit more water to that basil Alex ... and also use it more often Smile

I have only good experience with Meyers and Pentacons on crop sensor.

alex ph · Joined: 16 Mar 2013 Posts: 1674