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

Q1 in CZJ
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 6:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

no-X wrote:
Isn't it the pancake pancolar?


I would not say pancake :



PostPosted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 7:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, not entirely pancake, but MUCH slimmer, that this version:

http://img3.abload.de/img/ajp5018_9222150_30fj3.jpg

This lens must use different optical scheme. Thoriated element(s) make the lens slimmer...


PostPosted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 7:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CarbonR wrote:
My ausJena Pancolar 50/1.8 has the 1 in triangle :



My Aus Jena has the same triangle. A Carl Zeiss Jena Pancolar 1.8/50 with a higher serial number does not have this mark. Both have yellowed elements.


PostPosted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 7:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

no-X wrote:
Yes, not entirely pancake, but MUCH slimmer, that this version:

http://img3.abload.de/img/ajp5018_9222150_30fj3.jpg

This lens must use different optical scheme. Thoriated element(s) make the lens slimmer...


Are you sure these are thoriated lenses ? Someone said to me that is the glue that sticks two elements together (I don't know the english word, he said "Baume du Canada") that has turned yellow..


PostPosted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 7:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Till I know, all the 50/1,8 panks are six elements in five groups (2-3). Perhaps the large version (equal to the black MC) had the body of the lens larger, as with lens hood incorporated.

If you look the larger version the optic elements is far into the body.

I have 2 panks. Both MC. One aus Jena. This were yellowish when I bought it. I put at my windows and not yellowish any more.

Rino.


PostPosted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 9:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CarbonR: I'm not sure, but some members said it.

The yellowish cast on all thoriated lenses doesn't come from the glass itself, but the radiation accelerates aging of canada balsam, which will became yellow. Canada balsam can get yellow just by the age, but it doesn't make sense that it will get eyellow due its age only in one version of zebra pancolar and other lenses (later zebra, flektogons, biotars, tessars...) are OK.

So I expect it should have some reason.

Another possibility could be the coating. 55/1.4 has coating, which adds yellow tint, too. The lens is thoriated, but you never remove the yellow tint completely, because part of it is caused by the coating layers. Isn't possible, that Zeiss used the same coating even for the slim 50/1.8 zebra?


PostPosted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 9:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mine is like this :







I already had the pics posted, because I'm selling it. On a big french forum, I heard that it was canada basalm (I think its the word that missed to me) who had turned yellow, but no thorium in lenses, only in the 55/1.4, and here I hear that there is thorium Laughing I should ask in my phisical (or in the chemical) department, if we have a device who can check radioactivity, I'd test this lens and my thoriated Takumars Razz


PostPosted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 9:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's a great lens. Sure you will sell it quickly.

Good luck. Rino.


PostPosted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 9:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have two 1.4 all are yellows and not impact picture quality at all. I didn't see yet 1.8 what is yellowing.


PostPosted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 9:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CarbonR: The yellow thing is allways the canada balsam (not the glass). But there are two causes of yellowing: aging or radioactivity (coming from thoriated glass). If you take e.g. SMC Takumar 50/1.4 to special optical service, which is able to exchange the balsam, it will remove the color cast too (it's only more expensive than the lens).

I'm trying to indicate, that yellowing due to age would be quite strange, because there is a lot of other lenses of this age (or older) and not any single of them is as yellow, as these Pancolars.


PostPosted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 9:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

No-X

Why the yellowish gone when I directly exhibited the lens to rays of the sun by 2 or 3 days?

what assumption it enters, in the one of the radioactivity or in the one of the age?

Regards, Rino.


PostPosted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 9:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yellowed c.balsam can be bleached by UV independently of the cause of the yellowing (age or radioactivity).

The only thing we can reject is color cast of coating layers (which is not removable by UV rays)


PostPosted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 9:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

no-X wrote:
Yellowed c.balsam can be bleached by UV independently of the cause of the yellowing (age or radioactivity).

The only thing we can reject is color cast of coating layers (which is not removable by UV rays)


Very clear. Thanks No-X

Rino


PostPosted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 10:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is here anybody who could approve, that 55/1.4 Pancolar is yellow also due to the coating layers? Because that would mean, that the lens was yellow even as new and that it was unusable for color photography...


PostPosted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 10:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am using this lens my best 1.4 lens yellow and it has no trouble at all with colors.

None of the lenses was designed for B&W even oldest ones used yellow filter instead of yellow glasses.
http://www.mflenses.com/gallery/v/german/zeiss/pancolar_001/carl_zeiss_jena_pancolar_55mm_f1_4/
http://www.mflenses.com/gallery/v/german/zeiss/pancolar_001/pancolar_50mm_f1_4_zebra/


PostPosted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 10:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Digital camera can compensate the cast, but it must have very strong impact on color film...


PostPosted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 10:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

no-X wrote:
Digital camera can compensate the cast, but it must have very strong impact on color film...

Don't know I don't think so they made an expensive pro camera with b&w lens only and they never made any others on this way.


PostPosted: Sat Feb 07, 2009 12:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attila wrote:
I am using this lens my best 1.4 lens yellow and it has no trouble at all with colors.

None of the lenses was designed for B&W even oldest ones used yellow filter instead of yellow glasses.
http://www.mflenses.com/gallery/v/german/zeiss/pancolar_001/carl_zeiss_jena_pancolar_55mm_f1_4/
http://www.mflenses.com/gallery/v/german/zeiss/pancolar_001/pancolar_50mm_f1_4_zebra/


Great gallery show!

Both 55 are excelent quality. No color troubles.

Rino.


PostPosted: Sat Feb 07, 2009 12:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think same, great glass.


PostPosted: Sat Feb 07, 2009 3:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

no-X wrote:
We can make a poll now: Which Biotar would you choose: T without 1Q, or 1Q without T? Laughing


What about the Biotar with the "Q1" and red T?
Mines marked with both. Very Happy


PostPosted: Sat Feb 07, 2009 3:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I just found the 1Q symbol even on my Meyer Telefogar... so it's not only Zeiss related


PostPosted: Sat Feb 07, 2009 3:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is the same 1Q ?


PostPosted: Sat Feb 07, 2009 3:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, only slightly bigger:



PostPosted: Sat Feb 07, 2009 4:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I see Shocked Shocked

Rino


PostPosted: Sat Feb 07, 2009 4:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's probably some kind of German equivalent to the Soviet CCCP quality mark.