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

Which Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 300 f/4 is the better?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 4:43 am    Post subject: Which Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 300 f/4 is the better? Reply with quote
The 300mm Olympic?

The 300mm Zebra?

The 300mm Red MC?


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 4:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The one you can actually find at an affordable price...


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 5:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
The one you can actually find at an affordable price...


I really need to know. I have the Olympic and the MC is on it's way to me but I don't want to have to buy the Zebra to decide if it or the other 2 are the one I need to keep.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 6:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Wow, I would kill for any of the three...

Guess I'll have to be happy with my Tair-3


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 6:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I don't think there will be huge difference. I own Olympic version and is very sharp, even sharper than my Sigma APO 4/300. But shows lot of CA as all non-APO tele-lenses.
The MC version will be probably comparable to Olympic version, but it can be lighter.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 8:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
For all long teles, multicoated is always better.
Even with a hood, the large front glass is likely to cause loss of contrast at best (if not flares).
_


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 8:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have all three. I had two or three MC one, zebra and one Olympic.


One or two MC was nothing special, good avarage 300mm lens, like Nikon or Takumar 300mm. None of them was better than other non MC version.

Current one is better than zebra or Olympic.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 1:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Good. I'll not test the waters with a Zebra. When the 300 MC P6 gets here I'll post the comparison. Wish I had known that Orio was selling some lenses...The 80mm Pancolar was on the wish list. Too low on funds right now to buy it.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 2:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
As a general guideline, the larger the front glass, the more multicoating is likely to be needed.
Of course a lot also depends on the internal design of the lens... there are lenses designed so badly that flare like hell even with a small front glass.
But in general, whenever there is a large front glass, the difference between single and multi coated is likely to appear more evident than in a small lens.
For instance, I have had several copies of small Tessar 2.8/50 aluminium, some single coated some multi coated, but I was never able to notice any real difference in the images.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 2:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I've got the MC version and it is very sharp indeed at f4. It's got the usual slight magenta/green CA issue that all the Sonnars have. It is extremely heavy, of course, which is rather limiting.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 2:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I wish I could try one, but they're beyond my self imposed price limit. Dawg, you had the Meyer too; are they noticeably sharper? Is the diaphragm as many blades?


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 3:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:
As a general guideline, the larger the front glass, the more multicoating is likely to be needed.
Of course a lot also depends on the internal design of the lens... there are lenses designed so badly that flare like hell even with a small front glass.
But in general, whenever there is a large front glass, the difference between single and multi coated is likely to appear more evident than in a small lens.
For instance, I have had several copies of small Tessar 2.8/50 aluminium, some single coated some multi coated, but I was never able to notice any real difference in the images.


Thank you Orio. The Olympic doesn't have a lens shade but the P6 mount MC has a deep lens shade. Another reason to keep it. I'll know more when it gets here.

Last edited by Big Dawg on Wed Jun 01, 2011 3:48 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 3:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
PaulC wrote:
I've got the MC version and it is very sharp indeed at f4. It's got the usual slight magenta/green CA issue that all the Sonnars have. It is extremely heavy, of course, which is rather limiting.


I have the Bigma as well as the Olympic 300 f/4 and the P6 mount 180 f/2.8. All large and to some heavy. I can shoot hand held with one hand with no problems with all of them. Not that that is how I normally shoot but just to explain that weight is a non-issue for me. I like large heavy lenses. The CA is not an issue either...I've shot for years with Vivitars and they are very bad sometimes with the CA. That can be cleaned up with PP but it also is a matter of how you compose with the available light. So far the Olympic is not showing a lot of CA and is a surprise to me. Of course all lenses have some...it is more a matter of degree of CA and the Viv's had much more.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 3:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
woodrim wrote:
I wish I could try one, but they're beyond my self imposed price limit. Dawg, you had the Meyer too; are they noticeably sharper? Is the diaphragm as many blades?


The Olympic has 18 blades if my counting was correct. They also have some very very minor damage but nothing that keeps them from working properly. Very small bumps on the edges of 2 blades. It and the Meyer are about the same weight but the Olympic Sonnar is better balanced. Not as front end heavy. As for sharpness the Olympic Sonnar is sharper once you step it to F/5.6 and higher. Noticeably Sharper. Shows up in the Crops. They are about the same at f/4 but the Zeiss has better contrast. I'll know more about the 300mm f/4 MC Sonnar once it arrives. The Meyer's blades are more impressive as they are closer to the big end and thus larger in diameter.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 4:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The CA is really very slight, but I'm a bit of a pixel-peeper. Sounds like the Olympic is the same.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 4:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
PaulC wrote:
The CA is really very slight, but I'm a bit of a pixel-peeper. Sounds like the Olympic is the same.


Thanks Paul. I'm not much of a pixel peeper as most folks wouldn't know CA if it bit them!! LOL I shoot mostly for myself and my family and a little CA doesn't bother me or them. Saying that...I like them if less CA is there than if more is there. The Olympic so far show some blue-green but is not objectionable to me. And for Gosh Sakes keep peeking at mine!! LOL You would see it where I wouldn't. That way I'll get better at PP as well as at composing.LOL

About on average with most cheaper 300mm. The Vivitars have that Green Glow as well.

Last edited by Big Dawg on Wed Jun 01, 2011 4:15 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 4:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hope you don't mind this slightly off-topic post but I'd love to hear your thoughts on the subject...

I have a Promura 5/300 I got cheap, big heavy thing but the CA is terrible, not used it after these initial test shots as they looked so bad:




I have a Tair-3C 300mm that has very little CA and is very sharp:




Just got a mint Dufay 5.6/300 that seems to be not great, infinity is way off, seems to be in focus at infinity when the lens is set to about 50m, not tested it thoroughly yet but it is very light and might have it's uses:



Anyways, what I want to ask is how good are the 300 Sonnars? Are they a lot better than other 300s? Have you ever used a Tair-3 to be able to compare as a frame of reference I might understand?

About CA, is that Promura example I showed severe compared to most cheap 300s or to be expected with them?


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 4:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have tair-3 too sniper version and non sniper version too. I think Tair are good as than Sonnars. MC Sonnar has better contrast than Sniper Tair.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 4:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Attila wrote:
I have tair-3 too sniper version and non sniper version too. I think Tair are good as than Sonnars. MC Sonnar has better contrast than Sniper Tair.


Thankyou Attila. I love my Tair, just wish for a lighter 300 for those days I don't feel like carrying the Tair around. I realise the Sonnar isn't any lighter, I just wondered how the Tair compared in quality.

I fancy a Canon FD 300 if I see one cheap...


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 4:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Attila wrote:
I have tair-3 too sniper version and non sniper version too. I think Tair are good as than Sonnars. MC Sonnar has better contrast than Sniper Tair.


Thankyou Attila. I love my Tair, just wish for a lighter 300 for those days I don't feel like carrying the Tair around. I realise the Sonnar isn't any lighter, I just wondered how the Tair compared in quality.

I fancy a Canon FD 300 if I see one cheap...


To me it looks about the same.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 4:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Hope you don't mind this slightly off-topic post but I'd love to hear your thoughts on the subject...

I have a Promura 5/300 I got cheap, big heavy thing but the CA is terrible, not used it after these initial test shots as they looked so bad:




I have a Tair-3C 300mm that has very little CA and is very sharp:




Just got a mint Dufay 5.6/300 that seems to be not great, infinity is way off, seems to be in focus at infinity when the lens is set to about 50m, not tested it thoroughly yet but it is very light and might have it's uses:



Anyways, what I want to ask is how good are the 300 Sonnars? Are they a lot better than other 300s? Have you ever used a Tair-3 to be able to compare as a frame of reference I might understand?

About CA, is that Promura example I showed severe compared to most cheap 300s or to be expected with them?


The Cheaper 300's all have that kind of CA. The Vivitars have the Same Green Glow to them.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 4:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Depend from you mount capability , Konica 300mm f4.5 is a one of the lighter and best solution. Stunning lens for affordable price.

SMC Takumar 300 f4, Nikon 300mm f4.5 , Olympus OM 300mm f4.5 all are excellent lenses and light weight. I guess Minolta MD 300, Canon FD 300 just same.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 4:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks for the CA info Big Dawg, I would learn how to correct it in PP to be able to use the Promura but it's not sharp at all so I just wrote it off as a paperweight.

Thanks for the tips Attila, I will keep my eye out for those lenses, I don't mind doing some modification to use them on my EOS.

This is why I haven't used the Promura, the initial tests were so lacking in sharpness and badly fringed:













P.S. Sorry for broadening the discussion to 300mm lenses in general, but when such experienced chaps as Big Daw and Atilla are here to question, I have to ask! Besides, I will maybe never own a 300 Sonnar so it is good to ask those who are lucky enough to have them what us poor people are missing out on!


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 4:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Konica is unusable on EOS even with mount modification. Nikon oldest NON-AI frequently going for little money look for that.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 01, 2011 4:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Attila wrote:
Konica is unusable on EOS even with mount modification. Nikon oldest NON-AI frequently going for little money look for that.


Thanks, good tip on the Konica, I will keep my eyes out for a Nikon, I have a Nikon-EOS adapter but don't own any Nikon lenses!
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2