Finally Domiplan 2.8/50, a lens with character

[alex ph]

As all humans know, every man once in his life should test Domiplan. I guess my turn came. I've stumbled upon it attached to an old GDR reflex camera, put in a box "all for 5 quids" exposed outside of a camera shop. Put on Sony Nex, then applied autocontrast.

#1 f5.6


#2 f5.6


#3 WO


#4 WO


#5 WO


#6 f5.6, simple colour desaturation


#7 WO, simple colour desaturation


Colour rendering by the lens is really attractive, almost schneideresque, after PP. In some cases Domiplan lets think of another triplet, Iscotar 2.8/50. Meanwhile Isco gives a lighter, bleachier picture. Domiplan renders colours of better consistance (and easier boosted). Yellow and blues do not lack purity. Simple colour desaturation gives nice tone. At f5.6 its rendering of building geometry is not the worst, wide open it generates a vintage feel thanks to sharpness faults, like some other triplets, kind of 50mm Trioplan in its BW version.

In general, I expected much of fuzzyness and glow wide open. There are some, but not at the level of my expectations. I know, that sounds a bit unconventional, but the lens has character.

[D1N0]

you're lucky the aperture still worked. Often gets stuck

[macheck]

You've got a good copy of the lens, very nice pictures, #3 is the one for me

[calvin83]

There are some 50mm triplets with good sharpness at F2.8.

[alex ph]

Thank you fellows! I was glad to get a nicely working copy. I imagine it could be even more precisely adjusted, like some soviet Jupiters. But without a bold practical knowledge that could be destructive for the lens.

Here is a couple more test shots, all with autocontrast applied.

#1 WO defocused


#2 The same at f5.6 in focus


#3 At f4


#4 WO

[alex ph]

I had a spontaneous allusion of the Domiplan rendering to a projection triplet Rollei Heidosmat 2.8/85. Went to look at Heidosmat shots and acknowledged they are sharper WO. Here is a couple of shots, while the full series may be found here.





The colours is a different story, as I remember to boost more Heidosmat contrast and saturation, as compared to those by Domiplan.

[KEO]

The Domiplan is a super soap bubble highlight maker too, if you're in to that sort of thing.

[alex ph]

I am not too much into bubbles, giving preference to various urban captures. But this makes me curious, I'll try to get some later on. Thanks for the suggestion.

[D1N0]

Under de right conditions they can be pretty defined (Backlit through foliage)
Bokehplan by The lens profile, on Flickr

[alex ph]

Your sample clearly hits the bubbles target.

[alex ph]

I've got a half dozen of low end enlarger triplets and among them there was a pretty unexpected combination. The previous owner used Domiplan as enlarger lens. That is a triplet aficionado!

#1


#2

[kypfer]

Nice pix
I've got three Domiplans, one in M42 and two (slightly different) examples in Exakta mount.
I tried the M42 lens on an APS-C DSLR a few years ago and wasn't excited … nothing wrong with it, but nothing special, … however, the Exakta-mount examples, used on b&w film, are quite nice … I really need to spend some more time with them

[philslizzy]

I got one attached to a nice, working Praktica Nova 1B that I got for free. Presently it's airing, previous owner with plug in 'air fresheners' and a hairy dog. Both of which I'm highly allergic to.

[kypfer]

From a couple of weeks ago … one of my Exakta-fit Domiplans on my Samsung NX11

[simple.joy]

[kypfer]

[alex ph]

Very attractive and finely elaborated pictures, simple.joy, as usual!

As long as I have now two copies of Domiplan in my hands, I decided to compare them. Put both Sony Nex, no PP.

I found out that the difference is both in edge performance (keep in mind that I used an APS-C, so the FF difference should be even more pronounced) and in contrast.

To make it simple, I noted "clean" my first lens from this post (which some of you qualified as a good copy), and the second came from an enlarger as "fungused" because of fungus filaments on the lens' edges. Still it does not mean the main factor making the performance differ. I don't think this is crucial. This just lets distinguish them.

Click on the image to see it at 100% zoom



I started from infinity test and found out that the Domiplan which was attached to an enlarger was really weak WO. Then I was especially intrigued to see if it performed much better at MFD. No, it smears quite hard the image out of the center, especially in the left part. And even at F5.6 this distortion is kept, as you see in the test shots. It has also more glow than the first, better copy.

Finally the difference between the two copies is clearly visible but not that crucial, and both improve considerably at f5.6. Besides, both gain much from autocontrast applied (not seen in this bunch which was not PP), just as the first pictures shown in this thread.

[Jozef_AV]

This is a triplet i was avoiding for a while, mostly due to bad reviews all over.
Finally got one...and I like it.
It does bubbles and is quite decent at close up distance ( factory MFD of only 0,75m sucks, have to use focusing helicoid or a small extension tube )

#1


#2


#3

[alex ph]

Nice shots that show well the capacity of the lens!