View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
pavko
Joined: 31 Jan 2011 Posts: 216 Location: PL
|
Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 11:21 pm Post subject: MC Pentacon 50/2.4 |
|
|
pavko wrote:
Is there anybody with this lens and some mirrorless camera and could post some samples and 1:1 crops? I find it crap and I'm wondering whether my copy is lemon (although it looked mint) or it's just "character" of that lens. I will not post anything now as I doubt it would be objective. What is puzzling me more is that I have not seen any samples on the net - either no interest in so "slow" lens or big disappointment. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Nordentro
Joined: 24 Jun 2010 Posts: 4713 Location: Lillehammer, Norway
Expire: 2015-01-29
|
Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 11:29 pm Post subject: Re: MC Pentacon 50/2.4 |
|
|
Nordentro wrote:
pavko wrote: |
Is there anybody with this lens and some mirrorless camera and could post some samples and 1:1 crops? I find it crap and I'm wondering whether my copy is lemon (although it looked mint) or it's just "character" of that lens. I will not post anything now as I doubt it would be objective. What is puzzling me more is that I have not seen any samples on the net - either no interest in so "slow" lens or big disappointment. |
Well, there are many interesting "slow" lenses that have been discussed (even 50mm f/4), so I´m thinking that this lens could be one of the "not so common" ones?!?
I´m not familiar with that lens do _________________ Lars | Manuellfokus.no |
|
Back to top |
|
|
skida
Joined: 02 Mar 2012 Posts: 1826 Location: North East England
|
Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 11:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
skida wrote:
I did a search in Flickr and there were only two users with example shots. They weren't great but it may have been down to the users rather than the lens. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57865 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2012 11:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
This lens possible comes from different makers, if you see Made in DDR label on it , that is fine lens, if no label , means made in Japan and probably crap _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 12:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I have this lens, it is a good one.
I don't think the ones without the label are Japanese, they are probably made by IOR in Romania, I would expect those ones are not as good.
I will take mine out and make some samples on NEX, I shot film with it and it is a good lens, not sure if I have samples on the NEX but I will make some. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 12:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Just checked my copy and it doesn't say made in Germany unlike my other Pentacon PB lenses.
Tomorrow we'l see what it is like on NEX. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Minolfan
Joined: 30 Dec 2008 Posts: 3438 Location: Netherlands
|
Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 12:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Minolfan wrote:
I remember me rumors that this lens, if not made in GDR, might be produced in Romania, not in Japan?
I have one, no inscription GDR.
No samples digital available, sorry, don't have a Nex.
Have a look for the pictures of the real specialist: http://www.pbase.com/kkawakami/prakticar_50mm_f24_pancake
I presume member Koji can tell you more!
Last edited by Minolfan on Thu Jun 28, 2012 12:11 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 12:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Yes, many sources state this rumour that this lens was made by IOR in Romania. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 12:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
The maker per se does not make any difference, especially in a 50mm lens
My Rollei Planar 1.8/50 (Glatzel designed) made in Singhapour performs the same as my Zeiss made and labeled German copy.
(the barrel is better quality in the Zeiss copy but that does not influence the image)
The fact is that the 50mm lenses of average speed do not require special glass like for instance super wide lenses
The optical scheme is simple, the average speed does not ask for stellar performance and special correction
as long as the coating is of similar quality (such as Zeiss T* and Rollei's HFT), there is really nothing that can
make a difference in the performance of a 50mm lens.
In fact I have seen countless 50mm comparison tests where to spot differences between lenses was nearly impossible
Often I am asked by people something like "I own a Takumar 50mm lens, should I buy a Nikkor (Planar, Olympus) also?"
I always reply that if you have spare money that you don't need, why not - otherwise, the money is better spent in something
that can make a real difference, because between 50mm lenses of comparable speed, differences are very small if any. _________________ Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Nordentro
Joined: 24 Jun 2010 Posts: 4713 Location: Lillehammer, Norway
Expire: 2015-01-29
|
Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 12:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nordentro wrote:
So a Domiplan and a Planar would have pretty much the same outcome on f/2.8?!? _________________ Lars | Manuellfokus.no |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Orio
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 29545 Location: West Emilia
Expire: 2012-12-04
|
Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 12:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Orio wrote:
Nordentro wrote: |
So a Domiplan and a Planar would have pretty much the same outcome on f/2.8?!? |
I said 50mm lenses of average speed. I should have said "comparable" speed instead, it would have been clearer.
Planar is a f/1.8 at the slowest, Domiplan is a f/2.8 lens.
I mentioned the speed not casually: fast 50mm lenses (f/1.2 to f/1.8 ) are doppel Gauss design,
while slower 50mm lenses (f/2.8 or slower) are Tessar (4 elements) design or even Trioplan (3 elements) design,
as in the case of the Domiplan (which is a bare triplet). _________________ Orio, Administrator
T*
NE CEDE MALIS AUDENTIOR ITO
Ferrania film is reborn! http://www.filmferrania.it/
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 12:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I agree with Orio, the differences between different models of 50mm of the modern double-gauss/Planar design are small indeed.
I chose my 50mm lenses based on the character of their rendering, pretty impossible to chose them based on technical aspects as they are all good.
I don't know what formula the Pentacon 2.4/50 is, perhaps it is a double anastigmat like the old Meyer Primotar 3.5/50, or maybe it is a Tessar type?
I do have a couple of 1.8/50 PB Pentacons, those are very good lenses indeed, better than the Meyer Oreston/Pentacon 1.8/50 that came before it, optical formula is surely revised as the bokeh is different.
Tomorrow I will shoot my 2.4/50 on NEX, I am intrigued now to see what it is like, it did well on film last year when I shot it. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Nordentro
Joined: 24 Jun 2010 Posts: 4713 Location: Lillehammer, Norway
Expire: 2015-01-29
|
Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 12:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nordentro wrote:
Orio wrote: |
Nordentro wrote: |
So a Domiplan and a Planar would have pretty much the same outcome on f/2.8?!? |
I said 50mm lenses of average speed. I should have said "comparable" speed instead, it would have been clearer.
Planar is a f/1.8 at the slowest, Domiplan is a f/2.8 lens.
I mentioned the speed not casually: fast 50mm lenses (f/1.2 to f/1.8 ) are doppel Gauss design,
while slower 50mm lenses (f/2.8 or slower) are Tessar (4 elements) design or even Trioplan (3 elements) design,
as in the case of the Domiplan (which is a bare triplet). |
Yes, so can we say as a general rule that lenses with similar lens design (and similar coating) would perform equal or close to equal independent of brand? _________________ Lars | Manuellfokus.no |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 1:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Nordentro wrote: |
Yes, so can we say as a general rule that lenses with similar lens design (and similar coating) would perform equal or close to equal independent of brand? |
Construction plays a big part, how well put together they were. You can have the best design in the world and it be undermined by poor build quality. Look at the Helios 44, they should all be great, but they vary a lot, poorly motivated workers and slack QC are to blame. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Minolfan
Joined: 30 Dec 2008 Posts: 3438 Location: Netherlands
|
Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 6:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Minolfan wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote: |
I don't know what formula the Pentacon 2.4/50 is, perhaps it is a double anastigmat like the old Meyer Primotar 3.5/50, or maybe it is a Tessar type? |
According to what I found the Prakticar is at least interesting; elements 4/4, not a Tessar but an Ernostar build.
Koji's site:
http://www.pbase.com/kkawakami/image/126174492 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pancolart
Joined: 04 Feb 2008 Posts: 3703 Location: Slovenia, EU
Expire: 2013-11-18
|
Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 8:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Pancolart wrote:
I confirm fine results for Prakticar 2.4/50mm on 5DmkII. Unmodified sample could slightly touch mirror (or something) at infinity.
Regarding the difference between 50mm lenses: for someone that can notice that slight difference it means whole a great deal. I mean one can find his "photographic" pleasure exploring that tiny difference . _________________ ---------------------------------
The Peculiar Apparatus Of Victorian Steampunk Photography: 100+ Genuine Steampunk Camera Designs https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0B92829NS |
|
Back to top |
|
|
pavko
Joined: 31 Jan 2011 Posts: 216 Location: PL
|
Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 8:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
pavko wrote:
Mine is like the one on the left:
http://i.pbase.com/o3/62/611962/1/133193540.BDAyIpXo.D700_MP50ZF_YYZ7815.jpg
I wonder whether thy share totally the same optical design (as changes in barrel construction are clearly visible). Problem with mine is total lack of sharpness - even when stopped down. I did test twice focusing mostly on infinity shots as they show a lot about lens performance. Koji examples show totally different story - sharp subjects with smooth background, however they are in portrait to close-up range. I have to check that also. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 8:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Mine is the 1st version too and a quick test this morning shows it's not lacking in sharpness wide open. These shots are in bad light and heavy rain so not ideal, but even so, it's definitely a sharp lens.
Personally, I think that's a good performance in the conditions and wide open, definitely sharper then the EBC X-Fujinon 1.6/50 DM I shot a couple of days ago.
BTW, I tend to think that anyone who gets their pleasure from exploring minute differences in lenses isn't really a photographer, photography is about making pleasing images and as long as a lens is good enough then it's good enough and we should worry more about other aspects than the minutiae of lenses. Pixel peeping can be taken too far imho and one can lose sight of the bigger picture. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
pavko
Joined: 31 Jan 2011 Posts: 216 Location: PL
|
Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
pavko wrote:
Thank you for your effort and your pictures. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fuzzywuzzy
Joined: 18 Dec 2010 Posts: 1258 Location: Down East, Canada, eh?
Expire: 2013-11-30
|
Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 2:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
fuzzywuzzy wrote:
There isn't much online about this lens, so a couple more samples won't hurt. Exposure adjustment and slight sharpening, I didn't touch colors or contrast.
It's not a Tessar formula, but I think of it as having a similar role to a Tessar i.e. the bokeh can be ugly, but it's sharp with great colors.
Wide open, focus on the tip of the central flowers towards the bottom. I don't find the OOF areas appealing at all.
f/8 or so.
100% crop from above
It's such a cute, tiny little thing, if it could reach infinity on my Canon body I'd probably use it a fair bit. I was a bit bummed out that the film body it came with was unreliable, would have been a great lightweight and relatively compact walkabout set. _________________ I welcome C&C, editing my pics and reposting them on the forum is fine.
NEX-F3
~~~~~~~~~
CZJ Sonnar 135/4, Biotar 58/2, Pancolar 50/2, Tessar 50/2.8, Flek 35/2.8, Flek 25/4
Super Takumar 135/2.5, 135/3.5, 100/4 bellows, 50/1.4, 28/3.5
Helios 58/2, 3M-5A 500/8, Mir 20M
Vivitar Series 1 70-210 - - - - - - - - Nikkor 200/4
Rikenon 28/2.8 - - - - - - - - Zeiss 50/1.7 Planar
PB 50/2.4, 135/2.8
Yashica 50/1.9, 28/2.8, 135/2.8
Hexanon 28/3.5, 50/1.4 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
pavko
Joined: 31 Jan 2011 Posts: 216 Location: PL
|
Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
pavko wrote:
fuzzywuzzy wrote: |
There isn't much online about this lens, so a couple more samples won't hurt. Exposure adjustment and slight sharpening, I didn't touch colors or contrast.
|
Very nice samples and especially colors is what attracts me to them.
fuzzywuzzy wrote: |
It's such a cute, tiny little thing, if it could reach infinity on my Canon body I'd probably use it a fair bit.
|
It can. If you have same version as mine I will show you how to adjust infinity. I found out that during looking for the cause of my problems. It seems to be issue with centering of 2 middle elements caused by design flaw. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 12:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Hope you can fix it Pavko, if not, it's a common lens on ebay and cheap. The later version of the 1.8/50 in PB is not that much bigger BTW and a better lens imho. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
fuzzywuzzy
Joined: 18 Dec 2010 Posts: 1258 Location: Down East, Canada, eh?
Expire: 2013-11-30
|
Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
fuzzywuzzy wrote:
pavko wrote: |
fuzzywuzzy wrote: |
It's such a cute, tiny little thing, if it could reach infinity on my Canon body I'd probably use it a fair bit.
|
It can. If you have same version as mine I will show you how to adjust infinity. I found out that during looking for the cause of my problems. It seems to be issue with centering of 2 middle elements caused by design flaw. |
Intriguing, I would be interested, hopefully it's not too complicated _________________ I welcome C&C, editing my pics and reposting them on the forum is fine.
NEX-F3
~~~~~~~~~
CZJ Sonnar 135/4, Biotar 58/2, Pancolar 50/2, Tessar 50/2.8, Flek 35/2.8, Flek 25/4
Super Takumar 135/2.5, 135/3.5, 100/4 bellows, 50/1.4, 28/3.5
Helios 58/2, 3M-5A 500/8, Mir 20M
Vivitar Series 1 70-210 - - - - - - - - Nikkor 200/4
Rikenon 28/2.8 - - - - - - - - Zeiss 50/1.7 Planar
PB 50/2.4, 135/2.8
Yashica 50/1.9, 28/2.8, 135/2.8
Hexanon 28/3.5, 50/1.4 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
pavko
Joined: 31 Jan 2011 Posts: 216 Location: PL
|
Posted: Thu Jul 05, 2012 9:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
pavko wrote:
Piece of cake You will need small flat screwdriver plus rubber tool or your fingers (in my case later).
1) Lens in question:
2) Remove name plate:
3) Pull out filter ring:
4) Set lens to infinity. Loose 3 screws (You see them on last pic). Set ring to 6 m (assuming that PB adapter is 0.7 thick you need 0.3 mm to reach infinity). Tighten screws. Put lens on body (or it may be there for whole procedure). Adjust focus on object at least 250 m away (two times hyperfocal on quite dense sensor). Loose screws. Set ring to inf. Tighten screws.
5) You are done!
And now some warning for anyone cleaning this lens and source of my problems.This lens was designed to be cheap standard lens. One of the goals of it designer was to reduce number of parts in the lens to minimum. Second was to make production possible with high tolerances on components.
a) If you look closer you will spot that something is wrong in here (first glass element removed):
b) Two middle elements pulled out (as they are secured by first one and positioned by three screws you see here):
And those 3 screws are cause of disaster. It is practically impossible (at home) to position middle elements correctly... Especially that:
c) inner ring of middle element and outer ring of securing element not fit tightly:
I see solution but I'm still thinking whether turning adjusting ring is worth the effort... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|