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

Zeiss Jena: Zebra vs. MC
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Apr 30, 2015 11:44 pm    Post subject: Zeiss Jena: Zebra vs. MC Reply with quote
Hi there,

I'm interested in some Zeiss Jena Lenses with the P6 Mount.

I'm asking myself wether the Zebra or the MC version gets better results.
Where is the differenc in IQ and color rendering?

Has any of you made a comparison?

Thanks for your thoughts.

Cheers


PostPosted: Fri May 01, 2015 6:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
http://www.pentaconsix.com/lenstest.htm


PostPosted: Fri May 01, 2015 8:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
thanks for the link. some useful info there, but sadly not really answering the question.


PostPosted: Fri May 01, 2015 9:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have also wondered about this a lot. My feeling is that the MC has better flare resistance, but also a bit harsher/contrasty. While the zebra is more "vintage" it is also more prone to washed out images.

I may be totally wrong though and would love to hear an informed opinion on this.


PostPosted: Fri May 01, 2015 11:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I used (and still have) multiple copies of Zeiss Jena lenses in most vintages (all-black, all-aluminum, zebra, MC, and electric versions). Build quality is undoubtedly the best with early all-black lenses; often, those early versions also feature a different optical construction. IQ wise, I find MC versions to be the sharpest, feature top contrast and exhibit the best colors all around. However, their internal mechanics have some plastic parts that fail regularly with my lenses. I never had an early all-black lens fail on me.

There are also Prakticar versions of Zeiss Jena lenses. Some of them are 100% optically identical to MC counterparts, but some feature different optical designs (e.g. the 300/4 lens). I found Prakticar lenses to deliver even better image quality compared to M42 variants, but to have even more plastic parts that break even easier (I had a Prakticar 135/3.5 broken beyond repair because one tiny plastic lever cracked, and no replacement is available).


PostPosted: Fri May 01, 2015 7:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I bought a zebra Pancolar some month ago. I gave it a try today. I like the bokeh.



It is usable wide open



PostPosted: Fri May 01, 2015 8:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
rudolfkremers wrote:
I have also wondered about this a lot. My feeling is that the MC has better flare resistance, but also a bit harsher/contrasty. While the zebra is more "vintage" it is also more prone to washed out images.

I may be totally wrong though and would love to hear an informed opinion on this.

+1 and sometimes dependent from lens itself. I know several cases where Zebra was even better than any MC, but in general I fully agree with above statement.


PostPosted: Sun May 03, 2015 1:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
aoleg wrote:
I used (and still have) multiple copies of Zeiss Jena lenses in most vintages (all-black, all-aluminum, zebra, MC, and electric versions). Build quality is undoubtedly the best with early all-black lenses; often, those early versions also feature a different optical construction. IQ wise, I find MC versions to be the sharpest, feature top contrast and exhibit the best colors all around. However, their internal mechanics have some plastic parts that fail regularly with my lenses. I never had an early all-black lens fail on me.

There are also Prakticar versions of Zeiss Jena lenses. Some of them are 100% optically identical to MC counterparts, but some feature different optical designs (e.g. the 300/4 lens). I found Prakticar lenses to deliver even better image quality compared to M42 variants, but to have even more plastic parts that break even easier (I had a Prakticar 135/3.5 broken beyond repair because one tiny plastic lever cracked, and no replacement is available).


A friend gave me a small bag of little 'plastic' pellets this week, apparently when warmed up they can be moulded into any shape and, when cool, it is solid plastic. He tells me that it is also reusable, so it can be warmed again and moulded again.
I wonder if this stuff would be ideal for fixing parts like yours. I'll try to find out the name/details of this particular substance. Besides that, would Sugru be any good?


PostPosted: Sun May 03, 2015 2:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
This may add absolutely nothing to the discussion, but here you go anyway.
I have two Biometars - 2.8/80 MC and 2.8/120 Zebra.
Here are some images taken with both.
Not much in it is there apart from focal length.
OH

2.8/80 MC @ 5.6




2.8/120 Zebra @ 5.6



2.8/80 MC @ 2.8



2.8/120 Zebra @ 2.8



2.8/80 MC @ 5.6



2.8/120 Zebra @ 5.6



PostPosted: Sun May 03, 2015 3:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
SonicScot wrote:
aoleg wrote:
I used (and still have) multiple copies of Zeiss Jena lenses in most vintages (all-black, all-aluminum, zebra, MC, and electric versions). Build quality is undoubtedly the best with early all-black lenses; often, those early versions also feature a different optical construction. IQ wise, I find MC versions to be the sharpest, feature top contrast and exhibit the best colors all around. However, their internal mechanics have some plastic parts that fail regularly with my lenses. I never had an early all-black lens fail on me.

There are also Prakticar versions of Zeiss Jena lenses. Some of them are 100% optically identical to MC counterparts, but some feature different optical designs (e.g. the 300/4 lens). I found Prakticar lenses to deliver even better image quality compared to M42 variants, but to have even more plastic parts that break even easier (I had a Prakticar 135/3.5 broken beyond repair because one tiny plastic lever cracked, and no replacement is available).


A friend gave me a small bag of little 'plastic' pellets this week, apparently when warmed up they can be moulded into any shape and, when cool, it is solid plastic. He tells me that it is also reusable, so it can be warmed again and moulded again.
I wonder if this stuff would be ideal for fixing parts like yours. I'll try to find out the name/details of this particular substance. Besides that, would Sugru be any good?

It may be also possible make the parts via 3D printing using ABS thermoplastic thermoplastic.


PostPosted: Sun May 03, 2015 8:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I think I will go with the MC Versions as they seem to be found in better quality.

Other question: how is the 300 F4 Sonnar? Is the cromsatic abberation controlable stopped down?
I intend to use this lens for video, so to get the CA out is much harder in post. Ist there
a better 300mm lens within this price range?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1