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

Carl Zeiss Tessar 2.8/50 M42 Oberkochen (Stuttgart?)
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu May 22, 2008 12:53 pm    Post subject: Carl Zeiss Tessar 2.8/50 M42 Oberkochen (Stuttgart?) Reply with quote

I just received this lens:




A bit of paint removed from the aperture scale numbers, but other wise in mint condition.

The whereabouts of this series is a bit obscure for me. The finish is the same of the Contarex/Contaflex line of lenses. This means of course to me that the lens is West Germany. The mount however is M42 and except for the very early Contax S, which was produced before Germany was split into East and West, I am not aware of any other Zeiss Oberkochen or Stuttgart camera made with M42 mount. Any other information is welcome.

I still have to try it (super rain again here), but I'd like to say that, aesthetically speaking, I find this one to be amongst my most elegant lenses. I enjoy a lot the original Zeiss Ikon lens cap - which by the way has an unusual bayonet mount.


PostPosted: Thu May 22, 2008 1:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have to add that I find the two "handles" incredibly comfortable for adjusting the (continuous type) aperture without taking the eye away from the viewfinder.
I really wonder why so few, if any, other manufacturers have adopted this approach.


PostPosted: Thu May 22, 2008 1:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Congrats! Looks you get a rare gem!


PostPosted: Thu May 22, 2008 1:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attila wrote:
Congrats! Looks you get a rare gem!


Maybe, who knows?


PostPosted: Thu May 22, 2008 1:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OK, my Zeiss book offered the history.
This lens is part of a line of M42 lenses made for the Icarex TM, a shortlived threadmount version of the Icarex camera that was produced between 1969 and 1971 (the year when the Zeiss Ikon company of Stuttgart was terminated).
So the lens must have been built in Oberkochen for the Stuttgart camera.
The finish is much logically the Contarex finish, because at the time the Contarex was produced.


PostPosted: Thu May 22, 2008 1:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here a litle information on the Icarex line along with the lenses available in that particular finish: http://anusf.anu.edu.au/~aab900/photography/cameras/zeiss_icon.htm


PostPosted: Thu May 22, 2008 1:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This indeed is a very interesting lens and one with that amazingly beautiful design! Congratulations!


PostPosted: Thu May 22, 2008 2:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

themoleman342 wrote:
Here a litle information on the Icarex line along with the lenses available in that particular finish: http://anusf.anu.edu.au/~aab900/photography/cameras/zeiss_icon.htm


Thanks for the info Smile
As much as I find the lens beautiful, I find the Icarex quite ugly looking Surprised
Strange matching Confused Smile


PostPosted: Thu May 22, 2008 4:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Doesn't this lensporn really turn one on? Orio, it's beautiful and we cant wait to see how it performs (should be good).


patrickh


PostPosted: Thu May 22, 2008 5:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

patrickh wrote:
Doesn't this lensporn really turn one on? Orio, it's beautiful and we cant wait to see how it performs (should be good).
patrickh


Well, it was a budget lens in the Zeiss catalogue and so I was not expecting surprising results. In fact it seems to perform similar to other Tessar lenses from the Jena side, with one plus and one minus. The plus being that the West Zeiss coating is really effective and the lens shows a lot of contrast more than the Jena Tessars. The minus is that it does not seem to have that "magic" that the Jena 3.5/50 has - but I have come to the conclusion that the 3.5/50 is a one of a kind lens, because no other Tessar or Tessar clone that I have (and have several) has that magic.

Later I'll post some tests with the new lens. Being still sick, and overworked, it's the usual boring balcony/Melissa tests...


PostPosted: Thu May 22, 2008 5:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
The minus is that it does not seem to have that "magic" that the Jena 3.5/50 has - but I have come to the conclusion that the 3.5/50 is a one of a kind lens, because no other Tessar or Tessar clone that I have (and have several) has that magic


The 4.5/40 seems to have that "magic". This new one is really pretty looking. It looks similar in build to the ultron that has been fussed over so much lately.




PostPosted: Thu May 22, 2008 5:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, I think I remember now...Icarex was warned by his father, Daedalex
not to fly too close to the sun with his waxed wings...

Orio, jealousy-squared! Do show some pics when you have a chance!

Bill


PostPosted: Thu May 22, 2008 5:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm not sure. I need to use it (I mean the 40mm) more to make a more formed opinion. It is for sure the sharpest Tessar that I have, really Leica-sharp, but as far as the "3D magic" fingerprint of the 3.5/50, I'm not sure.


PostPosted: Thu May 22, 2008 5:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Katastrofo wrote:
Yes, I think I remember now...Icarex was warned by his father, Daedalex


Laughing


PostPosted: Thu May 22, 2008 5:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wink


PostPosted: Thu May 22, 2008 6:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Both lens (tessar and ulttron) was made by the Oberkochen zeiss, and both are zeiss design too. The mayority of the Ikarex's lenses are based on voigtlader designs. This two exceptions- The tessar and the ultron- are zeiss design. The tessar replaced, in the screw Icarex line, to the voigtlander's design skopar 2,8/50 MM, and the ultron modified with his 7 elements and the curved front, to the voigtlander's septon 2/50 mm with 7 elements too (excelent rendition) with schame similar to the planar 80 for hasselblad.
All good lenses, endeed. But the planar 1,7/50 of C/Y don't have the curved front element. And the planar of the high price contarex (the line A in Icarex time) didn't have it


PostPosted: Thu May 22, 2008 7:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's some boring samples.














My partial observations:

- looks sharper wide open than Jena Tessar 2.8/50 (this is probably due to the better coating and subsequent higher contrast)

- the highlights in the wide open bokeh displays a very pronounced, horrible doughnut effect

- the small number of blades sabotages the stopped down bokeh highlights also

- when there are no highlights, the bokeh feels pleasantly "organic" with good digradation

- close up the lens performs very well (it can focus down to 40mm approx.), sharp and contrasted

- overall the contrast is very good (visibly better than Jena Tessars')


PostPosted: Thu May 22, 2008 8:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Man, what got into Melissa in her 3rd shot Laughing


PostPosted: Thu May 22, 2008 8:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Look eyes! I always amazed eyes of cats.


PostPosted: Thu May 22, 2008 10:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio
Melissa is never boring - what a character. And this looks like a very fine lens with most of the attributes one looks for. Contrast seems remarkably high under those lighting conditions


patrickh


PostPosted: Thu May 22, 2008 10:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Aw, gee, look at these, I just knew it would be a sh*t-hot lens!

The evil Dr. Orio Francesco Diablo scores again! Laughing

Bill

ps I like the doughnut bokeh, what's wrong with doughnuts? I can't eat
them anymore, but I remember....LOL


PostPosted: Thu May 22, 2008 11:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That lens is beautiful. Photo's are sharp. I suspect people will be sifting through Ebay looking for one!


PostPosted: Fri May 23, 2008 12:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

maddog10 wrote:
Man, what got into Melissa in her 3rd shot Laughing


Laughing looks a bit demoniac, eh?
In reality she was just yawning Laughing
See, how can a photograph tell the false sometimes? Wink
Anyway she looks really scary!


PostPosted: Fri May 23, 2008 1:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio wrote:




" I said, GET BACK! I am really going to jump this time"

I am still laughing. Laughing

It does look to be a fine lens.


PostPosted: Fri May 23, 2008 3:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

How can you live with the internal bayonet and external screw for filters?
It's great,no?