Black Zeiss Jena Biotar T 1:2 5,8cm - Exakta - 17 blades

[vr777]

What do you think about this lens? I've read about it and all the reviews say it's very sharp wide open. It's better or equal in sharpness than canon 50 1.8 stm and canon 50 1.4 nfd? I found one, 100 dollars, but it have scratches,fungus and cleaning marks, does it worth it?









Thank you very much!

[Lightshow]

I would pass on this one, looks beyond help, you might be able to dismantle and Clean-Lube-Adjust (CLA) it, but I have my doubts it will ever be as good as I would want it, the foggy elements look bad.

[vr777]

[Jiaming]

I don't think it matters too much which is sharper than which, unless you intend to make really big prints. Most 50mm vintages are sufficiently sharp. The price looks great, but this condition really worries me. Not sure how good it can be after CLA, but there is possibility that it won't fully recover, and deteriorate the sharpness and contrast. I would suggest that you have a little bit more patience and do more search on the bay.

[Marek]

Pass this one

[luisalegria]

Biotars like this are mostly for collectors.
The price is high for what you get.
Much cheaper normal lenses can give better sharpness wide open.
The bokeh is interesting for the Biotar, but you can get very similar with most other lenses going for $20.

Cheaper lenses of similar specification that are exceptionally good -

Super or S-M-C Takumar 55/1.8 or 55/2
Pentax-M 50/1.7
Auto Mamiya/Sekor 50/2 - get the silver nose - quite lovely really
Ricoh Rikenon 50/2 - many seen as Sears - plastic fantastic but very sharp
Meyer Oreston 50/1.8
Zeiss Pancolar 50/2 - often quite cheap in Exakta mount. For some reason the M42 ones are expensive.

And of course many people like the Helios 44, which is a Biotar copy and has the same bokeh, but not the same construction quality usually.

etc. Most 50mm-55mm f/1.7- f/2 kit lenses of the 1950s-1980s were excellent.

[luisalegria]

Also a real bargain these days are the Sears 55/1.4
Usually available for around $50.
And the Nikkor-S 50.1.4 which can be found for just a bit more.

[luisalegria]

And your Canon lenses mentioned should be as good or better than the Biotar in almost every way.
Bokeh, maybe not, if you are looking for swirlies.

[vr777]

[Marek]

If you're into solid fast +/- 50mm, I may offer you

• Revuenon 50 1.9
• Carenar 50 1.8
• Pentacon 50 1.8
• Tessar 50 2.8 "Fat" silver

up to $50 or less, and

• Revuenon 55 1.7
• Tessar 50 "Slim" silver

around $75

All fully working, all M42

May have some mistakes in f values, as I didnt check the lenses now

Feel free to PM me


As for "your" Biotar, fungus definitely doesnt mean the end of the world but this one is just big fat and possibly eating the layers, aint sure what it is for sure but met this one with pretty similar structure (maps) earlier and this is rather dangerous type (form) or just on a "highly developed level"


Marek

[jamaeolus]

Get the helios copy if you want biotar like performance. Really cheap now, another option: I have been getting Konica 57 1.4 in the 40-50 dollar range. That is if you are shooting on a short flange mirrorless camera.

[calvin83]

A cheap Helios-44-2 will do the job if you want a lens which perform similarly to the Biotar.

[Pancolart]

Can you pass this 100$ offer to me then ? From what i can see it is in splendid shape. Light edge fungus really
doesn't matter.

[scsambrook]

Did Zeiss use those x-headed screws back when they were making these Biotars? (see pic #2 above)

[calvin83]

[scsambrook]