Enna 240mm 4.5 early-late versions optical difference

[connloyalist]

Hi All,

I found a few discussions on this forum with respect to the Enna 240mm 4.5. Opinions on it seem to range from "not very good" to "somewhat average"?

From what I have seen there are three variations: "wide zebra", "narrow zebra" and "black". My information is that the narrow zebra and black plastic are optically the same with 5 elements in 3 groups (5/3). The wide zebra apparently is 3/2.

Does that imply that the 5/3 versions are better corrected than the 3/2? Or is there more to it than that? it is my understanding that more glass does not necessarily make for a better lens.

I like lenses in the 150mm to 250mm range (for me 300mm lenses are usually too heavy to hand hold). I am highly doubtful this Enna 240mm gets anywhere close to a Canon FDn or Pentax-M 200mm 4.0, but it has piqued my curiosity.

Regards, C.

[Alun Thomas]

Do you have a link to the information about the 3 element version, or a diagram? I have an early version for sockel, it was not a good example of that lens when I tested it. Unfortunately I'm not close to it currently to verify the amount of elements. From the diagrams that I have seen, nearly all of the Enna long focal length lenses used a fairly similar optical layout.

[connloyalist]

The information about the different optical formulas is based on this source:

Early version: https://lens-db.com/enna-munchen-tele-ennalyt-240mm-f45-i/
Late version: https://lens-db.com/enna-munchen-tele-ennalyt-240mm-f45-ii/

[calvin83]

[connloyalist]

Interesting! I guess my source is incorrect

I do notice that while the diagrams are the same showing 5 elements in 3 groups on both, on one the text says "5 elements" and the other says "3 elements". I suspect that on the one that says 3 elements they intended to say 3 groups perhaps?

Regards, C.

[D1N0]

There was also a later plastic version https://m42lens.com/m42-lens-database/518-enna-munchen-mc-tele-ennalyt-240mm-f-4-5-22

but a 5/4 design. Was also sold as Revuenon.

[eugene1979]

Without knowing the full picture, it is very easy to come to the wrong conclusions.

The ENNA TELE-ENNALYT 240/4.5 was produced in the following versions (listed in chronological order):

- the first version - 3/2, CFD 2.4m - fixed mount - https://lens-db.com/enna-munchen-tele-ennalyt-240mm-f45-i/

- the second version - 5/3, CFD 3m - fixed mount - https://lens-db.com/enna-munchen-tele-ennalyt-240mm-f45-ii/

- Sockel version - 5/3, CFD 3m - interchangeable mount - not in the database (on my website, I decided not to record Sockel versions at all)

Sockel versions of ENNA lenses appeared AFTER the fixed-mount versions. These interchangeable mount lenses with automatic diaphragms were NOT the earliest ENNA lenses.

calvin83 posted diagrams and specs from the ENNA booklet dedicated both to Sockel (top photo) and fixed-mount (bottom photo) lenses. I have this booklet too, of course. These two models have the same optical design, 5/3.

Which does not change the fact that 3/2 version also existed.

As for the plastic version (5/4), I don't have any manufacturer's data about it, so, unlike m42lens.com, I can't be so sure about its specs and optical formula.

Evgenii Artemov
LENS-DB.COM

[calvin83]

https://photobutmore.de/exakta/objektive/enna/

Yes. It seems the early zebra version, with MFD of 8 feet and tripod mount, have different front element and length c.f. the later zebra versions. The link above suggest it is a long-focus lens vs the later zebra versions. Anyone owns the lens here?

[connloyalist]

Thank you for the explanations, thank you. Very interesting.

Regards, C.

[pabeu]