Rediscovering my own lenses: CZJ Sonnar 135mm f/4.0

[connloyalist]

Over the past few years I have built up a bit of a collection of lenses (it provided a distraction during covid). Sometimes I go into my collection to re-test some lenses, look at them with a fresh eye.

Today I took out my Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 135mm f/4.0. This is a chrome (aluminum?) one, M42 mount. I knew it was really good, but I have quite a few 135mm lenses and I hadn't used it in a while.

I must say I am blown away all over again. Wow this thing is good. Even wide open. I have 135mm lenses that are 20 or 30 years newer and not as good as this one. What secret sauce did they use in making these? Why are many later lenses by other companies worse? Was it a patent thing? Or were newer lenses built to a price? Or f/4.0 wouldn't sell because of being a bit slower?

Same thing with my CZJ Biotar 58mm f/2.0. Such a good lens.

Regards, C.

[caspert79]

[DrBB]

Great lens and, usually, great buy. I got 3 of them (2x silver and one black) for next to nothing (20eur or less). Also, easy to CLA with one word of warning - first element from back, on the inside has really soft coating, very easy to scratch. Learned the hard way

[caspert79]

[caspert79]

Here's an image made with the Sonnar 135/4 @ wide open setting on Sony A7RII; converted from RAW to jpeg; no additional post processing applied.
AusJena1354_2 by devoscasper, on Flickr

Here's a 100% crop:
AusJena1354_2crop by devoscasper, on Flickr

Detail rendering is excellent.

Here, a comparison against the Nikkor Ai 135mm f/2.8:
The Sonnar shows near perfect performance (including the far corners) wide open:
comparison by devoscasper, on Flickr
To be fair, it took a third Jena Sonnar before I had a well centered one.

[calvin83]

It seems there are centering issues on the f/3.5 version. We may be able to find what will be the cause?
http://forum.mflenses.com/zeiss-jena-sonnar-135-4-t25653.html

[caspert79]

[calvin83]

[caspert79]

[BrianSVP]

These are also 60+ year old lenses. A lot of them have been banged around and dropped. Most of the Jena lenses (and pretty much all pre-war European lenses and Soviet lenses up to the 1980s) have barrel components centered with external set screws.

These are much more susceptible to being thrown off by physical shocks than later designs.

[paulhofseth]

yesterday I wanted to compare old and "new" design 180-200mms and took a few snaps at f8 with two 1950es m42 mount things; a schneider 200 and an Angenieux 180 in comparison with the much later180mm apochromatic Angenieux (C/Ymount) and Leitz R mount creations.

Contrast was clearly better on the newer ones, but after massaging the (Z-7) files, detail rendering was no better on the later devices. So small diameter and lower weight must be weighed against time to treat the results with levels and curves.

p.

[kiddo]

[caspert79]

Just a another few snapshots to show the IQ of the Sonnar, first the full image, then 100% crops:


AusJena1354_6 by devoscasper, on Flickr
AusJena1354_6crop by devoscasper, on Flickr

AusJena1354_5 by devoscasper, on Flickr

Check details around eyes. This is @ f/4, and a 100% crop of a 42+ mp image. Not bad!

AusJena1354_5crop by devoscasper, on Flickr

AusJena1354_4 by devoscasper, on Flickr
AusJena1354_4crop by devoscasper, on Flickr

I think the Sonnar 135/4 is one of the best steals out there.

[DrBB]