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 vs Zeiss
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Dec 13, 2010 4:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
WallyJr74 wrote:
Orio wrote:
The very late versions of Planar 1.7/50 (those with serial number beginning with a 8 ) are incredibly sharp and the best buy.


It's impossible to find anywhere.


There are no optical differences between early models and late models. Rolling Eyes


PostPosted: Mon Dec 13, 2010 4:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
DSG wrote:
WallyJr74 wrote:
Orio wrote:
The very late versions of Planar 1.7/50 (those with serial number beginning with a 8 ) are incredibly sharp and the best buy.


It's impossible to find anywhere.


There are no optical differences between early models and late models. Rolling Eyes


Actually they have improved coating, with all the consequences !!

Last edited by Keysersoze27 on Mon Dec 13, 2010 5:18 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Mon Dec 13, 2010 5:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
contax 50:1.7 wide open
don't try that on a crop Laughing
http://forum.mflenses.com/contax-501-7-wo-5dii-t28244.html


PostPosted: Mon Dec 13, 2010 6:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
WallyJr74 wrote:
Orio wrote:
The very late versions of Planar 1.7/50 (those with serial number beginning with a 8 ) are incredibly sharp and the best buy.


It's impossible to find anywhere.


I happen to have one! Very Happy



I bought it 2001 in Tokyo, way before Kyocera stopped producing Contax cameras
and lenses at 2005. Can't tell this is better than the other Planar 50/1.7, since I only have one.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 13, 2010 7:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I thought a Jena/Oberkochen test page is well known:

http://www.lupomesky.cz/czj_vs_cz/comp50.html

But of course, sample variations can change lots of things.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 13, 2010 7:35 pm    Post subject: Re: Zeiss vs Zeiss Reply with quote
DSG wrote:


The Pancolar has lower optical quality, being a Carl Zeiss Jena lens, but at least its mostly all metal in construction.
The Pentacon 50mm f1.8 can match either, and its a darn sight cheaper than both of them.


Yeah shure... that was what I also told to myself until I got my first Pancolar.

Eugen


PostPosted: Mon Dec 13, 2010 8:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Keysersoze27 wrote:
DSG wrote:
WallyJr74 wrote:
Orio wrote:
The very late versions of Planar 1.7/50 (those with serial number beginning with a 8 ) are incredibly sharp and the best buy.


It's impossible to find anywhere.


There are no optical differences between early models and late models. Rolling Eyes


Actually they have improved coating, with all the consequences !!


Oh really?...So they went from T* to T**?


PostPosted: Mon Dec 13, 2010 8:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
DSG wrote:
WallyJr74 wrote:
Orio wrote:
The very late versions of Planar 1.7/50 (those with serial number beginning with a 8 ) are incredibly sharp and the best buy.


It's impossible to find anywhere.


There are no optical differences between early models and late models. Rolling Eyes


How do you know? Do you have both models?


PostPosted: Mon Dec 13, 2010 9:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
WallyJr74 wrote:
DSG wrote:
WallyJr74 wrote:
Orio wrote:
The very late versions of Planar 1.7/50 (those with serial number beginning with a 8 ) are incredibly sharp and the best buy.


It's impossible to find anywhere.


There are no optical differences between early models and late models. Rolling Eyes


How do you know? Do you have both models?


I did have four Planar 1.7/50, the first two were earlier versions, with serial beginning with 6 and 73 something. They were nice lenses, but after I got one with serial 8xx, I appreciated the big difference in sharpness. I sold the older ones, and bought another 8xx version. Both my 8xx versions were new old stock.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 13, 2010 10:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:


I did have four Planar 1.7/50, the first two were earlier versions, with serial beginning with 6 and 73 something. They were nice lenses, but after I got one with serial 8xx, I appreciated the big difference in sharpness. I sold the older ones, and bought another 8xx version. Both my 8xx versions were new old stock.


I also own a 1.7 #88xxxxx NOS and a #62xxxxxx one. The new one has different coating colour (reddish) and it's sharper than the older one. Can't be a coincidence as Orio is pointing out ...

The old one was build in late 70s, the new one early 00s, Zeiss must obviously have improved/changed the T* coatings on the same lens since then...silently as they always do Wink


PostPosted: Tue Dec 14, 2010 2:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Seele wrote:
I thought a Jena/Oberkochen test page is well known:

http://www.lupomesky.cz/czj_vs_cz/comp50.html

But of course, sample variations can change lots of things.


Ah, I have seen that long ago. But it's not representative of what the lenses will do on a digital camera. It's also doesn't show the results at infinity.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 14, 2010 10:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
AhamB wrote:
Seele wrote:
I thought a Jena/Oberkochen test page is well known:

http://www.lupomesky.cz/czj_vs_cz/comp50.html

But of course, sample variations can change lots of things.


Ah, I have seen that long ago. But it's not representative of what the lenses will do on a digital camera..


I dont think it makes any difference if they are used on film or digital, they should behave the same optically on both.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 14, 2010 10:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Keysersoze27 wrote:
Orio wrote:


I did have four Planar 1.7/50, the first two were earlier versions, with serial beginning with 6 and 73 something. They were nice lenses, but after I got one with serial 8xx, I appreciated the big difference in sharpness. I sold the older ones, and bought another 8xx version. Both my 8xx versions were new old stock.


I also own a 1.7 #88xxxxx NOS and a #62xxxxxx one. The new one has different coating colour (reddish) and it's sharper than the older one. Can't be a coincidence as Orio is pointing out ...

The old one was build in late 70s, the new one early 00s, Zeiss must obviously have improved/changed the T* coatings on the same lens since then...silently as they always do Wink


Thats interesting...I've been trying to find definitive proof of diiferences between the early and late models online and could'nt find a thing anywhere...Seems they do like to do things silently!


PostPosted: Tue Dec 14, 2010 11:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Smile

i found a 1.7 #88xxxxx planar....is to mouch expensive !! Smile
near 250€ Laughing Laughing


PostPosted: Tue Dec 14, 2010 2:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
DSG wrote:

Thats interesting...I've been trying to find definitive proof of diiferences between the early and late models online and could'nt find a thing anywhere...Seems they do like to do things silently!


DIfferently from Leitz, Zeiss does not advertise the changes they make to the lenses over the years.
The Contax line of SLR spread over approximately 30 years (the first Contax SLR camera, the RTS, was introduced in 1974, while the last camera, the RXII, was introduced in 2002, only one year before the launch of Canon's 300D which opened the DLSR world to the masses).
During this period of 30 years, the only official notice that we have from Zeiss about change to optical design of lenses regards the 2/25, 2/28 and 2.8/135 lenses at the moment of the AE/MM switch-over (1984), but it is highly unlikely that Zeiss did not improve the optical design of their other lenses over a 30 years period of time, which is almost like a lifetime camera-wise.
Rumours have flourished about other lenses, mostly the 1.4/85, 1.4/35, 2/100, 2/135, but I have always been skeptical, because I own or have owned those lenses in different AE/MM flavours, and I could never find an evidence that would support those rumours. The only confirmation I have found comes from a confidence I had, reported from a previous engineer who worked at Zeiss and who said that in 1982, for the 50 years anniversary of Contax, they released a new batch of 2/135 Planar lenses that were optically redesigned not for improvement, but because some of the components (namely lead) that was used in the formula of some optical glass used by the lens, had become outlaw in the meantime. Those lenses should have the "50 Years" label on them. I have an MM 2/135 which in theory should be later than those 50 Years version, but it performs identically as the AE version, so it is possible that 1) either the change did not really improve the performance, or 2) that the MM lens that I have is simply an old unsold AE stock whose aperture ring and mechanism were later changed to MM by Zeiss after the MM switch-over took place.
However, as skeptical as I am, I can not deny the evidence when I have it in front of my eyes. The difference in the results (the photographs) between my older copies of the 1.7/50 and the newest ones that I have found as new old stock with serial numbers 8x was just too evident to be ignored or dismissed as irrelevant. And no, I don't think it's a matter of coating only: the change in the optical performance (namely sharpness) is so evident that I am convinced that this lens was optically, if not redesigned, surely optimized.

Last edited by Orio on Tue Dec 14, 2010 2:13 pm; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Tue Dec 14, 2010 2:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
seme adaptor for eos-c/y in the description say:

" The EOS auto focusing system doesn’t support as less as F5.6. Before your capturing you have to focusing with MAX aperture and stop down to capturing."

i am confused!is true?


PostPosted: Tue Dec 14, 2010 2:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
verdurina wrote:
seme adaptor for eos-c/y in the description say:
" The EOS auto focusing system doesn’t support as less as F5.6. Before your capturing you have to focusing with MAX aperture and stop down to capturing."
i am confused!is true?


I wrote it in my earlier message: the autofocus system of the AX does not work with lenses slower than f/5.6
Which does not mean that you can not photograph at slower aperture: don't forget that the MM lenses are full automatic. You can (actually, you should, if not even must) leave the lens wide open. The camera will auto-focus the lens this way and it will stop down the aperture automatically at the moment you click on the shutter.
The f/5.6 thing means only that you can not autofocus the lenses who don't have the MAXIMUM aperture faster than f/5.6 - which basically only leaves out the Vario-Sonnar 100-300 f/4.5-5.6 in the longest position (300mm).


PostPosted: Wed Dec 15, 2010 8:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Orio wrote:
they released a new batch of 2/135 Planar lenses that were optically redesigned not for improvement, but because some of the components (namely lead) that was used in the formula of some optical glass used by the lens, had become outlaw in the meantime.


Does it really make sense to outlaw lead from glass? This isn't a rhetorica question. I am really interested if lead once melted in the glass could really be solved out of it again or have otherwise impact to the environment or the user.

Eugen


PostPosted: Thu Dec 16, 2010 9:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Eugen Mezei wrote:
Orio wrote:
they released a new batch of 2/135 Planar lenses that were optically redesigned not for improvement, but because some of the components (namely lead) that was used in the formula of some optical glass used by the lens, had become outlaw in the meantime.


Does it really make sense to outlaw lead from glass? This isn't a rhetorica question. I am really interested if lead once melted in the glass could really be solved out of it again or have otherwise impact to the environment or the user.

Eugen

Dunno if this is the reason, but since 2003 there are very strict EU regulations cocerning workers exposure to lead in manufacturing processes.


PostPosted: Thu Dec 16, 2010 8:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
peterqd wrote:

Dunno if this is the reason, but since 2003 there are very strict EU regulations cocerning workers exposure to lead in manufacturing processes.


Haven't thougth about that. Could be this is one of the reasons.

Although, who produces optical glass or lenses in Europe? Any manufacturer remained?


PostPosted: Fri Dec 17, 2010 5:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Eugen Mezei wrote:

Although, who produces optical glass or lenses in Europe? Any manufacturer remained?


Perhaps Schneider still make their lenses in the EU? (I don't know).


PostPosted: Fri Dec 17, 2010 9:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ChrisLilley wrote:

Perhaps Schneider still make their lenses in the EU? (I don't know).


Yes, made in Germany.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2