Carl Zeiss PANCOLAR 1.8/50 in-depth review(all versions)

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Type1 zebra in Canon EF mount (cine modification) www.ebay.com/itm/225839305331

[@gkiss2030]

Hi, is the f1.8 Pancolar MC (50 mm) and f3.5 Sonnar MC (135 mm) comparable in image quality and colors? I noticed that my Sonnar might be a tad sharper...

[@sarmadalmouallem749]

Best online shop and channel for vintage lenses.... 💜

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Thank you Sarmad!

[@kbrsretrogameroom327]

Good review. I have a type 1 in my collection and really love it. I use it a lot for landscape photography and it's incredible sharpness is hard to beat. The beautiful colors are great too. It puts many of my modern lenses to shame. Most modern lens elements have been manufactured to such a perfect level that they can be kind of boring, lacking character. The character of these older lenses really add a bit of magic to my photos in my opinion.

[@Skux720]

Great review. I love the design of the zebra version so it's good to know it holds up in image quality against the newer versions.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Thanks for watching!

[@ArminHirmer]

very interesting, thank you

[@alicefrommadworld]

Very helpful comparision. Just ordered the Type 2-e version!

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Good choice!

[@yesanton]

A great video! Your eBay Shop is also amazing!

[@j.c.103]

I'm shooting Praktica cameras with Pentacon and Pancolar lenses since long years. At the moment i use a Zebra Pancolar 50mm f1.8 ( with thorium elements ) very often, because is it a very small lens. It is both suitable for coloured and for blackandwhite film.

[@petemark7186]

To add my 3 cents: there's actually also Pancolar "type 4" - one last 1.8/50 M42 lens version produced till mid-80s (last ones in 1986). The differences with "type 3": more compact (shorter), smaller focusing "grip" part (3 rows instead of 5), slightly different coating (amber color only, without traces of violet/bluish tint). I don't think there will be any optical differences though. Hope that helps.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Thank you for your input. Can you please show a link to it? so i can take a look?

[@petemark7186]

@@RetroFotoHouse I can send you pictures, I own both v3&v4 Pancolar. And you can also look here: forum.mflenses.com/strange-mc-pancolar-50-18-t15457.html

[@joostooijman9662]

Thanks you for the great review that has helped me a lot to purchase edition 1 of the lens.

[@robertuskoppies444]

Excellent comparison! Thank you very much for sharing.

[@vaskoobscura_]

Thank you for taking the time to make this video. Thumbs up.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Glad it was helpful!

[@shlominger]

great clip... the zebra version up to serial nr 8552600 in 1967 had thoriated radioactive lens elements... which renders similar to the ultimate bokeh champ, the very radioactive 'hot' 55mm 1:1,4 Pancolar

[@sippinhappiness793]

does that mean after 8552600 serial # they stop the radioactive coating

[@shlominger]

yes @@sippinhappiness793

[@ohjajohh]

@@shlominger Is that for both the "Aus Jena" and Carl Zeiss Jena versions?

[@shlominger]

yes @@ohjajohh

[@seoulrydr]

I just picked up the zebra version 3 days ago and was curious about the differences. thank you for the video. i think i'll stick with what i have. $50USD (camera included). Thank you!

[@DixonLu]

Thank you Roman

[@campbells0ups]

i dont have the Pancolar 50mm F/1.8, but i have the Exakta Pancolar 50mm F/2 and its a great lens! the images are incredible

[@lukasmoodysson4701]

When was version 3 made?

[@AbDaniel21]

great review!, thank you very much sir!

[@stefpix]

Great video, is this based on the Biotar design? do you have any comparisons with the Helios 44-2 /44-M? differences in color, rendering?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Hi! No, it is not a biotar design, this is genuine german pancolar design. No , i don't have comparisons with helios, but i can say that pancolar is overall better

[@stefpix]

@@RetroFotoHouse thank you. I was wondering if the Pancolar was an evolution of the older Zeiss. Is the Meyer Görlitz Oreston comparable to the Pancolar in rendition? Although I know the Pancolar is some steps above.

[@campbells0ups]

the Pancolar is an evolution of the Biotar. there was in between a Pancolar F/2 50mm that was more like the Biotar in rendering. it was designed in the early 1950's to reconfigure the Biotar to be actually 50mm for SLRs. the 1.8 Pancolar was the final design

[@汪扬翼]

Type 3 looks not good as other 2lenses but type 3still a good lens Am I right ？

[@RetroFotoHouse]

yes, exact

[@lukasmoodysson4701]

Great work! Thank u

[@rickbyrne7631]

Excellent presentation. Thank you.

[@bww2s]

#9095012 zebra Pancolar DDR is the one I have. What can you tell me about this version? Time period? Coatings?

[@dandanu2526]

Are there major differences between Pancolar electric (type 3) and Pancolar auto 1,8/50 MC Carl Zeiss Jena DDR? Wich one is the best?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

I did not notice any differencies. They have same optics, just electric has electric contacts to transfer aperture value into camera body

[@nikola.kovacevic]

Great video as always! Shame you didn't have the early 8 blade zebra version with thorium elements.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Thank you! As far as i know-radioactive pancolar has 55mm of focal and f/1.4 maximum aperture. My review, and i stated at the very beginning of the video is about 50mm f1.8 modifications

[@nikola.kovacevic]

@@RetroFotoHouse yes, the 55mm 1.4 contains the thorium elements but so does a version of the zebra 50mm 1.8. They were produced between 1964 and 1967 up to serial number 8552600. I have one copy of it in front of me :)

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Interesting! Can you please send me few foto of it on [e-mail]?

[@nikola.kovacevic]

@@RetroFotoHouse sure!

[@bojanbuck7874]

Pozdrav druze, bas gledam jedan pancolar po serijskom broju bih rekao da je 8 listica ali je skoro duplo skuplji od mc pancolar sa 6 listica. Jel vredi taj extra kes? Ako imas iskustva sa tim..hvala

[@txusicB]

hello thanx for alal that knowledge.. i have a question... Carl Zeiss Jena P 28mm f2.8 MC is a pancolar or the P stands for a prakticar.. and if it´s a s good well build and sharp as a pancolar?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

this is prakticar, pancolar-this is either 50mm or 80mm it is not bad, but zeiss is better

[@cjewe1z]

What was the conclusion?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Please watch the ending part of the video to get a conclusion. Thanks!

[@cjewe1z]

@@RetroFotoHouse, you only mention that version two has the best contrast. Which one is best overall?

[@cjewe1z]

@@RetroFotoHouse, you only mention that version two has the best contrast. Which one is best overall?

[@paulvanos976]

Oh and it would be so interresting if you would compare it to the real first version; it has 8 apertureblades, it's radio-active and therefore maybe yellow. It's recognizable by the infrareddot being not above the ''4'' but between the ''4'' and the ''8'', if you would do that it would also be nice to compare it to the pre-version; the f2.0. Well....thanks in advance!

[@MrIbBeier]

Wonderful review, thank You very much! :)

[@maxbashyrov5785]

'in-camera jpeg' actually means 'photo was processed'.

[@AwesomeKicks]

Is the Pancolar with green markings type 3 radioactive? Which ones are radioactive? Thanks! What price do you think a great condition is worth?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

It is not radioactive. I know rumours are saying that pancolar 55 1.4 is radioactive, but that one is extremely expensive, and i did not have a chance to test it.

[@randallstewart175]

Although not an authority, I was under the belief that the Panacolor was developed to replace the older 50mm Biota as the fast normal focal length lens for the Exakta, thereafter being used on a number of East German SLRs.

[@danielmalter3373]

A number of lenses were shared across the East German cameras of different lens mounts, namely the Exaktas, Prakticas, and Praktinas. The Zeiss Biotars, Flexons, Flektogons, and Pancolars are examples of this. The Flexon 50/2 was only made for Exakta and Praktina, but not for Praktica; and the Pancolar 50/2 looks to be the same design (classic double Gauss like the biotar) and made for all three mounts, suggesting Zeiss homogenized the nomenclature for its lenses across lens mounts, which also makes sense. The later 50/1.8 tested here is an adaptation (with six elements in five groups, iirc). In any case, East German Zeiss lenses being designed for use across the three lens mounts makes perfect sense economically. Therefore, they would have to have been designed for the constraints of the Exakta. Whereas the lens mount itself (screw or some form of bayonet) is immaterial, the optics need to work for the mount with the shortest flange distance (distance from mount to film plane). And that's the Exakta (at 44.7mm, compared to the Prakticas 45.46mm, and the Praktina's 50mm).

[@campbells0ups]

I love the Pancolar F2 lens that one is great

[@Noealz]

cool never heard about these lenses

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Excellent german quality and awesome image rendition

[@lachsimzwaifel]

Do you know if this lens is in any way related or even the same construction as the Pentacon 50/1.8? They certainly look very similar.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

no, i don't think so

[@myblueandme]

Pentacon was Zeiss changed name due to some marketing issue for the US market. I think.

[@marksieving7925]

@@myblueandme The Pentacon name was derived from a combination of Pentagon (from a five sided prism used on their SLRs) and Contax. In the DDR Carl Zeiss and Pentacon were separate organizations. The Pentacon 50mm F1.8 was a rebranded version of the Meyer Optic Görlitz lens.

[@myblueandme]

@@marksieving7925 ok thanks

[@campbells0ups]

Pentacon 50mm 1.8 is Meyer-Optik Gorlitz Oreston 50mm 1.8 with different coatings.

[@bernarddelapart3519]

and the radioactivity of the Pancolar type 1 ?

[@danielmalter3373]

His is not radioactive. The thoriated glass ceased somewhere with serial 855xxx. His has serial 89xxxx. The barrel of the radioactive version is flatter, the aperture has eight blades (compared to his six), and the glass is often characteristically yellow from the thorium.

[@ryanstark2350]

@@danielmalter3373 Yeah. I have a few of those thorium versions. I'm not sure why he didn't mention that because It's an important feature that marks some of those Pancolars out. They are very sharp.

[@ivan9066]

This was a very useful video. And now I wonder why all pancolar are so expensive ? Currently I'm looking at a type 3 pancolar ,seller wants EUR 65 after seeing the comparisons it seems way too expensive.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Because people understood the beauty if this lens and demand exceeds offers. That's why prices are groving on the market.

[@bojanbuck7874]

Thanks!

[@kensavage7388]

Excellent....as usual

[@FourSeasonsHD]

Hello, may I ask if you are familiar with the German Altix cameras? I am trying to adapt one camera body to M42 mount but I can not enter the front of the camera. There appears to be a collar with two holes in it - similar to Industar 50 lens back - that might need a special tool to open. Have you been working with these cameras?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

No, i don't

[@FourSeasonsHD]

Hello, the Altix mount opened up and new lens adapters are being made for the camera that has been converted to take 43 mm wide film images. There is need for testing to evaluate what SLR lenses can cover 16:9 aspect film. More about SSLR (Super SIngle Lens Reflex) camera project on my website (address in my channel profile). With thanks and regards.

[@Meatyowlleg]

I have both the non -radioactive zebra and the MC version of it, personally I prefer the zebra one as it has a natural beautiful glow effect which is far better than using glow glass, it also has longer focus throw for vshooting video. The MC one has slighly more contrast and is more flare resistent and looks more modern. The pancolar has better color accuracy than the planar 50mm 1.7 and far more contrast than the praktica 50mm 1.4.

[@saso23D]

Unfortunately, mine was a type 3 simple version.

[@dominikbussey2419]

I have an exacta mount version of this lens zebra version how can I use this?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

via exacta-your camera adapter

[@TheCollector2222]

Thanks man

[@JuanTheBone]

I have one with red scale but no MC lettering, serial is 9616114. Any idea if it differs from standard red MC series?

[@RetroFotoHouse]

can you please send me a foto of it to [e-mail]? I would like to see it

[@petrulehla8633]

@@RetroFotoHouse I have the same version as described above. Have you found out any information please?

[@justin_704]

don't disassemble it if it is stuck with grease. Just put a few drops of lighter fluid in and along the ring to dissolve the old grease. faster, better, cheaper, and safer option

[@umac76]

So I see this theme playing out in meny videos on KZbin, where older Russian lenses of a particular brand are often better than succeeding versions. What do you ascribe this to? In a capitalist country this is often the result of reducing cost to increase profit, buying cheaper parts, reducing workforce, etc.

[@ДядькоТАкий]

Братан - використовуй озвучку нейронкою, я ізза смішного акценту не міг зосередитись.Відео чудове але акцент...хіба так задумано)))

[@robertb.3651]

Russian english is the best !!!!

[@Sergiusvl]

Спасибо большое за обзор! Полезная информация. Не обижайтесь, но вам конкретно нужно поработать над произношением, если работаете на англоговорящую публику.

[@martyzielinski2469]

Oh please, STOP already. These Pancolar lenses weren’t even considered much good when they were new fifty years ago. I should know, I was already entering the world of professional photography at the time. In fact, they were found on very last Exacta cameras sold for a whopping $79.95 when the model was finally discontinued in the early 1970’s. This fascination with substandard equipment has reached absurd levels in recent years.

[@RetroFotoHouse]

Thats your point of view. Thank you for sharing anyway.

[@oceansidesounddesign8770]

Hey Marty, may I ask what you favour in the 50mm 1/4 / 1.8 range?

[@martyzielinski1442]

@@oceansidesounddesign8770 -Funny you should ask. Because a 50mm f2 zebra Pancolar came through the shop last week. So I took it home and gave it the once over. It’s........well.........OK. If you’re not too picky. Certainly more than decent enough for a lens that sold brand new WITH AN EXACTA BODY for $79.95. Maybe about comparable to an old f2 Takumar or Hexanon. Second rate, but not terrible at all. But definitely not a world beater by any measure. As for better.........Canon 50mm f1.4 SSC, also the 55mm f1.2 SSC, and even the Canon f1.4 FDN which doesn’t have quite the flat field of the SSC, but does have really nice snap N sparkle. Nikkors are all decent, though none are terrific. They pretty much all have really nice image quality, but also tend to suffer from field curvature. The older 50mm f1.4 Nikkor S has LOTS of field curvature. Focus one of these at infinity in the center...........and the edges of the frame will be sharp at about 200 feet! The later versions improved this on the corners, but that caused weaknesses elsewhere. (If accuracy of exact focus across a flat plane is important to you, avoid Nikkors). Even the oldest of these, the 50mm f2 Nikkor H is decent enough. Maybe a little better than the Pancolar, but CERTAINLY at least as good. But the thing is, these were made by the bazillions and can be found for $25......or even less. The one caveat on the 50mm f2 H, the earlier ones have a DEEP purple coating. Believe it or not, this gives the lens a really annoying yellow/green cast, very similar to lenses made with radioactive thorium. The later 50mm f2 H-C is multi coated and does not have this cast. Nikkors are all pretty good if you find one for cheap. (You’re Unlikely to find a cheap Pancolar) Minolta 58mm f1.4 MC-PF Rokkor is decent, about as good as most Nikkors. Not as flat field as the SSC Canons, but nicely made, and no blatant flaws. Decent image quality, and these can be found cheap too. Maybe $50, especially if found at a garage sale or resale shop. Lots of nice Rokkors out there for little cash... The Contax/Yashica f1.4 Zeiss Planar has absolutely wonderful image quality. Crisp, beautiful colors, and just about the nicest build quality of anything this side of Leica. It also has more field curvature than the Canon SSC, but the overall image quality is at least as good, possibly even a shade better. And it’s top notch construction with buttery smooth focusing and f stop ring is unmatched by Canon, Nikon, or anyone else. Certainly a far cry from the cheesy/quirky construction of any version of Pancolar. Though I found mine for $150 at a camera show, they probably go for more than that on Fleabay. But you’ll NEVER find another lens that’s as much of a pleasure to use as this one. I do recognize that various flaws such as field curvature, bubble bokeh, fogginess or swirl bokeh are sought after by people looking for a bit of extra “art” in their images. That’s fine, and many shooters far more talented than me get stunning results out of these blatantly flawed lenses. They take those flaws........and make something very good out of it. Bravo for those skilled enough to do so. But the Pancolar.......likely any version of it........isn’t blatantly flawed enough to really add any substantive degree of that “art” to your shooting. It’s just flawed enough to be not quite as good as many other options. In my book, that makes it just one more mediocre lens among the zillions of them already out there. Similarly second rate glass can be found with names like Hexanon, Topcon, Zenit, Mamiya, Kowa, Miranda, Yashica, Argus and god only knows how many others. If you take nothing else from me, take it as fact that there’s nothing magic about the Pancolar. It’s just another ordinary lens with a name that for unknown reasons, has become very fashionable lately. Fashion however, is an illusion. And it tends to be fickle..... There’s nothing “wrong” with any of these lenses. But second rate is still second rate. Why spend top dollar for that?

[@oceansidesounddesign8770]

@@martyzielinski1442 I loved your reply Marty. Thank you so much for taking the time mate. I actually own a Canon FDn 50/1.4 which I adapted the mount to Canon EF. I did a shoot out against a Super Multi Tak 50/1.4 and a Planar 50/1.7 (had fungus, I was heart broken) and honestly preferred the Canon to both. I tested a Nikon 50.14 AI and thought it was ok (I cannot film with it because the focus is reversed and I miss shots. haha). The Canon FD is by far the best bang for buck I ever spent on a lens. Build-wise not so much but I don't mind the focus throw on it. I love the build of the Planar and it was not a fair test due to the fungus (it was still sharp but had massive bloom / halation.) I dream of a day that I have a Zeiss set of 25mm distagon / Planar 50/1.4 MMJ.

[@martyzielinski1442]

@@oceansidesounddesign8770 MMJ? Not familiar with that term. What’s that? If you’re talking about the Contax /Yashica 50mm f1.4 version from the 80’s-90’s, yes a wonderful lens. As for Distagons. Funny you should mention THAT! A couple months back, I also snagged a mint C/Y 28mm f2.8 Distagon for $260. Of course once again top notch build quality from late film era........with great optics to boot. Better than the much sought after Nikkor AI-s 28mm f2.8. Better than the current Canon EL 28 f2.8. (The pricey one with built in VR) In fact.......it’s the best 28mm lens I’ve ever seen. Grab one if you get the chance!

[@justnoted2995]

Too much detail in your presentation for one that is a little strung with English

[@miam1074]

is the MC version with serial number starting 999 radioactive???

[@RetroFotoHouse]

i can't say, as i never had this lens with 999 serial