East Versus West - Which Zeiss Is Best? Carl Zeiss, and Carl Zeiss Jena Lenses - Compared!

[@DL-jz1bm]

A more interesting comparison would be between the CZJ lenses, like for example the 50/1.8 or the 135/3.5, versus the Contax/Yashica CZ equivalents (50/1.7, 135/2.8)

[@Geolog66]

I owned a Distagon 25mm f/2.8 back in the days I was working with a Contax system, and I agree with your review. I fondly remember the vivid colours, contrast and sharpness, but I also remember the strong vignetting.

[@22fret]

I use CZJ MC lenses with my Pentacon six TL. The 4/50 Flektogon, the 2.8/80 Biometar and the 2.8/180 Sonnar. Symply fantastic lenses, it is hard to imagine there is anything better within this category...

[@subbbass]

the similarities come from the roots of both companies and development of the lenses from the 30ies on or even earlier. the biotar (1927) and the Pancolar are descendants of the Planar from 1897. The East Germans had very much more difficulties due to the economical restrictions in the GDR. Amazing how they continued to build that high standards of quality.

[@zenography7923]

Indeed - a good CZJ is very hard to beat!

[@subbbass]

@@zenography7923 by the way (not that it's important) Jena pronunciation is like Yale, not like Jennifer.

[@lugentaubner6853]

What an informative comparison. Thank you so much for this content!

[@petersnow389]

Thank you for an excellent, and most interesting review. Carl Zeiss Jena also used to manufacture a Flektogon lens in 25mm focal length, as well as the more widely known 35mm version, and a very imposing optic it was, with a large front element, and 77mm filter thread. It was a 7 element design of f4 maximum aperture. It stopped down to f22, and closest focussing was 20cm. This lens, and my 80mm f2.8 Jena Biometer, and the two lenses that I use the most on my Exakta Varex.

[@petersnow389]

Sorry, that should have read 'are' the two lenses I use the most on my Exakta Varex!.

[@zenography7923]

That 25mm Flek sounds magnificent - I'd love to find one!

[@petersnow389]

@@zenography7923They are indeed. I have been delighted with my example, over the twenty or so years that I have been using it. There are usually a number of them for sale on Ebay at any given time, having said that, most examples seem to be in Exakta fitting, although M42 examples do show up. They seem to sell for a similar, or slightly higher figure than the 35mm optic. I have absolutely zero experience with digital cameras, I do not even own one, so I am not sure how the lens would behave on, for example, a Sony A7, but it would not surprise me at all if the vignetting performance was good, especially given the age of these lenses, even though 25mm was, to the best of my knowledge, never available in a multi coated version, unlike the 20mm Flektogon, which was.

[@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?

[@xDNightmarex]

Glad you finally had the chance to get out and test my little Zeiss against your CZJ ones. I guess it's time that I hunt for a Zeiss Planar 50/1.8 now to step into the ring vs. your beloved Pancolar next? :) [That may even solve the vignetting problem, as 25mm is by far the widest of the three in this comparison]

[@zenography7923]

It may indeed! I'd be interested to know, if you've shot this lens on film, whether it vignettes quite as much? Vignetting is not necessarily a bad thing of course, and quite a few pieces of imaging software offer it as a film-like addition to digital images! It may be that I haven't noticed, but I've never seen quite so much of it from other lenses! I really enjoyed shooting it by the way!

[@Christopher.E.Souter]

@@zenography7923 I have to say that I never experienced even the slightest vignetting with the Distagon 25mm, wide open or stopped down, but that was on film *(24mm x 36mm)* with the Contarex. It's a real mystery to me why it should vignette with a digital sensor which is the same size as a 35mm frame. 🤔 If the sensor were actually *LARGER* than the 35mm frame, it would make sense, but the sensor size, is, in fact, *23.9mm x 34.8mm,* making it slightly *SMALLER.* It just doesn't make sense. Maybe there's something in the camera body that is somehow obscuring the corners of the image circle, or perhaps, the lens doesn't mount at exactly the correct distance from the sensor compared to the film plane....?

[@philhodgkinson1460]

Just bought a CZJ 135mm f3. 5 for £15 but needs work.... have partly stripped it down... one video I saw suggested the focus was very gritty... that described mine until I lubed it....having trouble operating diaphragm with stop down pin... but will get there in the end....also fungus In side front element but its there... Must say beautifully engineered lens... nothing cheap and nasty...there...... Really can't wait to get out with it......!!!

[@jeghedderhenrik]

wonderful video, in fact the most interesting video about vintages lenses for very long time that i have seen,,, my focus have been on industar, jupiter and helios, well and pentacon,,, i will look more for czd in the future

[@diforbes]

Just acquired the Jena 135mm f3.5 and have the Jena 50mm f2.8, both in M42 mount.

[@zenography7923]

Enjoy!

[@bobhadland2554]

Superb info and descriptions. Many thanks 😊

[@zenography7923]

Thanks Bob, glad you enjoyed it!

[@Magnetron692]

Hi Nigel, I live nearby Stuttgart. Thanks for the video! Best wishes, Magnetron

[@zenography7923]

So you're near the Zeiss factory? That's cool!

[@taterandy3958]

I live not far from Stuttgart I try to get some of the Carl Zeiss Jena lens they are both very nice lenes....

[@Magnetron692]

Zenography Yes, now the Zeiss company is located in Oberkochen, ca. 60 km from here

[@Dan-kb2oz]

Received my CZJ Flektogon 35mm f2.4 on Saturday morning and loving it! £122 in great condition. Decision helped by your channel 🙂 I’m using it on a M4/3 G9 as a great 70mm FF equivalent. The close focus and bokeh is awesome. Different focal lengths but I’m not yet sure if I prefer the CZJ or Helios-44 2/58 (older silver one) at 116mm FF equivalent. Loving both tho! Cheers!

[@zenography7923]

They're both nice, but in my experience the CZJ is likely to be rather sharper wide open.

[@Dan-kb2oz]

Zenography Yeah I’m it is and the CZJ close focus on M4/3 is great. Have to be careful I don’t touch the object with the lens haha

[@LonelyRavenProductio]

I have a new in box Jena coming from the UK right now. I've wanted one for years and one of your videos inspired me to check eBay at just the right time. I paid a bit much for it, but New In Box! Also, I have some lenses you may want to borrow; I have the Vivitar Flat Field 90mm Macro, Lester A. Dine 105mm Flat Field Macro, and the Vivitar 90-180mm Flat Field Zoom Macro. All three are amazing lenses, and have plenty of the blurry stuff...but one of them (not telling you which) shines as having "something special".

[@zenography7923]

Oh, that new CZJ sounds wonderful! And I'd love to test those lenses! If you'd like to email me at [e-mail] we can arrange. Thanks!

[@danielbehrendt2187]

I have more or less coincidentally come across your fabulous site. These are wonderful, entertaining, knowledgeable reviews of vintage treasures! You keep mentioning the point of color rendition. I have a question about this, as the color rendition also depends heavily on the camera: Do you usually do a manual white balance, do you set a fixed Kelvin value or do you rely on the automatic white balance? I think, at least with the Sony A7x models, it is quite unreliable. So how do you set up the camera so that the lens and its character play the main role in the color appearance? Many thanks and best regards from Hildesheim, Germany, from Daniel

[@TR6Telos]

I still have a mint 135mm 3.5 Sonnar I paid £18 new in 1980, Image contrast and colour are superb. I also have the Pancolor 1.8 and that is as you describe.

[@philhodgkinson1460]

Just bought one on e bay for £15 but years apart... I never use phrase that Nigel likes (back in the day) can't stand it......!!!

[@TR6Telos]

@@philhodgkinson1460 Enjoy it, its not like £1015 todays silly lens prices!

[@johnwheat5199]

I agree 100%, these lenses must be some of best ever made.

[@CryptoJones]

It maybe almost four years old but this video is an amazing resource and earned a sub from me!!

[@creativegreats6924]

Are the jenas worth buying if rehoused or is it just better to get the Zeiss cp3 lenses ?

[@woodkidlee]

CZJ lenses are impressive and the prices are affordable. CZ lenses are great but quite expensive. I’m enjoy to use CZJ lenses with Pentax Spotmatic.

[@zenography7923]

Agreed!

[@erwinderop8778]

Hello there, I have been watching many videos now and really enjoyd them so much. Bought today a mint ddr aus jena 35mm 2.4. No carl zeiss name on the lens. is there a differnce in quality with the same zeiss lens? Grtz from Belgium.

[@zenography7923]

I doubt there's a difference in quality, the Flektogon design was outstanding at the time - and it's still pretty good now! I can't see CZJ diluting it. Is your lens a later one, from the last years of production? I've heard there were changes in labelling around this time. There was also a dispute between Zeiss (Western) and CZJ over the use of the Zeiss name, which was resolved by CZJ labelling their lenses 'aus jena' for certain markets.

[@erwinderop8778]

Thank you for your response. I digged a little deeper and as you say no difference what so ever. There was just the dispute about whom could use the name. Mine is marked only ‘’aus jena ddr’’ wich places the fabrication of the lens during the trial, and before there was a verdict. And yes it is a fantastic lens. Love vintage lenses and there caracters as i love the prices. Love your channel too ofcourse. Sorry for the misspellings. ;)

[@charlesmorgan8440]

By coincidence I've been using a lot of CZJ lenses on my Exakta (including the 20 and 35mm Flektogons, 50mm Pancolar and 58mm Biogon) while also starting to use the CZ CY mount Distagon 35mm f2.8 and the 85mm Sonnar. I think all are beautifully sharp and render exquisitely on black and white film. I've not tried them with colour film yet, but they are all great. There is a story that the 35mm Distagon is actually a direct copy of the Flektogon, and all my Flektogons continue to give real joy. My M42 mount one actually focusses much more closely than 20cm, making it immensely versatile too! A very nice review.

[@zenography7923]

I've heard that story of the Distagon being a copy of the Flek - it wouldn't surprise me at all, as the CZJ optics are very, very hard to beat!

[@Christopher.E.Souter]

30 years ago, due to an unfortunate combination of circumstances, I was obliged to sell my Zeiss Ikon-Voigtländer Contarex SE outfit, with a set of about 9 Carl Zeiss lenses, including the Distagons 18mm f:4, the 25mm f:2.8, and the 35mm f:4, the Planars 50mm f:2 and the 55mm f:1.4, the Sonnar 85mm f:2, and the Olympia-Sonnars 180mm f:2.8 and the 250mm f:4. The outfit also included the motor drive, and all its associated remote control accessories, which included, among other things, a device for aperture-priority automatic exposure called the *_Tele-Sensor,_* which could automatically adjust the shutter speed to the appropriate value, making it the world's first film camera with automatic exposure capability. The Contarex also accepted interchangeable film magazines, (of which I had 4 in my outfit), the only 35mm camera of the time to have that capability. I even had a full set of Carl Zeiss filters, which had a special bayonet mount for the Contarex lenses. All in all, the camera was Zeiss Ikon's 35mm version of the Hasselblad 500c. The sharpest lens I have ever used was the 85mm Sonnar f:2, and my 25mm Distagon f:2.8 was also incredibly sharp, with the 35mm f:4 and the 50mm f:2 running very close behind. I shall always regret the loss of my Contarex outfit, (these cameras now fetch many thousands at auction, all having been snapped up by very well-heeled Japanese collectors). Unfortunately, neither the Contarex Super, (with TTL selective metering and mechanical shutter), and the Contarex SE, (with TTL selective metering and electronic shutter), are usable today, because the special mercury batteries that they required are no longer available.

[@zenography7923]

That's interesting, thanks for the info! A shame you had to sell your Zeiss kit - did you replace it with another camera later on?

[@Christopher.E.Souter]

@@zenography7923 I also had 2 Leica M3 bodies with a Super-Angulon 21mm f:3.4, an Elmarit 28mm f:2.8 with accessory viewfinder, a Summicron 35mm f:2 (with"Spectacles"), a Summicron 50mm f:2, a Summicron 90mm f:2 and an Elmarit 135mm f:2.8 (also with "Spectacles"), and a Visoflex housing. I later replaced the M3s with M6s and swapped a couple of the lenses out for newer versions which were more compatible with the M6: the Super-Angulon 21mm f:3.4 was replaced with the Elmarit 21mm f:2.8 and the Summicron 35mm f:2 was replaced with the Summilux 35mm f:1.4. I also had a Leica R4 with 35mm, 50mm and 90mm Summicron-R, a Super-Elmar-R 15mm f:3.5 and a 180mm Apo-Telyt-R f:3.4 plus a few other Leica odds and ends... One interesting Leica accessory I had was the ABLON film leader trimmer, which I used for cutting film leaders on bulk Tri-X Pan film, along with a Leica bulk film cassette, which, unfortunately would only fit the screw-mount Leicas. I had a number of other cameras, too: an Olympus OM-1 with 24mm f:2, 50mm f:1.4 and 100mm f:2.8, a Mamiya RB-67 with 50mm f:4.5, 90mm f:3,8 and 180mm f:4.5, a Pentax 6x7 with 55mm f:4, 105mm f:2.4 and 150mm f:2.8, a Rolleiflex 2.8F TLR, a Mamiya Press 6x9, a Pentax Spotmatic (M42 screw mount), and even a Praktica IV, (my first camera, which came with a Meyer Trioplan 50mm f:2.9 with manual non-click-stop diaphragm ring). I later replaced the Trioplan with a Pentax Super Takumar 50mm f:2, and later with the f:1.4, when I swapped from Praktica to Pentax. I even had a Cambo 4x5 with 90mm Schneider Super-Angulon, 150mm Schneider Symmar and a Rodenstock Sironar 300mm lenses. I also had a Kodak Retina IIIC with 35mm f:4, 50mm f:2 and 80mm f:4 lenses along with the 3-turret accessory viewfinder, and the SLR equivalent, a Zeiss-Ikon Contaflex with 35mm, 50mm and 85mm lenses, and two interchangeable backs. (Zeiss Ikon supplied interchangeable magazine backs for the both the Contarex and the Contaflex cameras). I had a reasonably good darkroom, equipped with a relatively cheap but very well-made LPL 4x5 enlarger, and a full set of Rodenstock Rodagon enlarging lenses, for all formats from 4x5 right down to 35mm Half-Frame: 28mm, 40mm, 50mm, 90mm, 105mm and 150mm. I had a friend who was a precision metalworker, who made me a specially customised recessed lens mount for the 28mm, 40mm and 50mm lenses, and an extension arm for remote-control focussing when doing floor projection enlargements. The LPL cost about ¼ the price of an equivalent Durst model, but (IMHO) was very well-designed, manufactured and finished, and it was built like a tank! The Japanese demonstrated that they had learned from the experience of Hiroshima when they designed that enlarger! 😂 Oh yes, I also forgot to mention that at one time, I also had a Zorki 4 (Leica-type cloth focal-plane shutter), with a Jupiter-8 50mm f:2 in 39mm Leica Screw mount. The lens produced extremely sharp and detailed photos with amazing colour saturation on Kodachrome 25 transparencies, but the feel of the camera was quite uncomfortable. The knurling on the film transport knob (no rapid-wind lever) was so rough that I developed a blister on my thumb, and I had to wrap an elastic rubber band around the knob in order to be able to use it with some degree of comfort. Unfortunately, I had to keep replacing the elastic band, because the rubber would perish quite quickly. A shame, really, because otherwise, the camera was very well-made, just not quite up to the Leica standard of smoothness and finish. To summarise, my camera journey began with the Praktica and progressed through Pentax, Contarex, Olympus, the various larger format cameras to the Leicas, and unfortunately it's all gone now. 😢 Apart from anything else, I no longer live in premises where it would be possible to have a darkroom, and I have no desire to buy film cameras if I can't do my own processing and printing. My only 2 cameras now are a Sony α350 (14MP APS-C) with a Zeiss Vario-Sonnar DT 16-80mm f:3.5-4.5 (24-120mm equiv.) and a Panasonic DMC-TZ11 (8MP 1/2.5") with Leica DC Vario-Elmar 4.7-47mm f:3.3-4.9 ASPH (28-280mm equiv.), but I hardly ever use them these days, as I can't get out much, (age catching up, plus the current pandemic situation), and nowadays, I take most of my photos on my Google Pixel 3 XL or my Huawei Mate 9 (which has a Leica camera and lens module - better pics than the Pixel (IMHO), sharper and better colour saturation. Sorry, I've rambled on a bit, but I thought there was a slight chance that you might be interested in my story. The more I write, the more I remember, hence the rambling... and your videos remind me of so much, too... Anyway, keep up the good work; I watch all your videos with great interest and enjoyment! 😁 👍🏻

[@PaulKretz]

Pentacon 50mm f/1.8 can focus down even closer, to 33cm. And there are also astonishing 135mm and 100mm lenses with f/2.8 aperture. Moreover, consider 200mm and 300mm both at f/4! *Is it me or there are no Pentacons on this channel yet?* =) Hope you cover this brand too, as it is kinda mixture of several post-war German manufacturers, including the legendary Meyer-Optik Görlitz and Zeiss Ikon.

[@zenography7923]

I must admit, I've yet to cover these brands in more detail - thanks for the suggestion!

[@alanandkarenbootholdfield6179]

Really useful review

[@zenography7923]

Many thanks, glad you enjoyed it!

[@angelfoto4795]

A comparison of the CZJ DDR Pancolar 1.8 vs the Contax/Zeiss/Rollei Planar 50 1.7/1.8 would be really interesting

[@PrecisionShooter]

Hi Mr. Could You test this "old" lenses: Nikkor 55mm f/2.8 (Micro), Nikkor 35mm F2D, Nikkor 135mm f/3.5 and Nikkor 85mm f/2?

[@zenography7923]

I'd love to - if I had them!

[@PrecisionShooter]

@@zenography7923 That's sad, I love the sharpness and the "3d pop" of the 135mm f/3.5 AI... Nikon z6 wirh 135mm f/3.5 AI at 135mm... f/3.5... 1/30s... ISO 200 drive.google.com/file/d/1Qj7E7RPFtkF4Y4na_0DsKnj_GICLeN_D/view?usp=sharing Nikon z6 with 135mm f/3.5 AI at 135mm... f/3.5... 1/800s... ISO 5000 drive.google.com/file/d/1xxhv_jetNbjK2c-PySoaOETmmdGx7CS_/view?usp=sharing

[@PrecisionShooter]

The termomether was the focus point

[@elusivelens1744]

I purchased a Meyer Optik Oreston 50mm f1.8 (Zebra model) some time ago. Very happy with it. I’m in the process of replacing my entire Canon FD kit with M42. The Oreston is much sharper than any of the FD 50’s I’ve owed. How would you compare MOG Oreston to the CZJ Pancolar? Enjoy the videos.

[@julesfisher3551]

The best comparison would be focal length / aperture side by side so 50mm F1.8 CZJ (M42) versus 50mm F1.7 CZ (C/Y), 35mm f2.4 CZJ (M42) versus 35mm F2.8 CZ (C/Y) etc, etc. As this would show direct performance.

[@arthurmermelshtein1767]

Loved the presentation. CZ lenses are all amazing, both east and west they are fave vintage lenses. I slightly prefer the colors of the DDR ones that's all.

[@zenography7923]

I agree - those colours are hard to beat!

[@creativegreats6924]

Whats the ddr ones ? And what mm do they make them in ?

[@robertolucarini6375]

i get flektogon 20/2.8 and sonnar 180/2.8 many years ago. I still use it on Canon 1D and they are amazing

[@zenography7923]

It's hard to beat the older lenses for character - enjoy! Those both sound like lovely lenses!

[@wakeupcaller6648]

I bought the pancolar 50mm at 1.8 and I sure enough loved it from the very beginning. But I m not sure which version of the pancolar I bought. It is not the zebra, nor the MC or electric. I can't find a single word about this one pancolar. I can send pictures of the fellow

[@zenography7923]

You can send pics to [e-mail]

[@wakeupcaller6648]

@@zenography7923, I will 😊

[@alexaudiovisuals]

Well moving to Jena to study is what got me into vintage Lenses, my Zeiss Jena Pancolar (btw I see you're a true connaisseur as well and chose the red MC one) lives on my Praktica MTL5B which with it's ability to take modern batteries for the light meter and the 3 split focus prism has evolved to be the camera I shoot 99% of my (non-instant) film photography on :) The price is an important point as well since most people nowadays are using their vintage Lenses on digital cameras and if you have to spend hundreds of Euros on them you could just get a modern lens as well. When it comes to digital I'm lazy and like my AF, so the digitals companion of my Pancolar is a Japanese Sony Zeiss 55 Sonnar

[@zenography7923]

Thanks for the info!

[@jimgraves4197]

The post war history of Carl Zeiss Jena versus Zeiss is full of intrigue, but you can't beat the Jena built lenses.

[@zenography7923]

A good CZJ is hard to beat, no doubt about it!

[@danielmalter3373]

I love them, optically and because of home bias. But honestly, I would have to admit and agree that mechanically any Japanese quality lens (Takumar, Yashinon, Canon, Nikon, Olympus) beats them hands down.

[@mjoelnir58]

@@danielmalter3373 Not those from the fiktives,later ones declined in workmanship.As the whole country did,thanks to communism.

[@danielmalter3373]

@@mjoelnir58 I'd say mainly mid to end sixties. The radioactive ones and the ones put in the same metal housing. The earlier ones were frequently aluminum. The earliest brass Biotar wasn't that good mechanically either. And the later ones, like the one's shown here, were a bit "plasticy" or "aluminumy" often with unevenness in the helicoid that doesn't seem to have anything to do with lubrication but with variation in tolerances. Optically, however, they are unimpeachable, with the 80/1.8 probably taking the crown.

[@glebmazur9892]

@@danielmalter3373 Hello, Daniel! I see you know something about optics ;) Do you an optician? I have few questions about getting lens set from one manufacturer. Right now i own Voigtlander color-skorpalex 28 2.8 and planar rollei 50 1.8 (which i will swap on Voigtlander Color Ultron 50 1.8), dont you know how this lenses compare to other zeiss lenses with same focal length? I cant find on any youtube any HUGE lens sets comparison for video shooting where color and rendering/out of focus/image plastics is important (Zeiss Contax Leica R FD s.s.c., nikor, zuiko OM, LOMO OKS): 1. Comparison few lenses from one set (how similar is set in terms of color and skin rendering etc). 2. Comparison, for example 24 to 24 mm / 35 to 35 mm / 50 to 50 mm / 85 to 85 mm lenses from different lens set to see pros and cons of each, artistic characteristics. 3. To hear/read any info about ergonomic comparison (rings, size, pros and cons of body/construction of lens etc). I dream about getting pancolor 80 1.8 and 20 2.8!

[@jaymichaels5187]

The DDR made Zeiss Jena lenses are generally very good. Did you find huge differences in photos taken by the 50mm Pancolar vs the Pentacon 50mm f1.8 lens that was popular on Praktica L series cameras?

[@zenography7923]

I like the Pentacon 50, it's a nice little lens, but the Pancolar, in my opinion, is rather nicer. It's much sharper, background blur is nicer, colours are better... I've used the Pentacon a lot and made some nice images with it, but there is quite a difference between it and the Pancolar!

[@jaymichaels5187]

@@zenography7923 Thank you for your prompt reply, it makes sense now.. as the Pancolar lens was always a primo and a much more expensive upgrade to the Praktica line of cameras for a standard lens and that is why they are much less common than the Pentacon 50mm lens on the vintage lens market.

[@alexbernatzky5646]

It's a shame you got the 25mm in the West's corner. It's widely regarded as extremely average in relation to all the other Contax CY lenses. If you can get a hold of the 50mm 1.7 I think you will fall in love it renders supremely sharply and is an all-round gorgeous lens to shoot with. It's relatively cheap too going for around 130 Euros on German Ebay

[@zenography7923]

Thanks for the tip, I'll check it out!

[@eagleeyephoto8715]

Jena Flektagon serie is better made than majority of the Oberkochen counterparts. On my copy's focus is smooth without any play and aperture ring "clicky".IQ wise it is a waist of money to pay double or even more for "western" versions.

[@zenography7923]

They're nicely made lenses, for sure!

[@4tcfilm]

Very interesting. I got set of Carl Zeiss lenses with Icarex BX mount (w adapter can be use on Canon EOS mount) Skoparex 35mm, Ultron 50mm, Dynarex 90mm, Super Dynarex 135mm, I noticed, that the lowest F-stop is on the left (West), while at Pancolar lens - on the right (East). In Poland we use to call that "sun is rising on the west!" (slonce wschodzi na zachodzie)...

[@zenography7923]

You have some very interesting lenses there! I never noticed the aperture scale difference, I'll remember it now though - slonce wschodzi na zachdzie!

[@4tcfilm]

maybe you can do another story about Leica and LOMO (called Russian Leica) lenses...

[@glebmazur9892]

​@@4tcfilm lomo is awesome performer, esp. in anamorphic ;) I personally dont own but using lomo you can achive super vintage sharp image with great flares!

[@blackheartusa]

Which radioactive lens did you like for autumn photography? It was a lens that had yellowing in the elements. Great videos.

[@zenography7923]

The Pentax takumar 50mm f1.8 would be a good choice, as would the Minolta Rokkor PF 58mm f1.4.

[@williambolton5679]

I may have found a vintage lens that outdoes the Pancolar for sharpness and color, the Konica 45mm f1.8 which has to be removed from a Konica fixed lens camera and adapted for use on digital cameras. Certainly, the video on KZbin that I watched suggests this. I'm awaiting delivery on the camera which I won at auction on eBay, a helicoid from Taiwan, and a step-up ring from Amazon. The conversion looks straightforward.

[@zenography7923]

I'd be very interested to know how you get on!

[@califmike2003]

Are you using the Zeiss pancolar 50mm f1.8 jena MC ? or 8 blade radioactive version ?

[@davidpostma9862]

Well presented.

[@zenography7923]

Thanks!

[@keithowens9374]

Excellent comparative review.

[@zenography7923]

Many thanks, glad you enjoyed it!

[@shy-guy5544]

I read that the 25mm distagon minimum focus distance is 17cm rather than 25cm.

[@chipmunkhunt]

I wish now that I had bought Karl Zeiss when I was serving in West Berlin during the Wall years. Instead, I just purchased a monocular dirt cheap.

[@zenography7923]

If only we could go back in time!

[@nocarsgo]

really enjoy your videos. they are useful

[@zenography7923]

Many thanks, glad you're enjoying them!

[@osa175red]

Excellent presentation. IMHO go for Jena lenses, comparable build quality in general, superb optics, better color rendition in most of the products. Why pay more? Btw. German "J" is pronounced as "Y", as in Yuma. Regards, t.

[@zenography7923]

A good CZJ is very, very hard to beat!

[@5272lihp]

It would be great if you could make a comparison with the 28mm f2.8 Distagon with other lenses please 🙏 Great content as ever 👌

[@zenography7923]

Glad you're enjoying the videos - thanks for the suggestion!

[@5272lihp]

@@zenography7923 yes I really take a lot from the options that you give. Great content and look forward to zeiss v leica face off 😅

[@theneed5977]

Pancolar 50 1.8 is not biotar lens formula its a planar. It would be very interesting in a future video a planar formula lens comparison: Pancolar 50 1.8 vs Rollei Planar 50 1.8 QBM vs Yashica ML 50 1.7 vs Zeiss Planar 50 1.7

[@punkrachmaninoff]

the zeiss 25/2.8 vs the pentax 24/2.8 would be an interesting comparison...

[@abee117]

Hi everyone, I want to know your opinion... If you have to choose between a Carl Zeiss 1.8 50mm pantacolor and a Carl Zeisa 25mm 1.4 Jena Tevidon which one do you choose?

[@zenography7923]

I haven't used the CZJ 25mm, though if you think it rivals the Pancolar I'd certainly like to!

[@simplexj4298]

7:10 When it comes to vignetting, it's not really fair to compare a 25 mm to a 50 mm. In construction vignetting is much harder to avoid the shorter your focal length gets. So for any given film / sensor format it would be appropriate to compare lenses that have at least similar focal lengths.

[@adriandobre9366]

Well, flektogon 20mm isn't cheap also, it makes you wonder if you should buy it since is 400-500 euros while the 20 1.8 from sony can be found at this year black friday around 800-900 euros or even better... I wanted a wide manual focus but there is no cheap option, all go too high in price to be considered

[@zenography7923]

There does come a point at which it makes economic sense to consider a modern lens - and vintage lenses do become much more expensive, the wider you go...

[@Loftikaz]

Agree the 21mm is rare and about £2000 the least

[@houseofob3479]

Another excellent video. Very informative. Thank you so much. You have one me over. I have subscribed.

[@billybeck]

Hi, have you done a vintage macro video? Love your videos.

[@zenography7923]

Not yet!

[@lxhk3595]

You pronounced Stuttgart impressingly correctly. The J in Jena is pronounced like i (like eagle) .. so "ea"-ena. That out of the way, i love your channel.

[@reinhardankenbauer3241]

It's nice to hear that our East-German brothers and sisters were able to make such beautiful lenses before the German re-unification. It would not be surprising if their lens manufacturers would have been on the same ridiculous level as their car makers (Trabant and Wartburg "state of the art" vehicles). Nowadays, former Zeiss Jena continues to function under the name "Jenoptik".

[@vojtasTS29]

I mean it was Jena who invented the whole Retrofocus thing that allowed us to make wide angle SLR lenses. The Flektogon was later copied as the Distagon by the west. Especially the 35/2,4 is one of the best photography lenses ever made with superb coatings in the MC electric verison.

[@zenography7923]

The CZJ lenses are outstanding, and in my view the best ones outperform their western counterparts by a very long way. My gold standard manufacturer.

[@princeharbinger]

What makes you think the MC electric is any better than the regular MC version? The electric in the name is for the contacts at the bottom of the rear mount.

[@vojtasTS29]

@@princeharbinger There's a whole lore around it saying the coatings were better than on the regular MC.

[@princeharbinger]

@@vojtasTS29 That's interesting. I just had a look at a electric Red MC and a non electric Red MC. The coatings on the front and rear elements look identical. Also from what I saw it appears they only made Red MC electric lenses. The white MC has the latest coatings. I'll likely get the white and the red. I think if I recall correctly the red has a unique circular firey flare.

[@kommissarjupiter7667]

If price is an factor, I'll take the east made ones

[@zenography7923]

A good CZJ is very hard to beat!

[@carlinnguyen4341]

Comparing a wide angle to a standard of course the 50mm is gonna be sharper.

[@DJBastor]

amazing voice my friend :)

[@zenography7923]

Thank you so much!

[@mjoelnir58]

On the mechanical side I had mixed experiences,older versions seemed to withstand time better.

[@zenography7923]

A good CZJ is hard to beat, but they do need to be serviced to keep them in top condition!

[@mjoelnir58]

@@zenography7923 Agreed

[@karlabmdz]

Can anyone explain or share a resource that explains what every name means as far as their characteristics and what's the difference between them ? thanks :)

[@brianmccutcheon3205]

The Distagon 25 mm f2.8. $580 to $2,000 plus in Australian ebay

[@zenography7923]

Lens prices do seem quite high in Australia, unfortunately...

[@wendysburgers4326]

Jena Flektogon has 3 version 1st Gen - Flektogon Auto 2nd Gen - Electric MC Flektogon 3rd Gen - MC Flektogon

[@ivanguerra1260]

No man, thank you for your great work !

[@zenography7923]

Many thanks, glad you enjoyed it!

[@danielmalter3373]

Zeiss Jena is pronounced Yeh-nah, which is the city in Thuringia in which Zeiss was/is located. As for Zeiss West, try the Ultron 50mm 1.8 if you can get your hands on it. It is expensive, but it is special optically and for being the first lens with a concave front element (it renders magic on par with or better than the Pancolar; downsides are terrible ergonomics, clickless and easily accidentally moved aperture ring, heavy vignetting wide open, the terrible idea of a silver barrel, which can reflect directly into the lens, and the lack of a filter ring). As for the Distagon West, it looks like it could be from Carl Zeiss Jena (East), except that Carl Zeiss Jena never produced a lens with an aperture mechanism that stops down turning left, as far as I know.

[@Christopher.E.Souter]

The Ultron was a Voigtländer lens, not Zeiss.

[@danielmalter3373]

@@Christopher.E.Souter Zeiss Ultron 50mm f1.8 and Voigtlaender (Color)-Ultron 50mm f1.8 and Ultron 50mm f2 are not the same lens. All were developed by Dr. Albrecht Tronnier for Voigtlander, who also developed the Xenon and Xenar. According to Wikipedia, Voigtlaender joined Zeiss West in 1956. The particular model I am refering to, the Zeiss Ultron 50mm 1.8 with the concave front element, was only made under the Zeiss Brand and sold with the Icarex 35 and Icarex SL706.

[@hector_soria_photo]

I would really love to know what 10 goals he would keep from his entire collection.

[@UmaticSota]

Pronounced: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jena.ogg

[@zenography7923]

You're not the first to point this out, but thanks for the correction!

[@UmaticSota]

@@zenography7923 You're welcome. I still own a number of Zeiss Jena lenses that I picked up in East Berlin back in 1973. Great value for money.

[@klauspetermann2373]

The Zeiss West 35mm optics comes in 2 versions: the contax series...heavy, double price, same optic. the rollei series...lightweight, half price!, same optic...they have a cheaper body because rollei has in the seventies ohnly cheap 35mm slr. the prices run as high as the contax series until the sl 2000f was introduced. The Rollei Zeiss 35mm lenses where in the seventies much cheaper as minolta and pentax lenses! I know it from pricelist from germany from this time. the optical engeniering of the zeiss jena lenses loses a bit of the fact that the east germans had no admitnance to the best rare glsses of the world market...one engeneer from pentacon told me. ju must take my horible english writing....excuse me for that shit...thanks to zenography!

[@zenography7923]

That's very interesting info, I didn't know that! I'll look out for some of these Rollei lenses - stay tuned for more Zeiss lenses soon!

[@glebmazur9892]

Hello, Klaus! I see you know something about optics ;) I have few questions about getting lens set from one manufacturer. Right now i own Voigtlander color-skorpalex 28 2.8 and planar rollei 50 1.8 (which i will swap on Voigtlander Color Ultron 50 1.8), dont you know how this lenses compare to other zeiss lenses with same focal length? I cant find on any youtube any HUGE lens sets comparison for video shooting where color and rendering/out of focus/image plastics is important (Zeiss Contax Leica R FD s.s.c., nikor, zuiko OM, LOMO OKS): 1. Comparison few lenses from one set (how similar is set in terms of color and skin rendering etc). 2. Comparison, for example 24 to 24 mm / 35 to 35 mm / 50 to 50 mm / 85 to 85 mm lenses from different lens set to see pros and cons of each, artistic characteristics. 3. To hear/read any info about ergonomic comparison (rings, size, pros and cons of body/construction of lens etc). I dream about getting pancolor 80 1.8 and 20 2.8!

[@klauspetermann2373]

@@glebmazur9892 Hello Gleb, 1.+2. Rollei comes in the seventies in two versions Rollei Bodies and Voitländer bodies. The same production in different looks. Voigtländer get bankrupet at the end of the sixtis, then was bought by Rollei ( bouth in the same city - braunschweig/brunswik). The first 35 mm model was originally from Voitländer, the next only versions of rollei models. The lenses (Voigtländer or Rollei label) are Zeiss opticts produced by rollei - in braunschweig or in singapur. (better build quality from braunschweig, also by the optics, but the same quality by the glasses, on the maschines from germany, hundreds of rollei workers moved to singapur at the begin of the seventies, Rollei had at the time 2000 workers in germany an 2000 in singapore...a financiell horortrip in the time, a technologietransfer to asia)with the zeiss name on it where produced by Zeiss Oberkochen, near stuttgart. All lenses have nearly the same color characteristics, the quality of the optics are all very good. The best are HFT and Color-Skoparex lenses, a bit better than the early carl zess lenses without HFT. 28 2,8 ? could it be labeled Rolleinar, also Voigtländer xy? Than it is from a second producer (Mamyja, Tokina). Zeiss had a 2,8 25 mm. All of the optics had a very light body, not so rubust like leica. but in optics zeiss is the bigger company and have more technology advances than leica! Zeiss target: best quality from the open stop, all same color characteristics. 3. pancolar 1,8 80mm ....very rare, from zeiss jena (east germany), optical quality? (i don't own ones) 20 2,8 flektogon...i have one..not the best in comparison to my tokina 2,8 17.tokina! That was the first 20mm ultrawide for 35 mm from zeiss jena, developed 1970. East germany at this time can't buy glasses on the (west) at the time. good engeniering, but often low quality of materials. Zeiss Jena is a bit overrated today. Example price in germany in the eighties Zeiss West 18 2,8 2000 DM, Flektogon 500DM, Nikon 20 2,8 1500Dm(circa but i know it) At the begin of the seventies zeiss 18 2,8 900DM, Nikon 20 1000DM and Zeiss Jena 20 mm 500DM...the same price than in the eightis ( they need cash from the west) In my opinion today the best for you in M42 is Pentax Takumar...expensiv like nikon at there time! best quality also the body. Sorry for my bad english, hope you can understand...writing quick and dirty. but it makes fun to tell a person of knowledge that no owne is interesting in the real life. Gleb Mazur...Kurt Mazur Symphonieorchester Gewandhaus Leipzig, than Met New York. Have a nice day! Klaus Ps. Mr. Zenografi makes a wonderful job. At all gives him a bit back!

[@glebmazur9892]

@@klauspetermann2373 Thank you so much, Klaus! It was very interesting to read) Would be cool meet you on a cup of tea, your english is more than enough to understand this ;) So can you advice me a propper set of Rolleis that will match if i`ll shoot video from different cameras? 25 2.8, 35 2.8, 50 1.8 right? Are you sure that HFT rollei is better than Voigtlander? I`ve heard that 50 1.4 HFT versions are soft vide open and it is better to save money and go for a 50 1.8 Voigtlander to save up some cash. I really love how canons FD s.s.c. 1/2 versions render colors/skin/flaring and they become pretty sharp 2.8. But the price is just WTF (totally worth it, but i cant afford right now for my small video production), leica got +- same characteristics (warm flare, skintones). So you say best wide angle choice would be tokina - thank you i will research prices!

[@simonc4764]

CZJ is the orginal Zeiss company and plant. CZ West Germany has to reinvent itself a like an offspring. At first just after the partition of Germany both companies collaborated with design and gradully drifted apart but there is no reason not to believe they continue to collaborated unofficially in a limited capacity right up to unification.

[@cameraprepper7938]

The Zeiss (West Germany) Distagon 25mm 2.8 was one of the "weakest" for the Contax Cameras,

[@marcp.1752]

To name it - the Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 35mm F2.4 is totally overhyped nowadays. It's not better than the Distagon 35/2.8 (MM) which is into C/Y (Contax-Yashica) Mount. But also -nowadays- pricey. I shoot with these for >3 Decades, so i can tell a story. And these infamous sought after "red MC" is a craze, it's not worse or better than later iterations, but don't have MC into red letters. Anyway, the T* Coatings are better (and Zeiss is improving these always, whileas the exact type of layers is an unknown valid to this day)

[@bingohume7013]

I fully agree with you and I have both the 35 f2.4 in m42 and PB and the 35 2.8 MMJ and 1.4 In CY. It’s people like this KZbin creator creating hype and therefore raising the prices on these lenses.

[@marcp.1752]

@@bingohume7013 Exactly! So do i. MMJ "Made in Japan" Distagon 35/2.8 in makers box, leather pouch and stuff, and the Carl Zeiss Jena inside it's round leather Pouch, also original. The Distagon wins, but the prices are hilarious nowadays. I do shoot with Contax since 1989. Have the RTS, RTS II, RTS III (defunct), 139Q, 159mm, 167mt, RX & ST. And the MM 28/2.8, 35/2.8, 50/1.4, 50/1.7, 28-70/3.5-4.5, 35-70/3.4, 28-85/3.3-4 Lenses. Also various Yashica ML, FX-1, FX-D, FX-3 Super 2000, FR, FR-I, TL-Super, TL Electro X, etc. But _not_ the 35/1.4 MMG or MMJ, because it was always too expensive. Nowadays, prices up to >2400 EUR, from Japan, really insane. /had forgotten the 167mt. (2-times) ;)

[@bingohume7013]

@@marcp.1752 nice set up you have! I have lenses from 18 mm to 300 mm particularly the 100-300 zoom and recently the 55 1.2 now that’s a beast and fun to play with!! I’m still shooting film but will eventually I will go digital. I mainly use the multiple RX/ S2 60 th anniversary and Aria when I want to travel light. My AX went defunct recently not worth repairing. Glad to of met someone who can call the 3rd world optics hype BS.

[@marcp.1752]

@@bingohume7013 I know the late 90's 100-300 very well, but haven't bought it yet. And the 55/1.2 is almost impossible to find, _and_ to pay, uber-expensive, for myself, way too much. But a great lens. /edit the Aria from 1998 (whereas the 28-70 Vario-Sonnar "Kit"lens came from) was the #1 and only with Matrix Metering, but overhyped, i mean, i prefer my RX or ST. The AX in contrast, technically 1996 a blast, but uber expensive, and a behemoth of a 35mm SLR, more than the RTS III 1990 even more. But both showed the Kyocera standard, back into the day.

[@bingohume7013]

@@marcp.1752 my holy trio lens is the 28 f2 Hollywood 35 f1.4 as mentioned earlier and 55 1.2 my recent acquisition. I love this trio and right now I’m trying to decide on a digital camera for them. The 100-300 is truly magical the images from it looks crisp and punchy in a Zeiss way. In fact all these lenses I’ve mentioned are special and I’m glad I bought them years ago before mirrorless cameras became popular and people like this KZbin creator started hyping up legacy lenses to drive up the costs of forgotten lenses. I mainly use my Aria for travelling because it’s light and small with the 28-70 or 45 pancake lens. I loved the AX for macro usage and for around the home or studio it made my 60 S even more macro with it than normal macro plus autofocus to boot! I might pick up another AX body later but I’m looking into digital right now. I found the RX to be the right size for me not too big not too small. Personally speaking I love Carl Zeiss optics but I found the Contax bodies long term not that reliable and often with electrical problems like my AX or slipping mirror problem or vinyl cover aging faster than compared to other brands.

[@theoldfilmbloke]

I want to know 'What is a ZENOGRAPHER' ?? I just take snaps -- some of which are Published and some of which win Awards -- I call myself a 'Photographer' ---

[@zenography7923]

A zenographer is broadly similar to a photographer, but with a bit more zen.

[@raycharlebois122]

You should watch his first video if you want his original explanation. Although I like his answer here very much.

[@michaelwhiles5282]

The 25mm Zeiss isn't their best lens, check out the 50 1.7 which for many years was known as the sharpest 50 on the market place. Today its good but very high levels of CA (purple edges). Just because it says Zeiss it doesn't always mean best in class. Most modern Zeiss glass is made in Japan by budget camera brand COSINA. So the older East German made can almost claim to be the REAL Zeiss... I'm NOT a Zeiss basher -- their M fit glass is (on the whole) lovely. But the old stuff is pretty dam good - just don't over pay for it when bidding etc.

[@zenography7923]

I'm sure there's a vintage Zeiss lens out there somewhere that can beat the CZJ Pancolar - but I haven't found it yet!

[@michaelwhiles5282]

@@zenography7923 - Good luck with that !

[@ViewandReview]

nice

[@zenography7923]

Thanks!

[@nocommentnoname1111]

Never shot a Western Z before??

[@zenography7923]

Nope!

[@mjoelnir58]

In my opinion the build quality of the Jena lenses faded in the last years of production,especialy the mechanical components were inferior to the older versions.I own several of these gems.Carl Zeiss Jena Was the brand Name even before the war,Zeiss West was in Oberkochen so they did not use Jena anymore. .

[@zenography7923]

Thanks for the info!

[@blueguitar4419]

Praising east Germany would have been a punishable sin in the old days. Good to know we can be objective now

[@Sembilan_Benua]

not an actual comparison at focal length but nice video, but why are you whispering..hmm

[@zenography7923]

Just my natural voice, friend...

[@elijahfernandez8385]

#asmr

[@vespabaviera6764]

Just one thing: it's pronounced Iena not Jena

[@zenography7923]

i know, sorry; i corrected it in later videos. Thanks for looking in!

[@jacovanlith5082]

Please, mind the correct pronounciation of JENA ! Think of “Yea or nay”. JENA : JE pronounced like "Yea" JENA: NA pronounced the vowel "A" in the word "master".

[@zenography7923]

Thanks for the tip!

[@NickShvelidze]

Jena is not pronounced like that.

[@writenamehere0000]

CAIS, not ZAIS ! Pronounce properly ! Jena is not pronounced with a J. It is prononunced "Yena".

[@zenography7923]

I hope you'll permit my anglicisation of Jena....thanks for watching!

[@Anarki2U]

You are wrong about Zeiss, there was not a dividing of the company after the, during the war most of the knpwhow and the companys "brains" excaped to the western part of Germany and settlet, so the "real" Zeiss are the western Zeiss since it was made by the original people who was the heart of the company, the eastern part was stolen by the russian occupiers. So the eastern Jena company are most based on old lens designs, where as the western Zeiss company most are based on new lens designs ! That is why the new western Zeiss are the best ! Carl Zeiss Planar 50mm 1.7 are the best of 50mm !!! You are a NOOB, you cannot compare different length of lenses and the 25mm Distagon are on of the weakest in the western lenses, try the 28mm 2.0 Distagon ! This is about one of the worst reviews I have EVER seen !!! I read ALL the review of all Zeiss at the time when they was new, so I know... and I know several who have Zeiss lenses.

[@zenography7923]

I've not shot many of the Western Zeiss lenses it's true, but of those I've used, none have outperformed the Zeiss Jena Pancolar. Thanks for your comment friend.

[@raycharlebois122]

I wish there was better information on the internet about the history of these two companies. I read conflicting reports all over the place and it's hard to get a real fix on the truth.

[@writenamehere0000]

Learn to pronounce ZEISS properly.

[@zenography7923]

With a TS sound at the beginning, right? I studied German many years ago, but I hope you'll permit an Anglicisation, and that it doesn't grate too much...