carl zeiss jena tessar 50/2.8!!!

[richardHaw]

https://richardhaw.com/2021/08/05/repair-carl-zeiss-jena-tessar-50mm-f-2-8/

rather underwhelming despite its reputation

[David H. Hartman]

https://richardhaw.com/2021/08/05/repair-carl-zeiss-jena-tessar-50mm-f-2-8/

rather underwhelming despite its reputation

"The overblown areas of this photo bloom and look washed-out. When metering with this it’s best to underexpose the photo a bit so details look better in the bright areas." --From article linked above

I believe lost diffused highlights in digital images are more unpleasant compared to film. I've never accepted ETTR as a useful method of exposure. When you loose diffused highlights the image will look ugly. I'd much rather accept noisy shadows. The dynamic range of recent DSLR and Mirrorless cameras should end ETTR but it lives on.

Dave

[David H. Hartman]

Thank you for another good read!

[richardHaw]

its probably due to the coatings, i have ordered a zebra to see if that resolved this, also going to shoot with my contessa again as i assume that the formula is the same

the cheaper 50/3.5 really beats this guy in mostly everything

[MEPER]

The classic Voigtländer 50/2.8 and 50/3.5 Color-Skopar lenses (which are also a kind of Tessar design) the 50/3.5 also got a better reputation?
Apart from that I was very happy with 50/2.8 which was soft at 2.8 but very sharp stopped down a bit (5.6 - .

[richardHaw]

not sure about those 2 but the CZJ 50/3.5 has something magical in it. ive restored 2 of them and the results are identical to mark the 1st one as a fluke. it really is a magical lens

[rosko]

Richard, I am amazed by the new look of this lens after your cleaning !

Also, quite decent pictures.

[MEPER]

not sure about those 2 but the CZJ 50/3.5 has something magical in it. ive restored 2 of them and the results are identical to mark the 1st one as a fluke. it really is a magical lens

Some few images here with 50/3.5 Color-Skopar. A person has been creative and been able to fit the lens to a digital rangefinder......any similarities with CZJ 50/3.5?
https://www.talkemount.com/threads/color-skopar-voigtlander-finally-mounted-on-the-nex.2627/

I have an adapter for the Prominent version (to Z-mount) but have not yet used the lens.....

[richardHaw]

Richard, I am amazed by the new look of this lens after your cleaning !

Also, quite decent pictures.

the original one looks like it was varnished with a clear coat, that coat is now gone, of course

[richardHaw]

Some few images here with 50/3.5 Color-Skopar. A person has been creative and been able to fit the lens to a digital rangefinder......any similarities with CZJ 50/3.5?
https://www.talkemount.com/threads/color-skopar-voigtlander-finally-mounted-on-the-nex.2627/

I have an adapter for the Prominent version (to Z-mount) but have not yet used the lens.....

im not sure, maybe it does.

these photos illustrate what i mean by "magic". theres a "cleanliness" quality to the photos of the 50/3.5 CZJ absent from all other lenses ive tried from any manufacturer. it is hard to explain

[Erik Lund]

"The overblown areas of this photo bloom and look washed-out. When metering with this it’s best to underexpose the photo a bit so details look better in the bright areas." --From article linked above

I believe lost diffused highlights in digital images are more unpleasant compared to film. I've never accepted ETTR as a useful method of exposure. When you loose diffused highlights the image will look ugly. I'd much rather accept noisy shadows. The dynamic range of recent DSLR and Mirrorless cameras should end ETTR but it lives on.

Dave

Yes, I completely agree.
Also thank you for the work Rick.

[Gone]

Does the (later?) "zebra" version have the same optics / foibles?

[richardHaw]

Does the (later?) "zebra" version have the same optics / foibles?

zebra looks like the optics have been recalculated but i am not sure.

zebra performs better, much better in my tests

[Gone]

Better than the 50mm f3.5?

[richardHaw]

Better than the 50mm f3.5?

close.