Indeed - a good CZJ is very hard to beat!

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

Thanks Bob, glad you enjoyed it!

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

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

@@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.

Many thanks, glad you're enjoying them!

Many thanks, glad you enjoyed it!

Many thanks, glad you enjoyed it!

Oh, that new CZJ sounds wonderful! And I'd love to test those lenses! If you'd like to email me at zenography11@gmail.com we can arrange. Thanks!

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

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

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

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

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

Thanks!

Agreed!

They're nicely made lenses, for sure!

Enjoy!

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!

@@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....?

Many thanks, glad you enjoyed it!

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......!!!

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

Thank you so much!

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

Not yet!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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

@@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.

@@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!

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!

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

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.

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. ;)

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!

@@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.

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?

@@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! 😁 👍🏻

I agree - those colours are hard to beat!

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

Thanks for the info!

A good CZJ is very, very hard to beat!

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

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

​@@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!

If only we could go back in time!

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

I'd love to - if I had them!

@@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

The termomether was the focus point

A good CZJ is very hard to beat!

You can send pics to zenography11@gmail.com

@@zenography7923, I will 😊

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.

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.

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

@@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.

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

@@zenography7923 Agreed

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...

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

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

Thanks!

The Ultron was a Voigtländer lens, not Zeiss.

@@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.

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

@@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.

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

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

Nope!

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!

@@zenography7923 - Good luck with that !

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!

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!

@@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!

@@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!

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 KZfaq creator creating hype and therefore raising the prices on these lenses.

@@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) ;)

@@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.

@@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.

@@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 KZfaq 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.

Just my natural voice, friend...

Thanks for the info!

Thanks for the tip!

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

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

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.

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.

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...