The Bertele Sonnar 5cm F2 Picture Thread.

The (post war) Opton lenses have a different look in my opinion. More punchy, slightly less focus shift, better closed down rendition (at the price of worse wide-open aberrations) which is of course something that some people (including me!) like. Zeiss Opton were just getting their bearings and sample variation, at least from my experience, worse than the (up to war-time) Jena lenses.

Near the end of the run they seem to have managed to square the circle and you get all of the benefits and the full aperture rendition is also improved! However these are hard to find and most have separated lens elements. I often wish Zeiss had stayed on the Rangefinder horse than throwing everything they had into the Contarex... altough these lenses are indeed also lovely... and now we're well off topic. Apologies!
 
Going back on topic, strangely enough - at least in my experience the post-war f2 lenses seem to have been a bit neglected. They do not offer much notable improvements that I can see over their pre-war brethren (assuming equal condition and both being fully T coated).
 
I've seen a lot of sample-to-sample variation on the Zeiss Opton lenses, and a lot of lens separation in the later Carl Zeiss lenses. I wish they had stuck with Balsam!
I have a really nice Carl Zeiss 50/1.5 Sonnar with perfect glass- keep it on an Amedeo adapter, and an early (90K SN) Zeiss Opton that someone tried to make into LTM but blew it. That one- back to Contax mount, and in an inexpensive LTM adapter. The Post-War lenses are closer in performance to the wartime Sonnars.
 
Sonnar Brian said:
I've seen a lot of sample-to-sample variation on the Zeiss Opton lenses, and a lot of lens separation in the later Carl Zeiss lenses. I wish they had stuck with Balsam!
I have a really nice Carl Zeiss 50/1.5 Sonnar with perfect glass- keep it on an Amedeo adapter, and an early (90K SN) Zeiss Opton that someone tried to make into LTM but blew it. That one- back to Contax mount, and in an inexpensive LTM adapter. The Post-War lenses are closer in performance to the wartime Sonnars.
Click to expand...

You and others have expressed the same opinion about not using Balsam glue for lenses. What caused the change away from this cement? The trees are still growing.
 
I assume it was some of what Brian said, and also (this is my educated guess!) that this was likely an early UV (or other trigger) cured cement which would have made lens assembly more controlled and generally easier, as you could move the elements about until you were happy and then "bake it" in UV light or similar to make the cement set. With balsam you have to work in a tight window before all the solvents evaporate out and it starts to solidify which depends on a lot of things such as spacing, room temperature etc. making it a more - for lack of better words - artisanal process.

Aka this was a simplification and a cost reduction measure, most likely!

Rolleiflexes and other Zeiss lenses of the same era also often suffer from separation, especially if the cemented surface has steep curvature (Sonnar - Check!) and very different glass types (Sonnar - Check!).
 
dexdog said:
I saw the Matt Osborne youtubereview of the pre-production Bertele lens. He liked it, but seemed to favor the Carl Zeiss version (it kinda grated on my nerves that he repeatedly referred to the Carl Zeiss lens as a Zeiss-Opton). I wonder how long it will be before Skyllaney has these available for purchase. I will probably buy one.

I have a fox that conducts regular patrols of my front porch in early morning, spot it on my front door camera 3 or 4 times a week.
Click to expand...

I had a small dialog going with Matt over this lens and getting him interested. I like it a lot for the color. Matt does not do color as much, but likes to see a Brit lens as he said in his review. As he is a mono guy he was less impressed than he would have been with color and an M-9. Be that as it may he did like the lens. I just wish he liked it more. Anyway, it got some good press which is good for Chris at Skyllaney and hopefully for the production of the lens going forward. There is a rash of retro lenses out now. I hope Skyllaney can compete against the PRC juggernaut. Skyllaney's Bertele is such a sweet lens. I am grateful to have my copy and love its color and IQ.
 
wlewisiii said:
Well, I understand that but my budget sez that the retro lenses are nope nope and an even bigger nope.

OTOH, perhaps I'll get lucky and they'll help make a decent quality (unhazed) Nokton 35/1.4 fall into my hands at a price I can afford ;)
Click to expand...
Are Nokton 35/1.4 prone to haze, too? It seems like a lot of CV lenses are. Which is a shame - I quite like a lot of them.

And yeah Skyllaney appear to do good work (I have no personal experience, though) but cheap they sure aren't!
 
I'm not a 100% sure about that Nokton but so many of the Cosina Voigtlanders are that I consider them guilty till proven innocent. I should ask Sonnar Brian some time when I'm bothering him about something else anyway ;)
 
wlewisiii said:
Well, I understand that but my budget sez that the retro lenses are nope nope and an even bigger nope.

OTOH, perhaps I'll get lucky and they'll help make a decent quality (unhazed) Nokton 35/1.4 fall into my hands at a price I can afford ;)
Click to expand...

Check out the KMZ Jupiters. I have gotten some nice ones. My '57 Jupiter 8 is a honey. $100

These are not great photos but they do show color and image quality, at $100. The '57 J8 is just great.

 
I've actually owned one in the past. When I need that itch scratched I have an excellent Nikkor 50/1.4 on my S2 :) & a Nikkor 50/2 for the M 240.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top