I took the newly converted CZJ 5cm F2 Sonnar "T" to the Marine Museum. Subjects stay still, and lighting is constant. I compared the results with the 1934 uncoated Sonnar, and a multi-coated lens. I was kind of surprised.
So- Uncoated 1934 5cm F2 Sonnar
Sonnar T 5cm F2, single-coated
And the pre-production Bertele Sonnar.
All at F2.
I've had the 1934 5cm F2 Sonnar for over 20 years, is the first lens I converted to Leica Mount using a J-8 focus mount. The bloom on it is beautiful. I've recently picked up a slightly later 5cm F2 Sonnar, glass is very clean. Will have to compare the two. The front element on the 5cm F2 is very soft, same as the Leica lenses of the period. Finding one in the condition of my 1934 lens is near impossible. Beginner's luck for me.
So- Uncoated 1934 5cm F2 Sonnar
Sonnar T 5cm F2, single-coated
And the pre-production Bertele Sonnar.
All at F2.
I've had the 1934 5cm F2 Sonnar for over 20 years, is the first lens I converted to Leica Mount using a J-8 focus mount. The bloom on it is beautiful. I've recently picked up a slightly later 5cm F2 Sonnar, glass is very clean. Will have to compare the two. The front element on the 5cm F2 is very soft, same as the Leica lenses of the period. Finding one in the condition of my 1934 lens is near impossible. Beginner's luck for me.
Last edited:
dexdog
Mentor
interesting comparison. The first two look a lot alike, although somewhat better contrast on the second. I guess the bloom on the 1934 lens helps a lot, it is impressive for an 89 year old lens. I think that the odd one out in this set is the third, color rendition is cooler/more blue at least on my monitor. That said, all are good performers and sharpness does not appear to vary at all.
Do you know what are they using for lighting?
All I know is- they switched over to LED lighting several years ago. The Gunner at Pearl Harbor has constant lighting, the Korean War display is under computer control.
Maybe that accounts for the minimal differences, impressive performance by the uncoated lens!