[g026r]

Since it didn't seem to reach any decision in the Soviet Lenses Club thread over whether not it was appropriate to post East German lenses there, this here is a new club especially for them, be they the big names (Zeiss Jena, Meyer, Pentacon) or the small (Ludwig, Feinmess).

To start, some photos of mine:

Pentacon 30/3.5:



Carl Zeiss Jena Tessar 50/2.8:



Pentacon auto 50/1.8: (A lens that I find has a lot of coma when wide open. Never tried the equivalent Meyer lens, so no idea if it was present then as well)




Pentacon electric 135/2.8 MC:



Carl Zeiss Jena "S" 135/3.5: (One of the Sonnars for export to a region where they weren't allowed to use that trademark)



Meyer-Optik Görlitz Telemegor 180/5.5:



Pentacon auto 200/4 MC:

---

Last edited by g026r; 06-25-2014 at 07:35 PM.

[manishved]

The last one looks nice.
I believe that most East German/Soviet glass used Thorium those days...

[g026r]

I believe that most East German/Soviet glass used Thorium those days...

Some did and some didn't. For instance: according to some posts I saw... somewhere, can't remember anymore... where the guy tested a number of lenses with a Geiger counter, the "zebra" Biometar and "zebra" Flektogon did, but in both cases only the versions with Pentacon-6 mounts. The m42 mounts of both didn't register.

[g026r]

Also, came across this the other day: http://www.dresdner-kameras.de/files/timetable_lenses.pdf

It doesn't list when superficial designs changed (e.g. when CZJ moved from the zebra lenses to the all black lenses), but it does list when various focal lengths of lenses were produced and from whom, including a few I didn't know of. (For instance, that Ludwig had produced some Victar lenses in m42 mount.)

---

Last edited by g026r; 02-04-2014 at 03:38 PM.

[Boris_Akunin]

Also, came across this the other day: http://www.dresdner-kameras.de/files/timetable_lenses.pdf

It doesn't list when superficial designs changed (e.g. when CZJ moved from the zebra lenses to the all black lenses), but it does list when various focal lengths of lenses were produced and from whom, including a few I didn't know of. (For instance, that Ludwig had produced some Victar lenses in m42 mount.)

Thanks a lot, that list is quite interesing!
I suspected that the Pentacon 200/4 lenses were the same as my Meyer GörlitzOrestegor 200/4


regards
Jan

[tromboads]

What about West Germany?

This was thanks to a 35mm f2.5 Enna Werk, Munchen, Super Lithagon.

Funny sorta thing, tiny, no bigger than a pentax M 50 f2, with a slow barrel, but made everything feel like the 50's

[g026r]

What about West Germany?

This was thanks to a 35mm f2.5 Enna Werk, Munchen, Super Lithagon.

Funny sorta thing, tiny, no bigger than a pentax M 50 f2, with a slow barrel, but made everything feel like the 50's

I'll admit that I'm not picky at all. Might be an issue if more people ever start posting, but until then...

The Pentacon electric 135mm again:



A bit soft, which is either because it needed to be stopped down a bit more or I shook a little too much while taking it.

[pinholecam]

CZJ 75/1.5 Biotar

[tromboads]

he he he

"the bookeh s truly amazing" says your little one staring in back from the planes of the multiverse.

[pinholecam]

he he he

"the bookeh s truly amazing" says your little one staring in back from the planes of the multiverse.

That made my day.. Thanks

[g026r]

Wow. I had no idea the Biotar produced bokeh like that.

[utak]

These photos are by the GDR Pentacon Auto 2.8/135. Its the M42, six bladed, later version of the 15 bladed "bokeh monster".

I have a question and would be grateful for your inputs: if I use this lens wide-open does it produce the same bokeh monster-ness as the 15 bladed version? Or are the two versions different designs? Clearly once the blades are partially closed, the bokeh will get different....

Many thanks in advance.

[xjjohnno]

utak, you get the 6 sided bokeh, not quite the same as the bokeh monster.

[pinholecam]

Pentacon auto 200/4 MC:

I like the shot from the Pentaxcon 200/4 the most.

[tromboads]

.... errr if the aperture is wide open, why would the blades effect the bookeh?

*cant believe I'm getting involved with a conversation about bookeh