Veteran Member Registered: July, 2007 Location: North West UK Posts: 390 | | Review Date: September 18, 2017 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Dirt cheap. Nice and sharp from F2.8 nicely made | | Cons: | No a/m switch (see comment) Dreamy wide open | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 7
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-1
| |
This was my fathers lens on his Praktica body, and he has given all of his gear to me as he only uses a digital compact these days.
So the Lens. It is East German made, M42 mount, and a metal build.
The focus ring is surprisingly smooth for an "iron Curtain" optic, smoother than soviet made glass and a lot smoother than the CZJ Tessar that I have. Not quite as smooth as the pinnacle of smoothness, which of course are the Takumars.
Optically it is fine, A bit dreamy wide open, with CA, but considering it has no mention of any coating, is not bad at all. (I am presuming that is it single coated rather than multi)
Contrast and sharpness stopped are very good, colours are a little cool.
Now that aperture control. Well, it does not have the a/m switch, only a push button on the side of the lens. However, it is near the battery grip, and you develop a technique where you use a finger to push it and hold, while you turn the aperture ring and then press the shutter, slows you down a lot, but you do get used to it.
Is it worth it? Well mine was free, so for me, yes! if you want convenience, get a Tak 55 or K mount 50mm F1.7 instead. But, if you enjoy playing with different lenses to create different rendition, why not give it a punt? Worth it for the fun of it, and the IQ is really rather good.
| |
Loyal Site Supporter Registered: December, 2009 Location: In the Florida swamps Posts: 773
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: February 26, 2024 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | minimum focus distance of 33cm, sharpness, bokeh | | Cons: | Can be prone to DDR quality issues | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: KP
| |
If you want a Meyer-Optik Görlitz Oreston 50mm F1.8 without paying the current high prices, look no further. This is the same lens manufactured by Pentacon after they absorbed "Meyer-Optik Görlitz”.
Plenty sharp wide open, good contrast and nice colors, very nice bokeh. Handling is fine with smooth (maybe a touch too loose) focus and a push button aperture control. The close focusing capability is very nice.
One caution is that (supposedly) DDR lenses can have soft coatings. I have both the Oreston and the Pentacon and both look to have degraded coatings. I don’t see that it has impacted the photos any, but something to keep in mind.
For more reviews just go over to the Oreston page. Everything there applies here.
The lens.
Lens construction.
Side by side with the Oreston.
Sample images.
 | |
New Member Registered: February, 2019 Posts: 15 | | Review Date: April 24, 2024 | Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Superb imaging | | Cons: | Read the review | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: Film and digital full frame
| |
My only 10 out of 10 lens. To me, this is the best 50mm lens money can buy. But you need to use a clean version.
This is a Zeiss Pancolar/Meyer Optik Oreston in disguise (it's actually exactly the same as the Oreston in every regard except superficial external shiny bling "zebra" effect) but it's half the price - or less - and it's better built than some Zeiss Pancolar lens versions.
Auto pin on the back and a metal manual button on the side/rear. The metal manual button can be wobbly on some lenses, but remember these are old and not recently off the factory conveyor belt!
Imaging is sharp - both close up and at infinity - from F4 to F11 and some will give fine F16 results if the lens is clean and not messed up by coating mold or dirt or cleaning marks accumulated through the years. No chromatic aberration (CA) except with some high contrast shots wide open, but it's not much.
How is it different to the more recent Pentacon version? Some people guess or assume that it is a weaker lens because it does not have the words "multi coated" written around the front lens ring like the more recent semi-plastic Pentacon version. I suggest you ignore these assumptions and actually compare the two versions together through comparative self use. I've never seen any actual applied comparisons undertaken online and my own comparative self use show no differences at all. The older lens is also all metal and tends to suffer less with glued up mucky stuck aperture blades. The older version also suffers less from deformed aperture iris shapes. This all makes it a better buy, but also shoves up the price.
| |
