German lenses not Leica or Zeiss

[jacketpotato]

Just won Steinheil Culminar 85mm F2.8 for young member of family. M42. Culminar 85/2.8 interchangeable with Trioplan 100/2.8 pretty identical bubbles look wide open.

Steinheil Culminar 85mm F2.8 m42


Steinheil Culminar 85mm F2.8 m42

Cute little thing

 

[Winterfrost]

Push those in my direction with your barge pole, please. That's a long-honored name in optics, and has lenses in production now, generally high end digital MF back lenses that cost a few thousand each new.

--
NancyP

S-K doesn't make their own lenses anymore. The lenses available for the Mamiya/Phase One MF cameras are rebadged Japanese lenses. Zeiss is a Cosina rebadge and S-K is another Japanese firm, whose name escapes me at the moment.

AFAIK there are no German made lenses anymore. All of them are rebadged Japanese offerings.

Not true. Zeiss Cinema Lenses are still being produced by Zeiss Oberkochen into Germany here. About Cosina: there is absolutely nothing wrong with that - if Cosina produces "Zeiss" badged-lenses just like Sony "Zeiss" lenses exactly to their Zeiss Specs - what is wrong with it`? Get over it...Cosina isn't just the cheap, crappy 3rd Party Lens Maker for cheap prime & especially Zoom lenses, that the brand was into the 70-80's back then... ;-) Nikon DSLR for instance also being made "Made in Japan" but also "made in Thailand", the cheap(er) ones...and nobody does really care - because a Nikon is a Nikon, period.

Good Light !

Marc

--
"The Best Camera is the One That's with You" ~ Chase Jarvis

 

[Macro guy]

Push those in my direction with your barge pole, please. That's a long-honored name in optics, and has lenses in production now, generally high end digital MF back lenses that cost a few thousand each new.

 

[Winterfrost]

Push those in my direction with your barge pole, please. That's a long-honored name in optics, and has lenses in production now, generally high end digital MF back lenses that cost a few thousand each new.

--
NancyP

S-K doesn't make their own lenses anymore. The lenses available for the Mamiya/Phase One MF cameras are rebadged Japanese lenses. Zeiss is a Cosina rebadge and S-K is another Japanese firm, whose name escapes me at the moment.

AFAIK there are no German made lenses anymore. All of them are rebadged Japanese offerings.

Not true. Zeiss Cinema Lenses are still being produced by Zeiss Oberkochen into Germany here. About Cosina: there is absolutely nothing wrong with that - if Cosina produces "Zeiss" badged-lenses just like Sony "Zeiss" lenses exactly to their Zeiss Specs - what is wrong with it`? Get over it...Cosina isn't just the cheap, crappy 3rd Party Lens Maker for cheap prime & especially Zoom lenses, that the brand was into the 70-80's back then... ;-) Nikon DSLR for instance also being made "Made in Japan" but also "made in Thailand", the cheap(er) ones...and nobody does really care - because a Nikon is a Nikon, period.

Good Light !

Marc

--
"The Best Camera is the One That's with You" ~ Chase Jarvis

Cinema lenses are beyond the scope of this conversation. As far as Cosina made Zeiss lenses are concerned, there's nothing particularly wrong with Cosina made lenses, but be aware that you're paying for the Zeiss moniker, whereas if those same lenses had a Cosina name on them, they would cost considerably less.

As far as Nikon being made in Thailand, that may not be an issue unless Nikon outsources their camera production to another company and sells them under their own brand name.

Nope - you forgot one very important thing: When it would have been a Cosina lens from the ground up, it would have been lax specs compared to a Zeiss, and the IQ wouldn't be that good. It's just a difference - when some brand like Cosina would built it all - or the opposite here, Zeiss designs the lens specs, does set the QC, and Cosina is just a 3rd party lens maker with clear definied Zeiss specs here ,

Needless to say, Zeiss lenses tend (and are) being sharpener usually then their direct Leica Counterparts, and/or often have 3D Pop, and that thing called "Zeiss" Look.

There's nothing wrong with it here - but this kind of discussion is pretty much useless.

Tomoika for instance, also have had been a 3rd party lens supplier into the 70-80's back into the Contax Zeiss Cooporation heyday, so also clearly made Zeiss branded lenses, just like Cosina nowadays - and they haven't been a single bit worse then the "original" ones here from Germany, made into Oberkochen by Zeiss. And even more, the Zeiss MM-Type (MultiMode) C/Y lenses back from this day, which have been made into Japan (therefore the MMJ Sign) aren't worse then -very rare- MMG (G stands for Germany) C/Y lenses, and even before, <84...these older AE C/Y Zeiss lenses have been made also into germany (AEG) and Japan (AEJ) both at the same time....Japan lenses aren't worse, and here MM-types do have had improved T* (T-Star) Coatings, Zeiss lenses are also known for....so much for that...

I really don't give anything about internet background noise, and conspiracy in terms of "Cosina Zeiss-branded lenses are worse" which isn't the case....nothing bad meant..just my 2 Cents.

Good Light !

Marc

--
"The Best Camera is the One That's with You" ~ Chase Jarvis

 

[widgetbox]

Nope - you forgot one very important thing: When it would have been a Cosina lens from the ground up, it would have been lax specs compared to a Zeiss, and the IQ wouldn't be that good. It's just a difference - when some brand like Cosina would built it all - or the opposite here, Zeiss designs the lens specs, does set the QC, and Cosina is just a 3rd party lens maker with clear definied Zeiss specs here ,

I'm inclined to agree - if Cosina could produce Zeiss quality lenses cheaper - we'd all be buying Cosina branded lenses. Yes there is always some level of marketing and branding going on but quality costs and I speak as someone who can't afford/justify buying Zeiss and owned Cosina lenses in the 70's.

Like any good manufacturer it would appear they can produce high and lower end products to specs determined by the engineers and marketing departments.

 

[Gandolphi]

I am looking for the less well known "greats" - even CZJ might qualify.

Lenses made by such relatively unknown German manufacturers as Meyer Optik, E Ludwig, Pentacon, Steinheil, Enna, Isco, Feinmess, Schneider Kreuznach. I am sure to have missed some - dig into the archives and lets see what we can come up with. Porst I am not sure of and Revue rebranded lenses made by others. Braun? - only for the Paxette? Others?

These are of the "don't touch with a barge pole because I have never heard of them" variety. But there are many quite good lenses made out there ouside the comfort zone of the Leica/Zeiss names.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

I am looking for the less well known "greats" - even CZJ might qualify.

Lenses made by such relatively unknown German manufacturers as Meyer Optik, E Ludwig, Pentacon, Steinheil, Enna, Isco, Feinmess, Schneider Kreuznach. I am sure to have missed some - dig into the archives and lets see what we can come up with. Porst I am not sure of and Revue rebranded lenses made by others. Braun? - only for the Paxette? Others?

These are of the "don't touch with a barge pole because I have never heard of them" variety. But there are many quite good lenses made out there ouside the comfort zone of the Leica/Zeiss names.

 

[Belgarchi]

Genuine Schneider lenses are outstanding.
I used three of them:

- A 'Leica' R 28/2.8PC, made by Schneider. Incredibly good, even without using the shift capability, the best 28mm I ever used;

- Excellent Schneider 50/2.8 enlarger lens;\

- Lens of a Rollei 4x4, shooting 4x4 slides; excellent results

Some under their name are genuine, others are 'crap' lenses rebadged (the brand name was bought by Samsung and maybe some other company), some 'Leica' lenses were made by Schneider (these are excellent of course),

 

[Winterfrost]

Nope - you forgot one very important thing: When it would have been a Cosina lens from the ground up, it would have been lax specs compared to a Zeiss, and the IQ wouldn't be that good. It's just a difference - when some brand like Cosina would built it all - or the opposite here, Zeiss designs the lens specs, does set the QC, and Cosina is just a 3rd party lens maker with clear definied Zeiss specs here ,

I'm inclined to agree - if Cosina could produce Zeiss quality lenses cheaper - we'd all be buying Cosina branded lenses. Yes there is always some level of marketing and branding going on but quality costs and I speak as someone who can't afford/justify buying Zeiss and owned Cosina lenses in the 70's.

Like any good manufacturer it would appear they can produce high and lower end products to specs determined by the engineers and marketing departments.

--
Richard

I truly dislike when ppl just cut out sentences from my whole posts and post them alone...so it reads itself different....about Cosina: nope its not that way - you simply don't get the point, sadly, because Cosina is just a 3rd party tier, that means lens producer here at this point - with exact given ZEISS specs to produce to, also QC, too.

Cosina onto it's own couldn't do this alone -therefore i can't agree with your arguments, because the very important thing here is: ZEISS did all the R&D, that means Reseach & Development - and not Cosina, that's the whole point. Who into the end produces the lens doesn't matter at all - as long as it's fully after tight, specific given specs for - that's it. It's the same when Tamron designs for example a new 24-70/F2 FF lens, and Sony would buy the patent, and produce it, or Pentax, Canikon, whatever.

Therefore, the whole thing "...but Cosina could produce it for cheaper prices..." is completely offline, because Cosina wouldn't have done the whole R&D & QC to produce, and have had designed a specific given Lens from Zeiss for instance by it's own brand & name. So much for that. They're just contract producer for a given Design made by Zeiss.

Good Light !

Marc

--
"The Best Camera is the One That's with You" ~ Chase Jarvis

 

[Tom Caldwell]

Genuine Schneider lenses are outstanding.
I used three of them:

- A 'Leica' R 28/2.8PC, made by Schneider. Incredibly good, even without using the shift capability, the best 28mm I ever used;

- Excellent Schneider 50/2.8 enlarger lens;\

- Lens of a Rollei 4x4, shooting 4x4 slides; excellent results

Some under their name are genuine, others are 'crap' lenses rebadged (the brand name was bought by Samsung and maybe some other company), some 'Leica' lenses were made by Schneider (these are excellent of course),

The Schneider-Kreuznach lenses on the Kodak Retina range were made by S-K as far as I know. They are very sharp and relatively slow lenses - something to do with the limitations imposed by the shutter design. I have a few and use the Yenon DKL to M42 adapter with them. The Yeenon adapter is no cheap knock-together but a precisely made exact replica of the aperture mechanism usually built into the camera body. Right down to material types and colourings. Fitted to a lens it looks like it was built there apart from being capable of being dismounted. Being adapted to M42 I can further adapt the combo to many other mounts if I require.

My main grouch is that their focus assembly can be very stiff to the extent of effectively locked solid. I have not had the courage to address re-greasing the tight helicoids so far, but I will get around to it one day.

Futhermore their 200/4.5 is a huge heavy bell shaped lens with focus ring right at the back which combined with a stiffer than usual focus action makes hand holding awkward and the minimum focus distance of 8.5 metres (25') it is no macro and yet at 200mm it is hardly long telephoto either. At 80 metres on the scale it is still a fair twist off the infinity stop.

So awkward to use, tighter focus action, and heft overcome it is a very sharp lens for the masochist inside us

 

[Tom Caldwell]

Nope - you forgot one very important thing: When it would have been a Cosina lens from the ground up, it would have been lax specs compared to a Zeiss, and the IQ wouldn't be that good. It's just a difference - when some brand like Cosina would built it all - or the opposite here, Zeiss designs the lens specs, does set the QC, and Cosina is just a 3rd party lens maker with clear definied Zeiss specs here ,

I'm inclined to agree - if Cosina could produce Zeiss quality lenses cheaper - we'd all be buying Cosina branded lenses. Yes there is always some level of marketing and branding going on but quality costs and I speak as someone who can't afford/justify buying Zeiss and owned Cosina lenses in the 70's.

Like any good manufacturer it would appear they can produce high and lower end products to specs determined by the engineers and marketing departments.

 

[olstrup]

I am looking for the less well known "greats" - even CZJ might qualify.

Lenses made by such relatively unknown German manufacturers as Meyer Optik, E Ludwig, Pentacon, Steinheil, Enna, Isco, Feinmess, Schneider Kreuznach. I am sure to have missed some - dig into the archives and lets see what we can come up with. Porst I am not sure of and Revue rebranded lenses made by others. Braun? - only for the Paxette? Others?

These are of the "don't touch with a barge pole because I have never heard of them" variety. But there are many quite good lenses made out there ouside the comfort zone of the Leica/Zeiss names.

 

[Jon555]

I don't know about "greats" and I don't have an adaptor to use it, but here's my old German lens from a manufacturer you didn't mention...





Apparently Enna is the name of the founder's daughter, reversed...

Sample images (from others):

https://www.flickr.com/photos/89238924@N02/sets/72157642980321103/

http://riotefe.blogspot.co.uk/2008/03/enna-lithagon-28mm-f35.html

More info:

https://spiral-m42.blogspot.co.uk/2009/06/enna-munchen-lithagon-35mmf35-m42.html

 

[photoholiko]

Rodenstock made camera lenses, I have their 135/4.

 

[Macro guy]

Rodenstock made camera lenses, I have their 135/4.

They still do. In fact, they're the only game in town when it comes to lenses for technical cameras.

 

[Belgarchi]

Around 1980, the best of the best were made by Rodenstock, closely followed ex-aequo by Schneider and Nikon.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

I don't know about "greats" and I don't have an adaptor to use it, but here's my old German lens from a manufacturer you didn't mention...





Apparently Enna is the name of the founder's daughter, reversed...

Sample images (from others):

https://www.flickr.com/photos/89238924@N02/sets/72157642980321103/

http://riotefe.blogspot.co.uk/2008/03/enna-lithagon-28mm-f35.html

More info:

https://spiral-m42.blogspot.co.uk/2009/06/enna-munchen-lithagon-35mmf35-m42.html

I am sorry if I have missed Enna as they seem to have been an active German lens maker. I do have the 35mm f3.5 Lithagon but the rarer 28mm f3.5 Lithagon seems more highly prized. I also have an unbranded lens called a "Reflexagon" 35mm f3.5 which I thought might be more rare but on closer inspection seems to be an Enna Lithagon by another name - presumably made for another German camera brand that did not wish to highlight the Enna brand name.

They made some "plastic" lens versions of their mainline lenses presumably towards the end of their lens making business. They are not expensive to buy but I think they can be regarded as fair if not outstanding performers. I have a "plastic" 240mm f4.5 which was filthy inside when I got it but turned out to be one of the easiest lenses to disassemble and clean. Its structure also allows for a very light fairly medium telephoto with an excellent smooth action. Just looking at it I think I might to have another go - the internal coating caused the problems and although it is now quite clean inside I think my own cleaning smears on the glass are just a knock-on from the first clean and are now a secondary problem that good sense needs to now eliminate.

Just part of the fun I guess.

--
Tom Caldwell

 

[jacketpotato]

I do have the rarer 28mm f3.5 Lithagon seems more highly prized.

Any idea of its value. I have silver F2.8 35mm Lithagon (Ebay seems to suggest £120 ish for F2.8 35mm silver Lithagon).

 

[Tom Caldwell]

Hi Tom,

i finally managed to find my Reflexogon 28/2.8 Lens from my lenses collection. )

As you said - it must be a bit seldom....because i haven't seen it somewhere else...thought it's F/3.5, but it's not...it's a 28mm/F2.8 Wideangle...Lens Mount is M42.

Here are some samples from the lens, but i haven't had the time yet to make samples with the lens, it's just the lens itself....as i promised some months ago...when i'd find it, i make a picture of it.

Good Light !

Marc







--
"The Best Camera is the One That's with You" ~ Chase Jarvis

I also have a "Reflexogon" 35mm f3.5 and an Enna Lithagon 35mm f3.5 - both of the older style build and similar enough to wonder if they came out of the same factory (I think that they are both Enna's). But I am not sure if "Reflexogon" is an Enna name - it might have been a useful name used by another brand for an Enna by another name.

Late Ennas seem to have moved to a plastic construction body - is this one of them?

But I also have a few Revuenon Japanese made (metal bodied) lenses which are 55/1.4, 55/1.7 and 35/2.8 respectively. The latter has some similarity to the one you are showing.

Revue seems to have bought lenses from Enna as well as other plastic 24mm f4.0 Macro and 135mm f2.8 lenses are quite obviously simply Ennas rebranded - the Japanese ones might be Tamioka and are really well made and in good condition. They did not seem prized by collectors but their 55mm f1.2 has become very sought after (now about AUD$1,000 - it has come down!) - maybe my f1.4 version will become sought after in time (grin).

--
Tom Caldwell

 

[Jon555]

Thanks, that was very interesting. Mine's metal but I have no idea how good or otherwise it might be. Some of the sample images I linked looked interesting enough for me to order a m43 adaptor, but I'm avoiding Canon adaptors until I find a chip that works with my camera.