Tim Gray
Well-known
Would I be the only one interested in a moderately priced, small, (slower) 50 based on the Tessar design from Zeiss? Something like a ZM 50/2.8 or 50/3.5.
Maybe I should just buy a Elmar-M instead.
Maybe I should just buy a Elmar-M instead.
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
The Elmar is basically a Tessar and sells for less used than a new Zeiss would cost if they made it. Still, it would be cool to own a lens with the Tessar name on it. I have an ancient prewar Rollei with an uncoated 75mm Tessar f3.5 and it is incredibly sharp!
I made an M42 mount 50/2.8 Tessar into LTM, RF coupled lens. It was not hard- used an I-61 focus mount.
FrozenInTime
Well-known
It seems like a gap waiting to be filled in the ZM line of 'C' lenses.
A physically shortened 50mm f/2.5 .. f/3.5 travel lens would be nice.
Something along the lines of the 50mm f/2.5 Color Skopar (discontinued).
A straight 50mm tessar design would probably need to collapse - otherwise it would be no smaller than the 50mm planar.
I had the 50mm Elmar-M collapsable for a few years, but did not like the way if flared.
The ergonomics of collapsing were also irritating : because the front ring to pull it out was smaller than the focus ring that overlapped it.
The old styling of the Anastigmat used on the 0-series is a lot nicer - but not so handy for filters.
A physically shortened 50mm f/2.5 .. f/3.5 travel lens would be nice.
Something along the lines of the 50mm f/2.5 Color Skopar (discontinued).
A straight 50mm tessar design would probably need to collapse - otherwise it would be no smaller than the 50mm planar.
I had the 50mm Elmar-M collapsable for a few years, but did not like the way if flared.
The ergonomics of collapsing were also irritating : because the front ring to pull it out was smaller than the focus ring that overlapped it.
The old styling of the Anastigmat used on the 0-series is a lot nicer - but not so handy for filters.
ZeissFan
Veteran
You always want what you can't have. There are plenty of Tessars for the Contax, but the lens that people want is the Sonnar.
And for the Tenax II, it came with the Sonnar or Tessar, and people want the Sonnar.
Still, there are a lot of cameras out there, prewar, postwar, East German, West German, that have a Tessar. Turn-of-the-century Tessars, 1930s and 1940s Tessars, postwar East German and West German Tessars. Yashica/Kyocera Tessars. And the various copies made by nearly everyone, it seems.
It might be interesting to see a Tessar in ZM mount -- especially if it was a lower-priced alternative to the Planar and Sonnar. However, "lower priced" might not be the bargain-basement price most people expect.
And for the Tenax II, it came with the Sonnar or Tessar, and people want the Sonnar.
Still, there are a lot of cameras out there, prewar, postwar, East German, West German, that have a Tessar. Turn-of-the-century Tessars, 1930s and 1940s Tessars, postwar East German and West German Tessars. Yashica/Kyocera Tessars. And the various copies made by nearly everyone, it seems.
It might be interesting to see a Tessar in ZM mount -- especially if it was a lower-priced alternative to the Planar and Sonnar. However, "lower priced" might not be the bargain-basement price most people expect.
I always end up using the Sonnar. I'm always amazed by the images produced by these 1930s, uncoated optics.
Uncoated Sonnar 5cm F1.5, wide-open on the M8.
Uncoated Sonnar 5cm F1.5, wide-open on the M8.
Tim Gray
Well-known
Lots of good points. I probably should just get the Elmar-M. Though I think if Zeiss did make a new Tessar, they could take one two routes:
a) make a modern Tessar, like the Elmar-M
b) make a C version, and give it some flavor
Given the existence of the modern Elmar-M, I think (b) would be a more interesting choice. As long as it was priced like the ZM 50/2 or a cheaper, it'd be cool. I'm sure it would never happen, but it would be interesting.
I've got the Sonnar angle covered already with a Nikkor.
a) make a modern Tessar, like the Elmar-M
b) make a C version, and give it some flavor
Given the existence of the modern Elmar-M, I think (b) would be a more interesting choice. As long as it was priced like the ZM 50/2 or a cheaper, it'd be cool. I'm sure it would never happen, but it would be interesting.
I've got the Sonnar angle covered already with a Nikkor.