Any Zeiss Tele-Tessar 85mm f/4 Reviews?

R

rsolti

Established
Local time
5:00 PM
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
105
View My Gallery
I have been looking for a tele lens for my M8 and have not seen any discussion on this lens. I love the Zeiss rendering and am curious about performance. I don't need speed....probably couldn't even focus it accurately if I tried to use it. That is why f/4 doesn't matter to me. I have searched and only found people saying they have ordered or seen it but no samples. So, anyone have anything to say about it?

BTW...I currently have a 75mm f/2.5 Heliar that I have not found to my liking at all. I don't find image quality at the higher apertures pleasing and can't nail focus at 2.5. I would like to try a 75 f/2.5 Summarit but would rather save some funds if possible.
 
I've had a hard time finding anything decent - there's some threads here, but the rest of the internet just seems to be spam-sites and shops. But I have faith, and ordered one anyway. It should be here in a couple of days, so I'll have some impressions thought through a little after that.
 
I'm pretty sure I recall backalley buying one when it came out... not sure if he still has it but perhaps he used it sufficiently to form an opinion and compare it to the other moderate teles he's had in the past...
 
I am also very interested in opinions on the Tele-Tessar 85mm. I currently have a 90mm Elmar-c, but recently got one of the lovely 35mm f2.8 Biogons and like the original poster I really love the rendering of the Zeiss lenses and so I am considering getting the Tele-Tessar to replace the Elmar.

As ferider pointed out, the Elmar-c and Rokkor are very compact and sharp, but my Elmar-c at least displays substantial vignetting at f4 and a little at f5.6, together with some drop in sharpness at wider apertures. Stopped down to f8 the Elmar-c does produce nice results, but in most situations I do not find it to be very usable wide open. In addition, the overall feel of the images has never really grabbed me like my 35mm Biogon does. Now I appreciate that the Zeiss 35mm and 85mm lenses are different optical designs and so will never be completely identical in terms of rendering, but it would be hard to believe that the extra 30+ years of lens design progress has not produced a superior lens, admittedly with a much higher cost.
 
I bought my ZM 85/4 from BackAlley here on RRF. It's very good, but just not a focal length that I often use. That's not meant to be a damning criticism. I have a 90/2.8 for my G2 and a 85/2 for my OM's. None of which see a lot of use. On the somewhat rare occasion that I use it, the ZM 85/4 is just what I need.
 
I'm still meandering my way through my first roll of film, but so far my impression shouldn't be too surprising. Using it in daylight with Ektar 100 at its rated speed is challenging in anything less than daylight; even photographing into shade at f/4 means I need to watch for camera shake. (Faster film would play better, but I like Ektar.)

Physically the lens is quite long, and the tubular hood adds about half-again to its length - it looks a little odd on the camera. I have my camera bag set up to let me fit the Ikon with the 1,5/50 C-Sonnar (with hood) down one of its compartments, and the 4/85 is too long to fit that way with the hood attached. On the other hand, if I take the hood off I could actually put the futzy little lens cap on. Every silver lining has a cloud.

The focus ring is wide and without any sort of a tab, and with the aperture ring being at the front of the lens, I find that most of the time I just adjust the aperture via the smooth rotating barrel.

I also bought the 85 to use it on my GH1 - it will be doing dual-duty as the long tele for both my Ikon and my Panasonic body. Being able to boost the iso on the electronic camera makes the f/4 much more practical, and I've been happy with my preliminary results. Sharpness isn't an issue, even wide open, at least as far as I can see past camera-shake and noise reduction from using it indoors.

With luck, I'll have something more useful to say in another week or three…
 
can't wait keepright, this is a lens that I want to replace my Elmarit-M with, as it is just that bit smaller and lighter for travel, and somehow I don't like the rendering of the Elmarit much.
 
kanzlr said:
can't wait keepright, this is a lens that I want to replace my Elmarit-M with, as it is just that bit smaller and lighter for travel, and somehow I don't like the rendering of the Elmarit much.
Click to expand...

If you want to travel with a slower tele lens - As far as ZM 85/4 - I could never understand why they even made it - while good optics - too big, too slow and waaay too expensive for what it is. But, I suppose, - opinions vary.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yep, I just made an Excel sheet with size and weight of the various 90/85mm lenses in M-mount and realized that the Hexanon is one of the smallest and lightest. 330g vs 310g for the Zeiss. Thus I decided to keep the Hexanon, send it to DAG for adjusting it to the M8 and if it is as good as they say it will replace the Elmarit-M I currently use 🙂

Still, it is tempting to at least try the Zeiss and see how it draws. I do like the look of their 25 and 35mm lenses.
 
Zeiss 85mm f4.0 Lens Comments

Zeiss 85mm f4.0 Lens Comments

I have the lens and have used it on my ZM and M4 mainly color (Provia 400X). Color rendition is excellent and very sharp especially at f5.6 and above. Weight is low and balance is very good for a telephoto. Bought new on EBay from Germany about 6 months ago when the dollar was stronger for under $800 new. Only minor negative is that the hood does not reverse like on the Zeiss ZF lenses so the overall length is a bit of an issue in my carrying case if I don't remove the hood.
BEst/Lee B.
 
The one print I've seen from this lens looked good.

I was thinking about one last year but ended up with a used Leica 90 Macro for just a tiny bit more than the Zeiss. And it collapses too 🙂
 
keepright said:
I'm still meandering my way through my first roll of film,

...

With luck, I'll have something more useful to say in another week or three…
Click to expand...


Keepright,

a really nice review

http://www.thewsreviews.com/2010/08/zeiss-ikon-first-impressions.html

That is just the first hand user experience that I like and written with a good sens of humor. And thanks for the in-the-text listing of another reviews as well.

But I prefer the pure manual non-electronic rangefinders :angel: so the ZI is despite its big viewfinder and me a glass wearer probably a no-no for me.

Nevertheless, could you please post some pictures / or at least snapshots 😉 of your ZM line including the above mentioned 85/4.0 as a real world volume visualization? Or even some more thoughts about your ongoing utilization of this lens?

Using ISO 400, the speed is no problem for me. I think the combo of c-biogon or planar and this lens could be a nice deal.
 
arpy said:
That is just the first hand user experience that I like and written with a good sens of humor. And thanks for the in-the-text listing of another reviews as well.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the kind words, and I'm glad you enjoyed it. I'm far from an expert - in anything, really - and I do try to acknowledge and promote the people who taught me.

arpy said:
But I prefer the pure manual non-electronic rangefinders :angel: so the ZI is despite its big viewfinder and me a glass wearer probably a no-no for me.
Click to expand...

I can respect that.
(and I've recently bought a meterless camera, so even though it's highly electronic and automated, I'm just learning how to use manual exposure control.)

arpy said:
Nevertheless, could you please post some pictures / or at least snapshots 😉 of your ZM line including the above mentioned 85/4.0 as a real world volume visualization? Or even some more thoughts about your ongoing utilization of this lens?
Click to expand...

Certainly. The ikon is with a friend right now - he's learning to use the 1,5/50 Sonnar to use for my wedding photos - but I'll take some photos of the combination when it gets back.

arpy said:
Using ISO 400, the speed is no problem for me. I think the combo of c-biogon or planar and this lens could be a nice deal.
Click to expand...

I've just received the 'last' part of my kit, a 2/35 Biogon, and it looks like it's going to be an excellent combination. Of course, it came in the day after I loaned out my camera….

Here are a few photos from my first roll of XP2. The second roll will be in colour, and I should have it done in a few more weeks.

1008491542_LuFwH-M.jpg


1009582780_Rpxif-M.jpg


1009582649_eGdY4-M.jpg
 
For a sense of scale, here's my Ikon with the 85 tele-tessar - hood extended - sitting sideways in a Billingham Hadley Digital bag. The lens+hood assembly is just under 5" long.

1093769765_qNaak-M.jpg


The Hadley Digital is quite a small bag. Even with the 85 on it, the camera would be able to sit in the conventional nose-down position if I didn't also have the 35/2 and 50/1.5 in there, each with their hoods and neoprene hood hats attached. (But what fun would that be? I actually like this position better, since it's easier to get to the camera.)

Unfortunately I still don't have enough experience with the 85/4 to write a proper review of it. I was hoping to use it a lot during a two-week stay in New York, but the 35/2 was almost permanently affixed to the camera instead. I bought it knowing that it was going to be my third-tier lens, but that's hardly a criticism when I consider how exceptional my other two optics are.
 
I'm still a long way from having a proper opinion, but here are a couple of photos of the lens, as promised (almost three months ago…):

1115710031_qy8Ne-M.jpg


1115710187_6RoDV-M.jpg


1115710344_4vFuA-M.jpg


The last one is the 4/85 next to the 1,5/50.
 
Thanks for the pics and your initial thoughts. This lens certainly has not had much feedback, kind of typical for the longer focal lengths.

Enjoy and please let us know your opinion as you get to use it more.

Kent
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom