Jupiter 12 v. Biogon

[mhv]

(I'm somewhat surprised not to have found this question in the archives of RFF. I would of course appreciate a link to a relevant thread, should it already exist.)

Given a decent sample of a J-12 in Contax/Kiev mount, how much more would you gain by trading up to a 35mm Biogon?

I have a goo J-12 on my Kiev, it is much better in terms of colour rendition than my Jupiter-8M, but lately I've been lured to old Zeiss lenses. The Opton-Sonnar 50mm f/1.5 is just a gem. It has a finesse of details and gradations that I have not seen on any FSU lens, so now I'm curious about the Zeiss Biogons.

So, how much more exciting is a 35mm Biogon compared to a good J-12, optically speaking? Is the post-war Opton more exciting than the pre-war Jena, compared to the J-12?

 

[Carlsen Highway]

I also would be very interested in comments on this subject myself...

 

[mhv]

Bump. Nobody, really?

 

[rover]

The good thing about the J12 is that they are abundant, and very good like many FSU lenses. The Biogon is not so common.

 

[ernesto]

J12 can be as good as Biogons, but not all J12 are as good as Biogons. In the same way Biogons are not all the same, although there is not so much room between the best Biogon and the worse Biogon. In my opinion this is a matter of probabilities.
It seems that old optical design and construction is not an exact cience, but perhaps an art, which deppends on the artist more than what deppends on the tools.

E

 

[mhv]

Thanks for the comments so far. Reminds me of that Ctein article on T.O.P. about modern cameras: the dispersion of individual items matters, not just the absolute best that can be reached.

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2008/11/data-mining-for.html

 

[ZeissFan]

Look at it has having three components:

-- Is the optical design good? In this case, yes. It's a Biogon.

-- Were the lens elements ground and polished correctly? Probably, as most Soviet-era lenses seemed to have good optics.

-- And was the lens assembled and collimated correctly? From comments, this is where things seem to be most uncertain with Soviet-era lenses and bodies.

The postwar Biogon should have better mechanical construction, and it's a reformulated lens. That doesn't mean that it's better or worse than the prewar lens.

So the biggest advantage to stepping up to a Carl Zeiss or Zeiss-Opton Biogon is quality of construction, which includes the choice of materials.

 

[photovdz]

a well colimated J12 is as good as a biogon... and you are not afraid of taking it out in the wild ;-)
but of course biogons have that special zeiss feel..;
(sometimes I use an orthometar... )

the best way is to find a lens that match your taste...

also never forget that a prewar (first formula) or a J12 will not fit a contax IIa or IIIa... only the postwar "west german" biogon fits in the post war contaxes...