AntonioS
Newbie
Hello,
I'm quite familiar with the Voigtlander Vaskar 75mm F4.5 triplet. Not fantastic but very honest if stopped down to F8.
Has anyone compared this lens with the Zeiss Novar Anastigmat 75mm F3.5 ?
I'm quite familiar with the Voigtlander Vaskar 75mm F4.5 triplet. Not fantastic but very honest if stopped down to F8.
Has anyone compared this lens with the Zeiss Novar Anastigmat 75mm F3.5 ?
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
Very little to choose between these two, though the Novar is a little faster of course. I have one on a Signal-Nettar and I've always been impressed with the results. Not a Carl Zeiss-made lens, according to Barringer and Small; probably made by Rodenstock or Steinheil. Nothing wrong with those names.
TenEleven
Well-known
As KoNickon said the Novar isn't that great. It's also not Zeiss "top of the line" triplet either. That would be the triotar, which has impressive performance not just "impressive for a triplet", but impressive hands down. Such as the ones they put on the very early Rolleicords.
That said despite the hype a lot of Voigtlander medium format cameras get, I found offerings to be always a cut below Zeiss. They're not bad by any stretch, but a Zeiss folder with a similar type of lens will offer a slightly better performance. That is - if both cameras are in good repair and calibration, which after many decades is not a given!
The other consideration is, having tried literally thirty or more different folders ranging from 1930s to the 2010s (The Fuji GF670) is that if you want the ultimate in image quality but want to use the lens wider open than say f/11, you're better off looking for a more rigid camera. Even on the very modern Fuji, which frankly has an amazing lens you have to observe a certain sequence of operating the camera or film flatness and thus the general impression of sharpness goes right out of the window.
That said despite the hype a lot of Voigtlander medium format cameras get, I found offerings to be always a cut below Zeiss. They're not bad by any stretch, but a Zeiss folder with a similar type of lens will offer a slightly better performance. That is - if both cameras are in good repair and calibration, which after many decades is not a given!
The other consideration is, having tried literally thirty or more different folders ranging from 1930s to the 2010s (The Fuji GF670) is that if you want the ultimate in image quality but want to use the lens wider open than say f/11, you're better off looking for a more rigid camera. Even on the very modern Fuji, which frankly has an amazing lens you have to observe a certain sequence of operating the camera or film flatness and thus the general impression of sharpness goes right out of the window.
DownUnder
Nikon Nomad
The Novar was made by Rodenstock. Not Zeiss. It was a standard lens on the Zeiss Nettar cameras (a budget range) for many years. Used at f/11, it's fine. Below f/8 you could be courting problems.
As you wrote, the Triotar was a Zeiss. A triplet, so a budget lens, mostly on early Rolleicords. Not really a stellar performer, but many users today enjoy it for its 'character' and it's popular for portraits.
Many years ago I had a Voigtlander Perkeo I with the Vaskar 80/4.5 lens. This was in the 1960s when I used Yashica TLRs. Now when I compare my negatives of the same scenes made with the two cameras, I find the Yashica outperformed the Perkeo by a slight margin. I sold both cameras long ago and in 2014 I acquired a Perkeo I with the Color Skopar 80/4.5 which gives me negatives with gorgeous mid tones.
I also have a circa 1950 Nettar with the Novar. It's an early Nettar with an albada finder, but it also produces truly excellent negatives. More recent Nettar models - I've owned several in my time - were I found, not quite as good as the older camera and lens. I put this down to sheer luck, I just happened to find a Nettar with a Novar that was better than most.
The Fuji folders are of course good cameras but much too expensive for budget minded photographers, tho' nowadays it's common sense that anybody who can afford 120 roll film should easily find the $$ to buy a good camera.
Use your Vaskar set at f/11 and you should get very printable results. The 1950s folders were not built to Leica, Contax or Rollei standards.
Someone once advised me that it's not advisable to open/close a folder with film in it, as it can produce a 'bubble' in the emulsion. Which will of course affect the focusing and depth of field. To date after many years of using my two folders and opening/closing them as I go, I've not found this has happened to me, but it's a thought anyway.
Last edited:
TenEleven
Well-known
I was not aware that Zeiss outsourced the Novar to Rodenstock, but that makes a lot of sense.
AntonioS
Newbie
Interesting. I never used any Nettars
AntonioS
Newbie
I have two other folders but they are much bulkier, an Ikonta 521/16, with a Tessar and a Takane Mine Six with a strange Takumar.
Never used the takane due to a bad bellows...
Never used the takane due to a bad bellows...
DownUnder
Nikon Nomad
It seems that several other lens makers also did. Notably Steinheil. Various sources (all from the internet) claim other lens makers also sold optics to Zeiss postwar as well but I haven't found a complete list. As we know internet data isn't always 100% reliable. One post has Zeiss Nettars manufactured 1934-1951 but other reliable sources confirm those cameras were made until the mid-'50s or later.