Shortest path to a T* lens

shadowfox

shadowfox

Darkroom printing lives
Local time
6:30 PM
Joined
Oct 24, 2006
Messages
8,770
I think everyone agrees that most Zeiss lenses are top-notch. Unfortunately, they only make lenses for several types of lens mount (unlike Tamron or Sigma).

So, it may be interesting to compare notes on how you guys get to your Zeiss glass, did you go full throttle with a gift set Contax G2, or did you hunt for an old Prakticas, and FSU cameras, or did you have a Zeiss glass for your Pentax Spotmatics?

Whatever, heck, tell your story about your Zeiss lens experience in general (of course it doesn't have to be an SLR story).

I'll start. After deciding that I cannot justify getting even a used Contax RTS III, I had my eyes on a Yashica FR-I which shares the C/Y mount for which Zeiss made a full range of lenses.

So by patience and luck, I managed to get this setup for a very reasonable price. Not bad, I think.

1281897707_d1b4ec5348.jpg
 
I say this in total embarrassment: I have no zeiss glass at the moment....
But soon, I will have a biogon 35zm for my m4-2, and a 5d is on the cards, selling my some of my high end canon stuff and fitting it out with some ZF primes. Should be good..

Hows about a picture from that planar?
 
fdigital said:
I say this in total embarrassment: I have no zeiss glass at the moment....
Click to expand...
I have no Zeiss T* glass either, unless one can count the lens of my Yashica T3 Super. My Nettar has Zeiss Novar lens, but of course it is not T* coated. New Zeiss ZS or ZF lenses are simply too expensive for me (and my wife who uses Nikons) and I do not have any Y/C bayonet cameras. I really try to stick to one system with my 35 mm SLRs and currently it is the oldie but goldie M42 screw mount.

Of course one of these days I might get a Yashica or Contax and continue to use my M42 glass with an adapter, but unfortunately most of the used Y/C mount lenses for sale are either Yashica or third party. Probably many of the Contax users are still keeping their cameras and Zeiss glass, and there were not that many Contax SLR users to begin with.
 
I started using classic T* glass on my 500EL (6x6 SLR). Cheaper than you think these
days, a good 80/2.8 Planar or 150 Sonnar go below US 300 each.

My only 35mm T* lens is the ZM 50/1.5. Also, there is a Contax T ...

One day, I'll get myself a Pentax or Yashica, to try out an Olympic 180/2.8.

Roland.
 
Last edited:
I don't have any Zeiss slr lenses, but I have a bunch of rangefinder stuff.
First lens, a sonnar 5cm f2 came with a 1936 Contax II, next I bought a 13.5 cm f4 Jena T, next a Contax IIIa that came with an 85mm opton sonnar and a 50mm f1.5 opton sonnar. I also bought a 5 cm f2.8 prewar tessar. The final zeiss lenses came with the G2 kit. Some of the best lenses ever made and reasonably priced. Some people desire the leica glow and pay crazy money for it, but for me Zeiss is nice.
 
My Contax 167MT (that my brother gave me) is my main camera and I love it. I have a Planar 50 1.7 (which came with the 167MT when I traded with my brother). I bought a Distagon 35 2.8 for only $119 in great condition and I had a Vario-Sonnar 28-85mm that sold for $250 on ebay last night in order to buy a Sonnar 85mm 2.8 (coming in the mail today) for $166. I love these lenses and my camera. Unfortunately they are all I can afford right now (along with my broken Yashica GS and my digital Panny FZ7), but if I ever came into some I would consider buying a Zeiss Ikon or Contax G series.

BTW I bought a Yashica YUS 135mm 2.8 for $4.50 on ebay . . . that lens is amazing! It is sharp and has a wonderful bokeh (in my eyes). Do not discount Yashica primes. Their bang for buck is pretty sweet. If their is a focal length you use rarely (for me 28 and 135) consider the Yashica ML's. They are not Zeiss, but they will still give you excellent photo's.

Checkout cdegroot's site for Contax and Yashica.

Yashica: http://www.cdegroot.com/cgi-bin/photowiki/YashicaEquipment

Contax: http://www.cdegroot.com/cgi-bin/photowiki/ContaxEquipment
 
After falling in love with the Contax G which I picked up in Germany with a 45mm Planar back in 1999 I bought the rest of the set (sans the 16mm) of 21, 28, 35 and 90. I did sell off the 35 not finding it up to par of the rest. Seeing how much I loved the Zeiss glass I sold off my Nikon FM2 and FE2 and Nikon glass and bought a very nice used RX and eventually loaded up on the Zeiss SLR glass including a 35 PC-Distagon, 50/1.4 and 50/1.7 Planars, 85/1.4 Planar, 60/2.8 Marko-Planar, and the 100-300/4.5-5.6 Vario-Sonnar. I also shoot a SL66 with Zeiss glass, a Hasselblad 500CM with a few Zeiss lenses and an old folder with a Tessar lens. Oh, and a Zeiss Ikon Contessa with the Tessar, a Rolleiflex TLR 622 Standard with Tessar, a Rolleicord 1A with a Tritotar and a Rolleiflex 2.8E Planar. And last but not least a Contax T2 with the Sonnar. Oh, and a Rollei 35T with the Tessar and a Rollei 35S with the Sonnar. And one more, just got the 35 Biogon for my Leica MP/CL. The latter is amazing.

Do I like Zeiss glass? Yes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Does an East German MC Flektogon 50/f4 count as a T* lens? In that case I have one. Otherwise I have none - the 180/f2.8 Sonnar is single-coated :)
 
i was reading photographyreview.com. i was reading reviews on the nikon 50mm f1.8d. someone mentioned their contax g mount 45mm f2 lens. how the nikon was good but didnt stack up. the nikon 50mm had a great review. but, i thought i had to have this carl zeiss 45mm f2 T* lens. i bought a contax g1 with carl zeiss 45mm f2 T* lens within a month. i hope to never part with it. the only thing that scares me is that the eventually g1's and g2's will no longer be around.
my other zeiss glass are the tessars on the zeiss super ikonta IV and Rolleiflex mx-synch.
 
I started with Zeiss glass way back with a Hasselblad w/50, 80 & 150 lenses. But after the Hassy went to fund more LF gear I was without any Zeiss glass for a while (except for a very old Zeiss Sonnar (?) 13.5 cm lens that covers 3.25x4.25). I got a used G1& 45/2 from George Ury, and loved the lens but not the camera. After I sold it and tried using the Nikon F4's for what I wanted the rangefinder for I almost immediately missed that G mount 45/2. So, a year later I fell into the G2 with a 45, which only started the GAS. I now own more T* lenses than any other single brand, all but the 16 G versions, A TVS, two T2's and the ZM25 & 28. Currently lusting after the 21/4.5 the 18/4 the 15/2.8, and really wishing that there will be an M mount 90. The 85 is tempting, but realistically out of my budget for a while (as is another in that list above).
 
Last edited:
I think I have told this story before. Back about 1980, I was in the PX and noticed a Contax 139Q on sale for as I recall, around $100.00 for the body. They also had four T* f/1.4 lenses for $20.00 each. I bought the body and two lenses. A couple of days later, I bought a Yashica FX-3 as a backup, also on sale and the other two lenses which by then had been reduced to $15.00 each. It seems everyone knew the brands like Nikon, Canon, Pentax, etc, but whatever that Contax was, it must have been some cheap Japanese knockoff, not a serious camera. Ha!

What an incredible camera and lens. I soon got the TLA 20 flash to try the off the film plane flash. Incredible. That often got picked over my Fujica ST901 for crime scene photography not only because the lens was so sharp, but for that flash which could do no wrong. The TLA 30 I later got was even better.

Well, the Contax died after about 10 years, but the Yashica FX-3 still works well. Not automatic, but it doesn't rely on batteries except for the light meter.

About 6 or 7 years ago, after doing some reading, I got a couple of FX 103s off ebay, one for less than $15.00 and the other for less than $25.00. The first one was so cheap because the film advance was not working. As soon as I put in a battery and fired the shutter, all was well. The FX 103 was the Yashica equivalent of the 139, with the added feature of program and shutter preferred exposure. I got 3 zooms to take me from 18mm to 150mm, but the 50mm f/1.4 is where it really shines.

Shadowfox, I am sure you can attest to the sharpness of the T* Planars and they fact they don't mind a bit being mated to a Yashica camera.

Sorry for the long post but I do like the T* and the 103s it mates to.
 
Last edited:
Only one Zeiss lens (and not a T*): the Planar 80/2.8 on the 500C. Got it, used but CLA'd by that great repairman David Knapman, twenty years ago.
 
I have black Zeiss T* 50mm, 60mm, 80mm, 100mm, 120mm, 150mm and 250mm for my Hasselblads :) Simply about as good as it gets. Leica-like quality, too.

My latest lens is 350mm f5.6, which is black, but not T*, which I find to be working just fine. Few elements and simple design lessens the need for the multicoating, especially with the original lenshood. But the wideangles especially, need to be T* IMHO.
 
My Rolleiflex Automat with a rare 7,5 cm Tessar marked T* (must be from 1949 or so) is badly badly scratched, so it flares like David Hamilton would have killed for, but it produces a certain magic no other of my lenses does - with the exception of the J8 sonnar type lense on the Kiev 4. Would love to have the post war sonnar 1,5 in contax mount for it, but hey - one has to have dreams...
Somehow special these Zeiss lenses;)
 
rxmd said:
Does an East German MC Flektogon 50/f4 count as a T* lens? In that case I have one. Otherwise I have none - the 180/f2.8 Sonnar is single-coated :)
Click to expand...

Our Ossis never had T*. This was a recipe only the Wessis had :). Jena had MC which is quite similar to T* but really not the same!

All CY-Zeiss-Lenses have T*. And i like it! BTW, HFT by Rollei is pretty the same ....

Surely buying a T3-5 is the cheapest way to get T* but don't forget the glass! Coating does not change a simple lens into one with high-end-performance
 
Bavaricus said:
Surely buying a T3-5 is the cheapest way to get T* but don't forget the glass! Coating does not change a simple lens into one with high-end-performance
Click to expand...
True, but the Tessar derived lenses of the Yashica T series are quite sharp especially if stopped down half a stop or more. Wide open the f/2.8 of the Yashica T3 (or in fact a similar lens from other lens manufacturers) is naturally not as sharp as more complex lenses such as Sonnar are at f/2.8, but stopped down a little the difference is very small.

By the way, I forgot: one way to get an early version of T* is to buy 1970s Pentax SMC lenses. Original T* and Pentax SMC was a joined development between Zeiss and Pentax and the formula is the same. Since then both have been further developed separately and most people say that current T* is more advanced than current SMC; Pentax fans might not agree though. Pentax SMC is nevertheless an excellent coating and Pentax lenses are in general are very good as well.
 
My first camera was a Yashica FX-3 super 2000, so switching from bundled Yashica lenses to T* was just a matter of time and patience: I got a Planar 1,7/50 (60 Eur. from a Swiss evilBay seller), a 139Q (AE is great for slide's critical exposure) and this year a Distagon 2,8/35 (150 Eur. from a local seller).

ML Yashica primes (esp. 24mm, which is missing in the Zeiss line up) are really good.

Maybe the cheapest way of tasting T* is 1,7/50 with a Yashica body, they are widely available.

BTW, I later (when Kyocera ended Contax and Yashica operation) tried to switch to Minolta AF, but it's not the same (Maxxum 7 + vc-7 with 50/1.4, great gear but it -or me- lacks something ... ). At least I managed to kill Minolta, too.

Currently waiting some extra financial gains to get a ZI with some lens(es), after having a first glance at RF world through a Ricoh 500 G (I love it!).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom