Vickko
Veteran
Please tell me what is special or legendary about the Zeiss 3.5cm F4.5 Orthometar
There is one in RFF for sale, and now there is one on the 'bay. The one on the 'bay is pricey.
Oh, I see that the one on the 'bay is the one on RFF (same photos).
So, I'm curious about the lens.
Thanks
Vick
There is one in RFF for sale, and now there is one on the 'bay. The one on the 'bay is pricey.
Oh, I see that the one on the 'bay is the one on RFF (same photos).
So, I'm curious about the lens.
Thanks
Vick
Last edited:
furcafe
Veteran
I have 1. They're pricey because they're relatively rare.
Anything wider than 50mm was pretty exotic before WWII. I don't have my reference books w/me, but IIRC, the 3.5cm/4.5 Orthometar was intended as a slower, less expensive alternative to the flagship 3.5cm/2.8 Biogon; after WWII, its place in the Zeiss line-up was taken by the 35/3.5 Planar, which is also relatively uncommon. I think both the Orthometar & the Planar ended up being scarcer than the Biogons because the market for slower 35s turned out to be smaller than expected.
I don't have an example of the uncoated pre-WWII Biogon to compare it to, but I'm guessing the Orthometar offers no optical performance advantage (needs to be stopped down to f/8 for good results), but is slightly smaller/lighter because it has less glass.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/furcafe/tags/carlzeissjena35cm45orthometarc1937/
Anything wider than 50mm was pretty exotic before WWII. I don't have my reference books w/me, but IIRC, the 3.5cm/4.5 Orthometar was intended as a slower, less expensive alternative to the flagship 3.5cm/2.8 Biogon; after WWII, its place in the Zeiss line-up was taken by the 35/3.5 Planar, which is also relatively uncommon. I think both the Orthometar & the Planar ended up being scarcer than the Biogons because the market for slower 35s turned out to be smaller than expected.
I don't have an example of the uncoated pre-WWII Biogon to compare it to, but I'm guessing the Orthometar offers no optical performance advantage (needs to be stopped down to f/8 for good results), but is slightly smaller/lighter because it has less glass.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/furcafe/tags/carlzeissjena35cm45orthometarc1937/
Last edited:
dexdog
Veteran
I have an Orthometar that was CLA'd by Ken Ruth, and while it is an OK performer, I think that the pre-WW2 Biogon is significantly sharper, although it could be just sample variation. The Orthometar was produced in fairly small numbers before WW2, perhaps a couple thousand total (alas, I am not near my reference books, either). CZJ did not produce the Orthometar after WW2, although they did manufacture the pre-war design 35mm/2.8 Biogon and the post-war design 35mm/2.8 Biometar. The Orthometar is a fairly rare lens, which is of course reflected by the price.
Last edited:
dexdog
Veteran
I looked up the Orthometar in John Keesing's book titled Contax Rangefinder Lenses, 1932-1962. He states that production was below 1,700 lenses, made in 7 batches.
David Murphy
Veteran
I was the seller of the Orthometar, but I pulled it from sale - decided it was just to special to let go, particularly after I got some results back. These are posted on another thread:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94134
There IS one big advantage of the Orthometar over the Biogon, and that is that it will fit both the post-war and pre-war Contax. Of course Zeiss did not plan that! This advantage is pretty well nullified by its cost, since its rarity puts it market value higher than a post-war Biogon Opton or Planar (at least according to what I see on eBay and so forth).
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94134
There IS one big advantage of the Orthometar over the Biogon, and that is that it will fit both the post-war and pre-war Contax. Of course Zeiss did not plan that! This advantage is pretty well nullified by its cost, since its rarity puts it market value higher than a post-war Biogon Opton or Planar (at least according to what I see on eBay and so forth).
David Murphy
Veteran
I was the seller of the Orthometar, but I pulled it from sale - decided it was just to special to let go, particularly after I got some results back. These are posted on another thread:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94134
There IS one big advantage of the Orthometar over the Biogon, and that is that it will fit both the post-war and pre-war Contax. Of course Zeiss did not plan that! This advantage is pretty well nullified by its cost, since its rarity puts its market value higher than a post-war Biogon Opton or Planar (at least according to what I see on eBay and so forth).
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94134
There IS one big advantage of the Orthometar over the Biogon, and that is that it will fit both the post-war and pre-war Contax. Of course Zeiss did not plan that! This advantage is pretty well nullified by its cost, since its rarity puts its market value higher than a post-war Biogon Opton or Planar (at least according to what I see on eBay and so forth).