CZJ Biometar 80/2,8 MC vs Zenzanon 150/3,5 MC - quality of bokeh

Discussion in 'Medium Format Cameras and Accessories' started by transporti686, Jan 22, 2013.

  1. transporti686

    transporti686 Member

    Messages:
    63
    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Hi everyone,

    I want to know your opinions about quality of bokeh for CZJ Biometar 80/2,8 MC vs. Zenzanon 150/3,5 MC, both fitted on 6x4,5 cameras?

    Thank you very much.
     
  2. Mustafa Umut Sarac

    Mustafa Umut Sarac Member

    Messages:
    4,574
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2006
    Location:
    İstanbul
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
  3. transporti686

    transporti686 Member

    Messages:
    63
    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Thank you.

    I saw rating for some medium format lenses in this file (check this link http://free.art.pl/fotografie/johnston/LensBokehRatings.pdf). Rating for Bronica Zenzanon S 150/3,5 is 9 from 10, which is outstanding, exceptional, capable of great beuty bokeh, but I dont know if lens formula for Zenzanon 150/3,5 MC (6x4,5 format lens) is same as Zenzanon S 150/3,5 (6x6 format lens). I think, that lens formulas are different.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 23, 2013
  4. transporti686

    transporti686 Member

    Messages:
    63
    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
  5. Mustafa Umut Sarac

    Mustafa Umut Sarac Member

    Messages:
    4,574
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2006
    Location:
    İstanbul
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    I dont like japanese lenses whoever reports whatever. In 25 years , I only saw few good japanese lens shots and they were taken with exceptionally beatiful women. As you see at your Zenzanon picture , lens is very weak performer , nothing special even good . Zenzanon , who gives that name to a product ? I use zeiss and leitz and I am happy.
     
  6. AaTen

    AaTen Member

    Messages:
    9
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2013
    Shooter:
    Med. Format RF
    hehe i have a Seagull 203 6x6 folder that uses a HAIOU 111-2 lens
    and thats excellent, it was made by Carl Zeiss Jena ;-) So never try to
    judge a lens by its name ;-)
     
  7. Mustafa Umut Sarac

    Mustafa Umut Sarac Member

    Messages:
    4,574
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2006
    Location:
    İstanbul
    Shooter:
    35mm RF
    :laugh:
     
  8. transporti686

    transporti686 Member

    Messages:
    63
    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Picture is not mine:D. I own CZJ Flektogon 50/4 MC and CZJ Biometar 80/2,8 MC with Mamiya 645. I dont use Biometar at f-number range between 2,8-5,6, because I need higher DOF for landscape. Bronica ETRS with Zenzanon 150/3,5 MC is my new toy and I want to try shooting some portraits with Zenzanon or Biometar.
     
  9. kanzlr

    kanzlr Subscriber

    Messages:
    76
    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Location:
    Vienna, AUST
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    150/3.5 will have shallower depth of field and different angle of view...hard to compare.
     
  10. Noble

    Noble Member

    Messages:
    277
    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2012
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    It's been a long time since I've heard such an over the top and biased assessment of a lens or lens line. I've shot both Zeiss and Bronica and I can tell you that while there are differences there is no way someone can tell from a single 800x600 scanned in picture on the internet that a lens is a "weak performer." I assume you were just being sarcastic and it didn't translate well over the internet.

    Yup. Pretty much. I read the question a couple of days ago and I didn't even understand why it was being asked.
     
  11. kanzlr

    kanzlr Subscriber

    Messages:
    76
    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Location:
    Vienna, AUST
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Oh I think it has to do with gearheadism..."I want the lens with the best bokeh!" instead of formulating a photographic vision and aquiring the tools needed to fulfill it :smile:

    1. define the mission
    2. get the tools needed

    it is vital to do it in that order, if you want to get to results :smile:
     
  12. Slixtiesix

    Slixtiesix Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,104
    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2006
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    As Kanzlr said, hard to compare. You should better compare a Kaleinar 150/2,8 to the Zenzanon lens or a Zenzanon 80/2,8 to the Biotar, otherwise it will pretty much be a 80mm vs 150mm bokeh comparison, less to the say that the 80mm are Planar-types while the 150mm lenses (I assume) are Sonnar-types.
     
  13. transporti686

    transporti686 Member

    Messages:
    63
    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    OK, you are right. Different lenses - hard to compare.

    What do you mean about Zenzanon 150/3,5 MC and Biometar 80/2,8 MC for portrait work? I tend to Zenzanon for this work.
     
  14. Slixtiesix

    Slixtiesix Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,104
    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2006
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    I don´t know the particular Bronica lens, but for medium format portraits (head and shoulder or facial) I would recommend a 150mm over an 80mm. The 80mm is better suited for full length body shots. Tight facial portraits done with an 80mm will in most cases look distorted. It may still be okay for head and shoulder shots though.
    In any case, and I say that as a great fan of Zeiss lenses, I would prefer a portrait made with a Zenzanon lens that has ideal proportions over any distorted portrait made with a Zeiss lens of too short a focal length for the purpose.

    Regarding the bokeh of the East German mf lenses (especially Biometar 80 and 120, Sonnar 180) I must say that these are sublime. The only lenses that are close are the 2000-Series Hasselblad lenses (110/2, 150/2,8), but these are much more expensive than the East German lenses. I had a look on pictures made with the mentioned Bronica lens on Flickr and they look nice too!
     
  15. transporti686

    transporti686 Member

    Messages:
    63
    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Thank you.

    Yes, I don`t want to use this lens for close up portraits, minimal focusing distance (1,5 m) is too far for this work.
     
  16. Noble

    Noble Member

    Messages:
    277
    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2012
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Extension tubes.

    transporti686, as others have noted it would be a lot more helpful to know what exactly it is you intend to do with the lens instead of everyone just guessing. Someone already pointed out the error of comparing an 80mm lens of any type to a 150mm lens. But the other thing is you are discussing two different lenses for two entirely different systems. A better course of action is to figure out your needs and then pick the system that best fits your needs. No system is going to be the best at everything. You may pick what you think is the system with the lens that has the best bokeh but it may be a pain in the butt in other areas. I find getting a camera, lens, and film that you will actually shoot, comfortably, is a better strategy. You will shoot more and have more keepers.

    Anyway maybe the Bronica 150 3.5 MC is a sleeper hit. I own a Bronica and the 150mm PE is the lens everyone seems to clamor for in that line. I got a 150mm 4.0 MC years ago. It's not supposed to be that good. I never upgraded it to the 3.5 MC nor the PE version because I switched over to the Rollei 6008 Integral system. I have never done a head to head test between my 150mm 4.0 MC and my Rollei 150mm 4.0 Sonnar. The Sonnar has built in automatic metering, apertures, and shutter speeds. It's just a faster easier camera/lens to work with.

    So tell the forum what exactly it is you want to do and I'm sure someone can point you in the right direction.
     
  17. Felinik

    Felinik Member

    Messages:
    428
    Joined:
    May 13, 2012
    Shooter:
    35mm

    Word!

    In addition:

    2.1 check the current toolbox if there's anything that can be used to achieve the mission by modifying the mission a few percents.


    :smile: