Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,963   Posts: 1,523,176   Online: 810
      
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 34 of 34
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Adirondacks
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,323
    Quote Originally Posted by steven_e007 View Post
    Hi

    The opinions you are expressing about Carl Zeiss lenses are commonly held by a lot of people. I get on my soap box about it a bit - but it is the dodgy history that is out there that I am critical of, nothing personal.

    Sorry if it sounds like I'm on your case!
    That's not a problem. I have limited experience with post war CZJ lenses, and that experience was hit-and-miss.
    If you have better information than I do, I appreciate your sharing it, and thank you.

    The prewar CZJ lenses, which I actually have a fair amount of experience with - from early Protars to the 75mm uncoated Tessar on my Rollei Std, with quite a few between, and including a really excellent pair of CZJ 10x25 binoculars made in 1896, have been much more consistently high quality.
    Last edited by E. von Hoegh; 06-28-2012 at 09:37 AM. Click to view previous post history.

  2. #32
    Slixtiesix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    711
    Images
    21
    Vegeotto, if you enjoy lens tests, you may have a look on this. There you may find an answer to your question:

    http://www.rickdenney.com/mother_lens_test.htm

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Philadelphia area
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    295
    Images
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by steven_e007 View Post
    I think to characterize it as a budget maker of dodgy camera lenses is wide of the mark.
    Unfortunately, from the consumer standpoint, I don't think it is wide of the mark. CZJ was a respectable lens maker until the '60. Then, the innovation stopped, the quality went down and they were somewhat competitive only because of their low price tag. At the same time, CZ West and japanese makers were able to adapt to the market and the consumer demand, offering an large range of lenses from fisheye to tele-lens, including zooms and catadioptric lenses I am not sure this diversity was part of CZJ business plan...

    Take care.

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Shropshire, UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    829
    Images
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by Dali View Post
    CZJ was a respectable lens maker until the '60. Then, the innovation stopped, the quality went down and they were somewhat competitive only because of their low price tag... At the same time, CZ West and japanese makers were able to adapt to the market and the consumer demand, offering an large range of lenses from fisheye to tele-lens, including zooms and catadioptric lenses I am not sure this diversity was part of CZJ business plan...

    Take care.
    Yep, that's pretty much what we've been saying. Thinks did go a little downhill later on, but I don't think the decline in quality was so severe as to take them from respectable to 'dodgy', though, IMHO. The optics were still very good, just the designs were getting a bit dated and the quality control was sometimes a bit lacking. Lack of development certainly, but if you were happy with the traditional prime lens designs then you were still getting good optics for little money. I wouldn't describe them as 'dodgy' (even though I think it was me who used that expression ;-)
    I don't doubt a Hassleblad mount Zeiss CF lens would knock spots of an East German lens for build quality, but comes in at maybe ten times the price of a CZJ Biometar. Personally I don't own any modern West German Carl Zeiss camera lenses because I can't afford them.

    I think to characterize it as a budget maker of dodgy camera lenses is wide of the mark.
    I said that in relation to the idea that the Carl Zeiss factory in Jena was making poor quality camera optics. Most (maybe all) of the camera lenses were made at the Carl Zeiss plant in Saalfeld. The Jena factory was about as high tech and modern as anything you would find on the 'wrong' side of the iron curtain - but they didn't produce the camera lenses, That is what I meant by wide of the mark.
    Steve

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin