Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/08/01
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 07:38 PM 8/1/97 -0400, Alf wrote: >Maybe, but in my experience the Zeiss Jena lenses (Biometar 80, 120, >Flektogon 50) have far better optical abilities (not mechanics !!!) than >Oberkochen's equivalents (Planar, Distagon), and are on 1/4 to 1/3 of the >price. And, as known also, the (Rolleiflex built-in) 3.5/75 Planar is better >also than the 2.8/80 Planar. > >Maybe it's different with 35mm camera lenses ... although there is hardly any >lens which compares to the 20 mm Flektogon (exept the Super Angulon, maybe). The only answer possible is a gasp and a snort. This simply isn't true. The Biometar is ALMOST as good as a Planar. The Flektogon is ALMOST as good as a Distagon. As for the 3.5/75 Planar, well, I have sold all mine and now have only 2.8 lenses. Figure it out for yourself. Please understand: I think Jena did a better job with binoculars than did Oberkochen/Wetzlar. But with camera lenses? No. There are some that shine: the 2.8/180 is a superb telephoto, for instance. But the Oberkochen Planar and Distagon are still distinguishably better than their Jena equivalents. Why the hell do you think we WON the Cold War? Marc James Small Vice-President, the Zeiss Historica Society Marc Marc James Small Cha Robh Bas Fir, Gun Ghras Fir! FAX: +540/343-7315