A Pancolar? Or just Pentacon

[iamsid]

I've got a Pentacon 50/1.8 MC (M42).I've never tried a Pancolar 50/1.8, but I

still wanna know whether a Carl Zeiss Jena Pancolar 50/1.8 MC (M42) performs

better than this Pentacon. I know that Pentacon was made by Carl Zeiss, but

there are people saying Pancolar beats Pentacon at full aperture. Anyone has

any experience? Thanks.

[dan_fromm2]

Um, the Pancolar was a CZJ lens. Pentacon brand lenses were made by Meyer, not CZJ. 50/1.8 Pancolars are cheap enough, buy one and ask the question yourself.

[winfried_buechsenschuetz1]

The Pentacon 50/1.8 was the cheaper alternative to the CZJ Pancolar. I don't have experience with any of them, but the Pancolar has a good reputation which the Pentacon counterpart does not have.

 

It is NOT true that Pentacon lenses were made by CZJ - as others said, most of them were originally made by Meyer-Goerlitz. This company was merged into Pentacon and so their lenses were sold with a Pentacon label. Their design is identical to the former Meyer lenses.

[david_m]

I've used both. You can't really tell the difference in the performance. Maybe you could in huge enlargements. The Pentacon is a Meyer design not Carl Zeiss Jena. It used to be called the Meyer Oreston. The Pancolar should theoretically be better as it was more expensive and top-of-the line. There are single-coated and multi-coated versions of both. The multi-coated version of the Pancolar is uncommon and usually sells for a premium. Avoid the older 'zebra' lenses - they are not up to the build-quality of the later multi-coated lenses. The Pentacon lens focusses closer. I use mine quite a bit, its a fine lens. But with all East-German equipment you never really know if you will get a good example or a poor one.

[pshinkaw]

I have Pancolars, Orestons and Pentacons. I believe that they are all of the same Double Gauss design, but vary slightly in construction quality. The Pancolars are the best, the Oreston are not quite as good and Pentacons are downright cheaply constructed.

 

In 4X6 prints, I can't tell them apart. Both the Oreston and Pentacon feel loose. Man of the Pentacon's suffer from gummy lubricant or loose fitting parts in the auto-diaphragm mechanism.

 

On the plus side, the Electric Pentacon, with the electrical contacts for the Practica, is possibly the second shortest of any 50mm lens. The only one I have found that is actually thinner is the 50mm Nikon E. It's about a 3 millimeters shorter than my Oreston.

 

The Pancolar can be found in both f1.8 and f2 versions.

 

-Paul

[iamsid]

thanks guys. think i gonna buy Pancolar though it's not "cheap enough ;)

[iamsid]

by the way, could any body tell me whether there is difference in performance between the electric CZJ lenses and non-electric ones?

[winfried_buechsenschuetz1]

There is probably no optical difference between the electric and non-electric versions. On the electric versions there is a resistor track inside and some contacts outside to tell the camera body which aperture you selected.

[pshinkaw]

The electrical contacts can jam in the detents used for some open aperture metering indexes. As I recall I have jammed it part-way into a Fujica ST-705 as well as a Mamiya Sekor DSX-500. The blade on a Swiss Army knife can push in the contact and release the lens.

 

-Paul

[weezul]

I also used both and I support what David M wrote - I think it is rather a sort of cult following that Pancolar has, although it definitely comes out better in benchmark tests. A Pentacon can also deliver very good pictures if only in the right hands... ;-)

[emmanouel_pateros]

I have the pancolar and 3 pentacon electric 50mm f/1.8. A sears 50mm f/1.4 and a pentax super takumar 50 f/1.4. There is no difference at all between the pancolar and the pentacon. The sears-mamiya lens is my best lens in this focal length and is the most heavy. I have never seen a bad heavy lens. I believe that the most important factor when you buy a lens is the weight as a first testing. The takumar that is admired so much from many is believed to be radioactive with lanthanium. I am an astrophysicist and I have a knowledge of these things. Personally I believe that these lenses are not dangerous unless they are broken and you cut your hand with the glass or you have them all the time near your head or your eyes. But these fine lenses now are yellow. Mine has turned yellow. When I look through the camera lens I notice this yellow color. These lenses are only now for BW. Their serving life has finished. One thing is very strange. Why they are so expensive even with scratches on EBAY ?