I'm not at the same computer that contains the PDML Digest in which someone asked me to document my statement that the Carl Zeiss Jena Pancolar 80/1.8 is similar to the Pentax Super Takumar 85/1.8. My source is a series of postings and private mailings in 2001 and 2002 by PDML's sadly missed CZJ expert, Frantisek Vlcek of the Czech Republic. Here's all I have on the Pancolar, which weighs 310 g, takes a 58mm filter, and has 6 elements in 5 groups (like the Super Takumar and Pentax SMC 85/1.8s):
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 10:39:53 +0100 From: Frantisek Vlcek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: favorite non-Pentax K mount lens? That's easy. It's the 1.8/80mm Carl Zeiss Jena Pancolar. Superb lens. ( M42 only) ... The 1.8/80 CZJ Pancolar is a gaussian design, probably very similar or same as Planar design. I do have this lens, and while the Multicoating on my sample is not as good as modern SMC (needs a lens hood still <g>), in normal light it is about as sharp as my SMC F 1.4/50 or just slightly less (at relatively same apertures - 1.4=1.8; 5.6=5.6). It's good wide open, and excellent even moderately stopped down. It should be as sharp or even better <g> than all the portrait 80mm' Pentax made (xcept the new ones, A & FA 1.4/85 of course). AFAIK it's same or very similar design to Pentax SMC-K 1.8/85 (most those 1.8/80 lenses are of same, planar-derived design). Only drawback my sample is prone to flare from strong light sources." >From http://zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/archives/1999/msg01582.html: Hi Zuiko amateurs, This week I bought a new (used) lens, and while it's not a Zuiko, I just wanted to say what an amazing lens it seems to be. It's a Carl-Zeiss-Jena (east) Pancolar 80mm 1:1,8 with M42 mount. Because of a small dint at the front thread it costed only 200 DM (120 US dollar) instead 390 DM. First slides taken with an aperture of 1:5,6 were great. Because there are no OM - M42 adaptors, which goes to infinity without an auxiliary lens, this message is somewhat off topic, but I think there aren't any M42 or Carl-Zeiss-Jena (east) discussion lists around where I could share this experience. Regards, Matthias. "Some of CZJ's lenses such as the "Pancolar" and "Flektagon" have their roots in pre-WWII designs ("Biotar" and "Distagon") for which CZJ could use the designs, but not the original trademark names due to court rulings about intellectual property rights." -- John http://www.astrosurf.com/buil/us/spe2/hresol.htm: The Pancolor 80_1.8 lens has a pupil diameter of 44.4 mm, which implies that there is no risk of vignetting in any part of the spectrum. A user of 80_1.8 and other CZJ primes wrote: "Superb. I know everyone says Pentax made the best M42 lenses but I disagree." >From the Contax discussion list: "By the way I have bayonet mount practica lenses, Flektogon 20/f2.8 which is a very good lens Mayer 28/F2.8 not a bad lens at all Flektogon 35/f2.4 very very nice lens Pancolor 50/f1.8 very nice Pancolor 80/f1.8 ditto! Sonnar 135/f3.5 extremly nice lens Sonnar 300/f4 I do not use much, though good one and mayer 50/f1.8 CZJ 55/f2.8 MACRO lens (good lens) I would say these lenses have almost the same colour redention, which is very pleasing, and very small distortion. So I like them a lot, but cameras (B200 and BX20) are different story all together. I wish Penatcon servived and produced a better camera body! " [EMAIL PROTECTED]
