No aspherical surfaces. I'm not sure when they started multicoating,
but I don't think that early. Zeiss used the designation of *T for
their multicoating. When they began doing it, I don't know. I think
that modern CNC machining and computer designing gives lenses from
the last 20 years a decided advantage over the 50's designs. But they
sure were good given the tools of that era.
At 03:57 PM 4/26/2006, you wrote:
Let me be more specific - the cameras I bought both have 'black-nose' Zeiss-Opton 50mm f1.5 Sonnars, both from the 50's -60's, i.e. multicoated (T*).
So for all practical purposes, this IS a modern lens, no?
Thor
On 26 Apr, 2006, at 22:24, Jeffery Smith wrote:
I'm still amazed that the best overall performing lens in my entire collection is a 50/3.5 CV Heliar that was from a design waaaaay back in the early 20th century. It seems to have been based on an earlier design of the Tessar. Very simple, but very good optically.
Jeffery
At 03:14 PM 4/26/2006, Richard wrote:As far as design goes, my designer friend, Brian Caldwell, tells me that many of the older Zeiss designs are about as good as they can get. Setting these up in a lens optimization program demonstrates that even changes in glass types will not much improve them. Old Tessars and Protars fall into this category. This is not to say that they are wonderful lenses, only that Zeiss pretty well exhausted the capabilities early on.
--- Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
--- Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Online, searchable archives are available at //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
