PRAKTICA VF German-made Lens Recommendations?

[PGraham3]

Hello, APUG!
I acquired a very clean, barely-used PRAKTICA VF body the other day, and I’m looking to get a good German-made lens for it, perhaps even a rather obscure, cool lens that helps to produce sharp, contrasty photos.
I’m very familiar with shooting Japanese-made m42 cameras and lenses, but I’ve never shot a German-made camera or lens. The PRAKTICA VF was a camera that always interested me and I was finally able find one in pristine shape.

Carl Zeiss, Meyer-Optik, Pancolor, Pentacon, Beroflex, Primotar, etc, these are lens brands that I’m familiar with.
I’m curious, what is your favorite German-made m42 prime lens made during 1950s-70s?

Thanks, APUG! I look forward to read your responses.
-Paul

 

[AgX]

Carl Zeiss, Meyer-Optik, Pancolor, Pentacon, Beroflex, Primotar, etc, these are lens brands that I’m familiar with.

There were only 4 manufacturers of complex photographic lenses in the GDR, with the first two making most:
Carl Zeiss
Meyer
Feinmess
Ludwig

For several reasons not all lenses beared the name of the manufacturer but a brand.

The Japanese did not reinvent the wheel. In many lenses I see german designs.
However there is more variation amongst japanese M42 lenses. The number of GDR-M42 lenses is in relation rather limited. All are well known. I would not say there is something obscure.
Reallly tricky however it becomes when taking into account mount and barrel variations. Keep in mind that only two versions of zoom lenses were made. Both in the 80s.

 

[BMbikerider]

The Pancolor 50mm F2 is possibly the cream of the cream, but any of the later Zeiss lenses are well made, with good quality optics and very good build. there was a range from 20mm right through to 135. If you cannot find a Pancolor, a Tessar F2.8 or a Zeiss Biotar are almost as good. The Biotar F2 actually has a 58mm focal length.

 

[PGraham3]

@AgX
Thanks for the info!

Do you happen to know how many West German lens manufacturers were there that produced lenses that could fit the Praktica VF camera?

I’m a bit familiar with Steinheil-Munchen and Schneider-Kreuznach lenses. Have you tried these brands or any other West German m42 lenses?

-Paul

 

[AgX]

Do you happen to know how many West German lens manufacturers were there that produced lenses that could fit the Praktica VF camera?

The Praktica VF is not special at all.
As it yields an automatic diaphragm, but nothing more, it can take basically any M42 lens ever made. Be it plain manual, preset or automatic.

 

[PGraham3]

@AgX
Yep, it’s essentially a plain-jane manual m42 camera, but it has some neat unique features.

Just curious, would you happen to have any specific German-made m42 lens recommendations?
-Paul

 

[AgX]

There was a Zeiss range from 20mm right through to 135.

From 20mm to 1000mm. All in M42.

 

[PGraham3]

Thanks, @BMbikerider
I’ll do some research on the Pancolor 50mm f2, and see what I can find about it.
-Paul

 

[abruzzi]

I recently stumbled across a positive review of the Schneider 50, but I can’t find it or remember if it was the 1.9 or the 2.8. Anyway, I’ve loved Schneider lenses in other incarnations, so if I wanted a German lens for a German camera, that’s the direction I’d probably go.

 

[AgX]

You mean the Xenar (Tessar-type) and the Xenon (double-Gauss-type).

 

[Ian Grant]

Another lens would be the CZJ 50mm f2 T (coated) Flexon it's essentially the same as the Pancolar except the latter has newer coatings better balanced for Colour photography.

The Pancolar was initially an f2 lens, later they were f1.8, there's also a rare f1.4 version sold with the Pentacon Super. The most desirable CZJ standard lens in most peoples eyes is the 58mm f2 T Biogon but they usually sell for silly money, I have one in Praktina mount which I got at a good price with an FX body. The Helios 58mm f2 lens is a Biogon clone even these are sell for more than their worth (well in my eyes).

Ian

 

[PGraham3]

Cool, thanks @abruzzi and @Ian Grant
I’ll look into these as well.

Have any of you heard of or shot the Steinheil-München Auto Quinon lenses?
They look quite interesting, and not much info out there about them.
-Paul

 

[Ian Grant]

Forgot there was also a very rare 58mm f1.4 T Biotar.

I had a Steinheil Cassar on an Edixa, it was OK, a friends father had the Auto Quinon he seemed to like it. One thing you have to watch is often lenses on there own are selling for more tahn the same lens on its original camera. I bought my 58mm f2 Biogon on the Praktina FX body from a well known and highly reputable;e Online seller (he also has a shop which is appointment only) I paid £35 knowing (as did the seller) the lens alone was worth at least £100 on its own, the camera body had been engraved with a number on the top plate (the Praktina's were professional cameras).

Ian

 

[Ian Grant]

Having had a few hours to think, I have a suggestion - get an early auto diaphragm CZJ 50mm f2.8 Tessar, they are cheap and cheerful and the most common lens the camera was sold with. Alternatively a 50mm Meyer f2.9 Triotar but they are desired by the Lomo people so fetch higher prices, this was another common lens but don't have an auto diaphragm.

Early 50mm Tessars are really cheap, then go looking for the better lens with probably a bettera body. The sad thing happening on Ebay is people are splitting cameras and bodies as they fetch more separately, it's not just with 35mm cameras, it's happening with 9x12cm cameras because the lenses can be sold as LF cameras for 5x4.

I prefer to have a contemporary lens on a camera and that goes for any era, but then the option to use newer as well. So in the case of your VF body an early auto Tessar, ideally also a Biotar, but then if not the option of using a Takumar, Super Takumar, Super Multicoated Takumar. MC Yashinon etc. My point really is if you want an f1.9 Quinon look for an Edixa with one, no-one wants them so they are usually quite cheap.

Ian

 

[AgX]

Having had a few hours to think, I have a suggestion - get an early auto diaphragm CZJ 50mm f2.8 Tessar,...

Maybe one with that semi-autiomatic diaphragm. If you are lucky your sample squeaks at releasing. Too old for your model but good for a show...

 

[PGraham3]

Thanks for your comments and recommendations, @Ian Grant and @AgX.
Starting to research and look around.
-Paul

 

[Steve Roberts]

The Praktica VF is perhaps a little unusual in the UK. The IV versions turn up very often but I've only ever seen one VF, which was given to me. IIRC, it differs from the IVF in having an instant return mirror and a red warning in the viewfinder that the film isn't advanced. What these cameras lacked in finesse, they made up for in weight and longevity. Your barely-used VF could well outlast most of us on this forum!
Steve

 

[Ian Grant]

The Praktica VF is perhaps a little unusual in the UK. The IV versions turn up very often but I've only ever seen one VF, which was given to me. IIRC, it differs from the IVF in having an instant return mirror and a red warning in the viewfinder that the film isn't advanced. What these cameras lacked in finesse, they made up for in weight and longevity. Your barely-used VF could well outlast most of us on this forum!
Steve

I don't remember seeing a VF here in the UK, I had a friend at University (early 70's)who had a IV, I had a Prakticamat at the time. The Praktikamat was an excellent camera, first camera in the UK to have TTL metering (they were imported slightly before the Spotmatics) but I has very inconsistent exposures. It wasn't the camera body I discovered later the Pancolar lens was at fault never stopping down correctly, sometime to much, occasionally to little, a shame as it was very sharp. I replaced it with a Spotmatic F.

My main concerns with early Praktica's is build quality, at some stage I may buy a IV or V or an early Contax SLR, just to compare and sit alongside my Praktina's.

Ian

 

[Pentode]

For “sharp, contrasty photos” the Pancolar is probably your best bet. It’s the newer Zeiss design from that era.
On the whole I think you’ll find that Tessars (and Xenars), while quite sharp, have much lower contrast than most modern lenses. I like a lot of those older German lenses, but none of them compete with the later lenses made from the 70s on where contrast is concerned.

For sharpness I think you’ll do a little better with Zeiss, Schneider and Meyer than with most of the others. Not that Isco, Steinheil or Schacht were bad, but those first three are (IMO) better. Stopped down a little they’ll all be plenty sharp.

This is a page from an excellent site about Exakta cameras. While the author is addressing lenses for Exakta specifically, almost all the lenses he mentions were also made in the m42 mount. The page isn’t exhaustive but it gives a very good overview of the German lenses made during the period you’re interested in and his opinions seem measured and thoughtful.

Overall I think Ian’s suggestion to start with an early Tessar is a sound one. It’s a classic lens.

 

[Pentode]

Oops... forgot the link!
http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/exakta/lenses.html

 

[PGraham3]

@Pentode
Super-thanks for the link! It's quite helpful, and the opinions are indeed measured and thoughtful. Also, thanks for your comments!
As for shooting a Tessar-style lens, I have a GN Auto Nikkor 45mm f2.8 that I had AI'D and sometimes shoot with my Nikon F3, and it indeed renders quite well when stopped down a bit. I may opt to snag a German Tessar lens for the Praktica, but I feel more inclined to try something a little different.

@Steve Roberts @Ian Grant
Indeed, I also have seen a lot of Praktica IVF's around, but never really a Praktica VF. Something about the Praktica VF simply intrigued some time back, and I was happy to land one in pristine shape. The VF does appear to be much more rare, which is why it may have also intrigued me a lot.

I'll update in hopefully the near future on which lens that I ended up grabbing, and will have some sample shots posted on my Lomography page.
-Paul

 

[Ian Grant]

For “sharp, contrasty photos” the Pancolar is probably your best bet. It’s the newer Zeiss design from that era.
On the whole I think you’ll find that Tessars (and Xenars), while quite sharp, have much lower contrast than most modern lenses. I like a lot of those older German lenses, but none of them compete with the later lenses made from the 70s on where contrast is concerned.

For sharpness I think you’ll do a little better with Zeiss, Schneider and Meyer than with most of the others. Not that Isco, Steinheil or Schacht were bad, but those first three are (IMO) better. Stopped down a little they’ll all be plenty sharp.

This is a page from an excellent site about Exakta cameras. While the author is addressing lenses for Exakta specifically, almost all the lenses he mentions were also made in the m42 mount. The page isn’t exhaustive but it gives a very good overview of the German lenses made during the period you’re interested in and his opinions seem measured and thoughtful.

Overall I think Ian’s suggestion to start with an early Tessar is a sound one. It’s a classic lens.

The CZJ coatings were excellent and my experience is the T coated lenses have excellent contrast, I use a 1953/4 T coated 150mm f4.5 Tessar alongside Multi Coated lenses and you'd not be able to spot a difference with B&W film, it's the same with my T coated Biotar compared to a SMC Takumar. With colour films the T coatings have a blue bias and you need a warm-up filter. CZJ renamed the T coated Flexon and it became the Pancolar when they began using coatings better optimised for colour films but it didn't alter contrast just colour balance.

Ian

 

[PGraham3]

@Ian Grant
According this source (http://www.pentax-slr.com/108413506) there were only just over 15,000 Praktica VF cameras produced, whereas there were about 170,000 Praktica IV produced. This may offer a suitable reason why Praktica VF cameras are harder to come by in comparison to the IV. Also, of course, a lot has to do with where these cameras were initially sold as well, which is information that is probably not easily obtained.

@Steve Roberts
What is the serial number of your Praktica VF?
Mine is: 805667
I have a hunch that Praktica began serial numbers for this camera at 800000.
What do you think?
-Paul

 

[AgX]

There were two VF versions, the plain VF is stated to had been produced in only 8700 samples.

 

[Ian Grant]

@Ian Grant
According this source (http://www.pentax-slr.com/108413506) there were only just over 15,000 Praktica VF cameras produced, whereas there were about 170,000 Praktica IV produced. This may offer a suitable reason why Praktica VF cameras are harder to come by in comparison to the IV. Also, of course, a lot has to do with where these cameras were initially sold as well, which is information that is probably not easily obtained.

Well it's similar with the Prakticamat where only 25,000 were made , while there were vastly more Nova's. I suspect the VF went into production as the Nova's were being designed and prototyped, a bit like the Spotmatic F and the K series Pentax cameras.

Ian