What would be considered "Zeiss Color"?

Howdy, APUG! I read some posts the other day about old SLR/M42 Zeiss lenses as I'm considering trying out one. This particular post mentioned how sharp the Zeiss lens was and that it gives typical "Zeiss Color".

I'm quite curious, would any of you be able to explain the general characteristics of "Zeiss Color"?

I've shot many Nikon and Ricoh lenses, and I can generally tell the difference in their color rendering. But for a Zeiss, I have no clue. Thanks, APUG!
-Paul

It's a lot like the "Leitz glow".
The Zeiss lenses I have tend a bit cooler than Japanese lenses, mine date from 1936, 1937, 1946, 1894 or so, and some from the late 50s to mid-late 60s. The three earliest lenses are uncoated so can be disregarded. My set of Schneider-Kreuznach lenses from 1959 have a similar slightly cool look, comparing them to Nikkor, Takumar, and Zuiko 35mm lenses.
Some of the FSU lenses have interesting color rendition. All comments slash comparisons based on directly observed transparencies, not scanned images on a screen - this makes a big difference.

E. von Hoegh said:

It's a lot like the "Leitz glow".

Click to expand...

Correct.

You know, I've had or used quite a few Leitz lenses, and none of them glowed like I see on the internet.
Two lenses that did have the "glow" were, oddly, Sonnars - a 5cm collapsible from a Contax and a Lytkarino J-9. But the "glow" went away when I cleaned out the lubricant haze, although some veiling flare (due to uncorrected abberations) remains at f:2.
My Summitar has no "glow" at all, $150 wasted

E. von Hoegh,
Thanks a lot for the info. Just curious, would you happen be familiar with “Komura Color”?

PGraham3 said:

E. von Hoegh,
Thanks a lot for the info. Just curious, would you happen be familiar with “Komura Color”?

Click to expand...

Didn't Komura make film at one time?

E. von Hoegh,

Yeah, I believe so. But they also made an assortment of neat lenses.

PGraham3 said:

I read some posts the other day about old SLR/M42 Zeiss lenses as I'm considering trying out one. This particular post mentioned how sharp the Zeiss lens was and that it gives typical "Zeiss Color".

-Paul

Click to expand...

It might be helpful for the rest of us, who have never come across "Zeiss Colour", to quote the particular post. I for one am interested in the description of what it is, how it differs from say, Leica Colour, and best of all examples that reveal the differences.

pentaxuser

"

PGraham3 said:

E. von Hoegh,

Yeah, I believe so. But they also made an assortment of neat lenses.

Click to expand...

"Komuranon"? Sorry, I have no experience with them.
When I was getting paid to take pictures, in the 80s and 90s, I did a fair amount of product photography. Differences in color rendition were NOT acceptable, to the point that for a particular job all the film came from the same batch, all the lenses from the same maker and of the same vintage, lighting was voltage stabilised, and for the critical work a grey card and color chip were included in each frame. "Bokeh" was unheard of; backgrounds for portraits and so on were non distracting, period. The maximum aperture of a lens was used only when necessary to isolate the subject or get an image in very poor light; anything faster than f:2 or f:1.8 was really a special purpose (read "existing light") lens - for instance, the Nikkor H 50 f:2 is better at f:2 (and all other apertures) than the Nikkor S 50 f:1.4 at f:2 and smaller apertures. f1.4 was for when you couldn't get a picture any other way.

edited for spellynge