|
|
Post by John Parry on Mar 2, 2006 7:18:37 GMT -5
Hi Everyone,
Just won something that's turned out a bit of a mystery. A Prakticar 200/3.5. Not sure of the lens mount, but more likely to be a B than M42 (they only used the Prakticar designation for their long monsters for M42). Ordinarily, I would have looked it up, but it was late, the auction was finishing at an awkward time, and a Prakticar would have to be for one or the other mount (or so I thought).
Won the item, looked it up, but can't find it in the lists I know of on the various Praktica sites. I'm just hoping it isn't for another manufacturer's camera altogether (unless it's for an Exakta !!)
Lesson: Look it up first ! I'll just have to wait and see what comes.
Regards - John
|
|
|
|
Post by kiev4a on Mar 2, 2006 18:39:49 GMT -5
John:
The only info I could find on a 200mm Prakticar listed two models--an f4 for the Pentagon (rare--maybe just a prototype ) and a Jena f2.8 200mm that is really rare and really expensive. No mention of a 3.5 but a lot of the info was in German and the translation was really rough. Any way you look at it the lens must be pretty rare. Don't know what the odds are that it an M42 mount.
|
|
|
|
Post by John Parry on Mar 3, 2006 3:45:52 GMT -5
Thanks for that Wayne
The description actually says M42. Beginning to suspect it may be an 80 - 200 zoom, which came in a 3.5. Common as muck! Will have something to say about the description if it is - bit of a difference !
Rregards - John
|
|
|
|
Post by John Parry on Mar 3, 2006 12:19:43 GMT -5
No idea what it is.  Doesn't look like a zoom. Seems to have a huge lens hood for it's size. Description says made in Japan, which sounds right for a zoom, probably not for a prime. Oh well - it's the anticipation that keeps us going back! Regards - John |
|
|
|
Post by kiev4a on Mar 3, 2006 12:51:34 GMT -5
From waht I read, not all the lenses were made in Germany, and the lens formulas were used on lenses with a number of different brand names, depending on the country where sold. Supposedly the photo quality was the same no matter the brand or where it was made. I certainly looks like a prime lens.
|
|
PeterW
Lifetime Member
Member has Passed
Posts: 3,804
|
Post by PeterW on Mar 3, 2006 14:43:07 GMT -5
Can't say it rings a bell, John, but most of the Prakticar lenses were relabelled from lenses marked Pentacon and were originally Orestegors made by Meyer in Gorlitz.
I've got one of the original Orestegors, a 200mm f/4 prime lens in M42 which isn't auto diaphragm, not even pre-set diaphragm. Just plain ordinary M42 prime. It's a heavy old beast, but it's as sharp as a razor, even at full aperture.
Peter
|
|
|
|
Post by John Parry on Mar 7, 2006 16:22:12 GMT -5
Well the Prakticar 3.5 200mm turned up. Yes it's a prime, 200mm 3.5 Prakticar. But they never made one - at least according to all the lists I have been able to unearth.
Additional info - made in Japan Ser No T-73090769. VS-PM Japan. Filter size 62mm.
Unlike every other Japanese Prakticar I've come across, there is absolutely no plasticky feel about it. The large focussing band is milled metal. The aperture adjustment ring has a clicky-cricky feel to it (as opposed to smooth continuous adjustment). It is heavy and the glass seems very bright indeed.
One odd thing. It's an auto aperture, but there is a metal tab on the side which, when pushed (haphazard operation) operates as the DOF preview on the camera.
When screwed fully home onto the camera, the DOF marks dont line up on top as you'd expect, and there is some evidence that there was once a tripod mount attached (slight scratch marks around the lens)
Can't get my digital camera (mobile phone!) to work, so I can't show you, but this seems definitely out of the ordinary.
Any ideas anyone?
Regards - John
|
|
|
|
Post by heath on Mar 9, 2006 6:29:39 GMT -5
Could it acctually be a T-mount lens rather than an M-42? The only reason I ask this is the serial # starts with a T, and the DOF marks are not lining up where they should.
Heath
|
|
|
|
Post by John Parry on Mar 9, 2006 9:33:44 GMT -5
Good idea Heath,
Will check it out tonight - didn't think of that. (It does fit the M42 Praktica but as an earlier thread discussed, a T-mount will often fit a true 'Universal' M42 until it becomes worn).
Regarding that earlier thread, PeterW was perfectly correct. Turns out I have a whole bagful of T-mount lenses, most of which won't mate with a true M42, but work perfectly with an M42 (or Exakta bayonet) adapter.
Regards - John
|
|
|
|
Post by John Parry on Mar 9, 2006 15:45:39 GMT -5
Hi again.
No Heath - not a T-mount. the adapter doesn't fit at all after a couple of turns.
However, I asked the question on the PUGW (Yahoo) Group, and Sam Tang, a really knowledgeable chap on there came back with:-
"Nothing mysterious about this lens:
It was one of the lenses commissioned by CZ Scientific Instruments, the
British importer of Pentacon and Carl Zeiss equipment, as its "second
label" lenses for the Praktica cameras some time in the seventies I
believe. As CZ Scientific Instruments also represented Sigma it was easy
to arrange for some private branding, and Sigma also produced such
M42-mount Prakticar lenses with electric diaphragm simulation and indexing.
"The Praktica Way" by Leonard Gaunt (Focal Press, third edition 1975)
listed these "British M42 Prakticars" on page 289:
24/2.8, 28/2.8, 35/2.8, 50/1.8 electric (which I suspect is a typo while
referring to the Pentacon electric), 135/2.8, 200/3.5, 200/2.8, 300/4.
All but the last one was available as both auto and electric versions.
All the best,
Sam."
That of course, explains why it wasn't in any of the Praktica lens lists. As always, with any new long(ish) M42, I'm hoping it'll take a large teleconverter. Will let you see the results if it does.
Regards - John
|
|
