Weight | 70 g |
---|---|
Dimensions | 85 mm |
Focal Length (mm) | |
Max Aperture (f) | |
Aperture Blades | |
Elements | |
Sharp (Near) | |
Sharp (Far) |
Zett Talon 85/2.8 [V1]
Multicoated lens for Zeiss Ikon Ikolux / Perkeo slide projectors. Probably AKA Zeiss Ikon Talon.
Category: Transparencies
Reviews
Add a review Cancel reply
Related to . . .
Related products
-
Arsenal Triar-1 150/3.5
Compare -
Agfa Agomar 85/2.5 [V1]
Compare -
Agfa Agomar 85-150/4
Compare -
Agfa Color-Agolar 60/2.8
Compare -
Apollo 100-150/3.5
Compare -
Argus Projection Anastigmat 100/3.3
Compare -
Agfa Color-Agolar 85/2.8
Compare -
Agfa Agomar 90/2.4
Compare -
Benoist Berthiot 60/1.6
Compare -
Aldis Projection 100/3.2
Compare -
Argus Projection 100/3.5
Compare -
Apollo 90/2.8
Compare -
AG Optical Trionar 152/3.5
Compare -
Agfa Variomar 80-125/3.1
Compare -
Pentacon AV 200/4
Compare -
Airequipt Luminac 100/3.5
Compare -
Agfa Agolon 90/2.5
Compare -
Agfa Agomar 85/2.8 [V4]
Compare -
Benoist Berthiot 110/2.4
Compare -
Agfa Agolar 85/2.5
Compare -
Appro 100-225/4
Compare -
Apollo 85-150/3.5
Compare -
Argus Projection 100/2.8
Compare -
Aldis Anastigmat 152/4
Compare -
Pentacon AV 150/2.8
Compare
16:9 –
This lens invites damnation by faint praise, but on reflection I feel the need simply to damn it: this is a horrible lens. With a lesser brand-mark on the nose it would merely be another ugly plastic-barrelled triplet, but here the differential between expectation and performance is a set-up for particularly acute disappointment.
Granted, it was the entry-level option for Zeiss Ikon series projectors, but alongside similarly commonplace Leica Hektor and Agfa Agomar lenses, the Talon 85/2.8 does exactly whatever the opposite of shine is. It dulls.
Disposing of a few positives for editorial balance, it’s cheap and light. Contrast and saturation performance is no worse than average – in fact, colour rendition might even be described as fair: this was a lens produced in the 1980s era of relatively civilised coatings, not the wildly flare-prone and murky-looking boat anchors of the 1960s. Zone A performance is a commendable enough 7.0, dipping slightly at near distance.
However, the outer Zones, especially Zone C (full frame corners) are terribly soft – even by the abysmal norm of slide projector lenses in general. In an older lens, the lower contrast and poorer correction combine to give an attractive glow, but this lens is well-enough spherically corrected, and the rendering style sufficiently snappy, to highlight its poor resolution and strong chromatic aberration. The combination is aggressively ugly: in and out of focus. There’s even significant optical vignetting on full frame (in Zone C). Bokeh balls are curiously deformed rather than consistently circular, or noticeably tending to cat-eyes. There’s no swirl, and minimal soap bubble outlining.
Although slightly sharper than the worst offerings, in terms of desirability, the Talon 85/2.8 is in line with the scrag end of the 85mm market – in company with the later Isco/Gnome Projars and lesser Aldis optics – an illustriously named dud. Whereas Leica doesn’t ever seem to have made a bad projector lens, Zeiss never seems to have made a good one for 35mm slide projection – at least not one well suited to digital image capture today.