11 Comments

1. In 1978 I got my very first SLR. It was a used Practica PL Nova 1B. With the camera came two lenses, a 200/f4 and a Meyer Domiplan 50 f2.8. For two years I used the camera and the lenses extensively. The 200mm was surprisingly decent but the Meyer 50mm was crap. Horrible, bad, utter crap. Through the years I have since used many 50mm lenses and none of them have been as bad as the Domiplan. The biggest problem is that the lens has super soft corners. Forget soft, blury is a better word. I mostly used the lens for B/W, which was lucky for me. The few slide films I shot shows that the lens has severe color problems.
   From a usability standpoint the very thin focus ring makes the lens harder to focus than necessary and it is difficult to avoid altering the aparture during focusing.
   I have tested a host of other CZJ Praktica 50mm lenses. I am not all that impressed, but they are of much higher quality than the Meyer Domiplan.Avoid.

2. I too own this lens and I am pleasantly surprised.

   My copy happens to be very good as it seems as it produces sharp images even wide open. To be be fair however I ‘ve only used it on my DSLRs which means that msotly the center of the lens is used.

   When I received the lens I was amazed by the simplicity of it’s construction and light weight. It doesn’t claim any quality awards, mechanically speaking, and it’s a bit akward to use. Still, it produces very pleasant images and I am happy to have it in my collection.

3. Perhaps some other readers have encountered a bad copy of this lens, but I was pleasantly surprised by mine. It is quite sharp when stopped down and seems to have even better color rendition than my Pentacon 50mm, which is a multicoated lens. The Domiplan takes a 49mm filter, not a 55mm as stated above. The front element is deeply recessed making a lens shade unnecessary.

4. I just got one for $9 (including shipping) from the Bay. Would this be an indication of its quality? I hope not. I bought a Meyer-Optik Something Else 37mm f2.8 on M39 mount, adapted to M42, paid about $60 for it, and while I am please with the center (really sharp), it is absolutely soft or messy on the surronding areas. I hope this Domiplan is not bad, I will post in couple of days.

   1. As I did not expect, this lens came broken, I guess. It is only working wide open at f2.8. I guess it has the spring broken. The shots taken are relatively OK wide open.

5. Excelente optica uma das melhores que conheço na distancia focal de 5mm e abertura max. 2.8.Sou coleccionador no campo da fotografia.

6. I don’t have the domiplan but I tested accurately many samples of the pentacon 50mm. 1.8 who was made by the same factory as the domiplan.
   The difference is that the pentacon is 6 elements against the 3 elements of the domiplan.
   The results were very bad at diafragms open more than 5.6.
   I suppose that domipkan, a simple triplet, cannot be better.
   By the way the best 50mm. I tried was the super takumar 50 1.4.

7. I have two Domiplan lenses, one for Praktica (screw) and other for Exakta. Both excellents lenses.
   I think when you do not get good results with this lens possibly cause is that the rear element is missalignment.
   Three small screw fix this element and aligned it,if this element is misaligned the results are very bad.

8. I love the lens.

9. It’s far lighter than my MC Pentacon which has closer focusing ability as does my Biotar. It is more like the Tessar lens. I love the eye pleasing effects I can create with landscapes.

   Handling is terrible that contributes to negative opinions.

10. i got one of these, and it had a thumbprint inside between the two sandwiched elements, and i can’t get them apart. i guess they had serious qa issues, although fifty years on it’s hard to know for sure…

Comments are closed.