[Na Horuk]

I guess this is one of those "old vs new" threads (or at least a "stop me from buying.." thread! )

I recently saw a a pretty good copy of the Zeiss Flektogon 35mm f2.4 lens (Jena, made in DDR) at a local store, for a good price (under 60euro). But I already have the DA 35mm f2.4! The lenses are quite different - the Flektogon is m42 with aperture ring and short MFD. The DA 35mm is.. well, pretty great and it has AF, auto aperture, everything auto. I don't really have any complaints against the DA 35mm (except maybe the axial CA wide open). I am not looking to replace the DA 35mm, but you know how LBA is.. I've seen the review page and threads about the Flektogon on this forum, but the reviews are a little mixed and nobody directly compared it to modern Pentax 35mm lenses, though some did say they prefer the DA 35mm because of its AF. I am wondering about the rendering, though. Bokeh, colours, sharpness.

Has anyone had both of these lenses? Is their rendering and handling different enough to be worth buying a Flektogon 35mm f2.4 if one already has the DA 35mm f2.4?

Also, the Flektogon is m42, but it has the auto switch as well as electrical contacts. I didn't know m42 lenses can have electrical contacts. Is that of any value on a Pentax DSLR? What kind of camera would make full use of this? I already have the genuine Pentax m42 adapter btw

---

Last edited by Na Horuk; 05-09-2014 at 04:23 PM.

[VisualDarkness]

Looks like a Pentacon thing when I googled: Pentacon lenses - Camera-wiki.org - The free camera encyclopedia

[Imageman]

That will be the pentacon electric version then, as far as im aware the contacts are simply there to confirm the aperture setting to the camera and are of no consequence if you don't own the matched camera body.


I have a range of m42 lenses, its all I shoot. For me the need to purchase a lens comes down to a decision about its optical design and if this design will give a different look to the image.


Whats the point of owning a dozen lenses so similar that you cant tell which one made the shot, that's like owning a dozen jackets all identical, nobody can tell which one your wearing. What you want is a dozen different jackets, you can then choose the look you want.


It seems to me that this lens has 2 qualities, more vibrant colours and closer focussing, almost to macro. The first can be replicated by adjusting the saturation, but the second could make it worth a pop. I would be looking for a distinctive image from it which I not seeing to make me want to invest.


Wide lenses are always difficult to quantify, they have complex designs to provide retrofocus, this forces extra elements into the mix and predictions based on basic lens design become impossible.


Triplets planars tessars xenars pancolars sonnars and the other distinctive designs have predictable distinctive looks. These distinctive designs are familiar names in the longer focal lengths but don't appear in wide angles due to the retrofocus issue, so performance predictions become anyones guess. Differences between lenses seem to boil down to resolution and distortion rather than look and feel.


I guess the real answer is, looking at the images it can produce is there a gap in you lens lineup that this would fill. If the answer is no or I don't know, then don't buy.

[lytrytyr]

It's curious that these seem to be the only 35mm f/2.4 lenses available.
Both assembled in a communist country.

[Imageman]

Im not sure what point your making lytrytyr, can you elucidate.

[stevebrot]

Also, the Flektogon is m42, but it has the auto switch as well as electrical contacts. I didn't know m42 lenses can have electrical contacts. Is that of any value on a Pentax DSLR? What kind of camera would make full use of this?

The electrical contacts supported certain features on later Praktica bodies. They are of no use on a Pentax dSLR. For under Euro 60, you should give it a try. It is supposed to be a decent lens. Google is our friend. Here is a link to the Flickr group for that lens:

https://www.flickr.com/groups/311992@N25/


Steve

[clackers]

It's curious that these seem to be the only 35mm f/2.4 lenses available.
Both assembled in a communist country.

It's obviously because that's the people's focal length, Lytrytyr.

Wide angles are bourgeois, teles the province of the ruling classes.

[stevebrot]

It's curious that these seem to be the only 35mm f/2.4 lenses available.
Both assembled in a communist country.

It's obviously because that's the people's focal length, Lytrytyr.

I prefer to think that it is part of an overarching conspiracy of socialist/communist numerologists to poison the minds of the photographic masses.


Steve

[ogl]

I guess this is one of those "old vs new" threads (or at least a "stop me from buying.." thread! )

I recently saw a a pretty good copy of the Zeiss Flektogon 35mm f2.4 lens

I had this Flektogon - I'd say that DA35 and this old GDR lens are in different leagues. Pentax is FAR BETTER.
Low contrast is the illness of all GDR lenses.

[Na Horuk]

Yes, I was surprised its focal length and aperture were the same as the modern Pentax DA, but the designs don't seem to be related. I guess I'll stay away from it for now, as I already have a 35mm f2.4 lens and another dedicated macro for closeups. But it is tempting just for the experience of getting a new toy if nothing else

[manntax]

I dare to disagree with some of the previous posters ! These Flektogons command a steep price for a reason ! I bough mine for something like £140+ and it was nearly 2 years ago - prices have gone even up - all I say is about mint condition lens. My copy is a lens that has beaten badly all 35mm lenses I had - and including both takumars 35mm SMC and Super as well as few other lenses in this area - including highly prized SMC 28 f3.5 - these are simple a different league lenses. Flektogon is sharper , and more importantly gives such unique rendering that cannot be found in many other lenses. My copy is both sharp in close up mode and at infinity - stopped down gives beautiful sharpness across the frame, wide open is very sharp in the middle of the frame with amazing smooth bokeh. The only gripe i have is the fact that this lens twice the size of Takumar ( which I kept anyway for that reason only ! ) and the build quality isn't as good - although way batter than plasticy lenses.
If I was in the position of buying a clean working copy for 60 euro - I would jump on it in an instant, then test whichever is better and then sold the other one earning probably a good £50+ in the meantime !!

EDIT: The flare is non issue for me with deep made-for-50mm lens hood !
ahh and did I mention it is a full frame 35mm lens !? ( fingers crossed Ricoh/ Pentax! )
I say .. grab it , test it play with it and then sell if the mood strikes - you will thank me !

>>-manntax-->

[ogl]

Maybe it will be useful -
???????? Carl Zeiss Jena DDR electric MC Flektogon 35mm F/2.4 (1977-1990) - ?????, ?????????????? ? ??????? ??????? - AFLenses.ru

I'd say that the contrast of photos is made higher in any graphics editor

The real contrast is something like this



---------- Post added 05-10-2014 at 09:57 AM ----------



---------- Post added 05-10-2014 at 10:01 AM ----------

more samples

????? ?????????? ??? ?????????. ??????????????, ?????????, ??????, ??????, MTF ??? ?????????? Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax, Olympus, Sigma, Tamron, Carl Zeiss ? ??.

---------- Post added 05-10-2014 at 10:03 AM ----------

Real contrast of this lens
35mm f2.4 Flektogon MC

---------- Post added 05-10-2014 at 10:10 AM ----------

My opinion - the optical quality of this lens is one of the numerous myths about old lenses.
it's not bad, but nothing special. Super-Takumar 35/2 is better IMO.

Is it sharp? Yes, I would say - it's sharp at center wide-opened, very good at f5.6, but DA35/2.4 is sharper.
As for bokeh - it's from mediocre till really bad.

Second problem is high difference in IQ of different copies of old GDR and Soviet lenses.

[manntax]

Answering some questions that recently were post about this great lens , I created a thread which will hopefully become a starting point for a club for this cult lens. Here is the link with some testing and real life shots : Zeiss Flektogon 35mm lens club
,,,
' >' manntax

[atiratha]

Difficult question. I myself have the FA 35/2, the SMC Pentax 35/3.5 (said to be the sharpest Pentax 35 after the FA 35) and the Flektogon (both 2.4 and 2.8) and I can tell you that I hardly ever reach for the FA 35 and end up grabbing the Flektogon instead. It really depends on what pictures you like to take. I tend to go for close ups and there the Flektogon with its almost macro 1:2 comes incredibly in hand. This is why I find Flektogon to be an immensely useful lens. Also, the haptics is great (I just love the last edition of CZJ lenses, Pancolar 80, Sonnar 135 and Flek 35 have all wonderful feeling from focusing and very handy stop down buttons/levers). The thing is, Flektogon is really getting expensive these days. I would not buy it for the outrageous prices it goes.

You may try the Mir-1 37/2.8 which is said to be a copy of Flektogon, much cheaper. But I never really liked its feeling. Gave me no joy using it.

So, if you don't tend to go close or are not fond of alternative renderings, stay with the plastic fantastic.

[Na Horuk]

I bought the Flektogon 35mm f2.4 and here is my little review.
When mounting it, make sure the lens is in MF mode, because the electrical contacts of this m42 lens can bump into the AF screw drive and prevent it from being mounted properly.
In comparison to the DA 35mm f2.4
The Flektogon has a great minimum focus distance. This lens is almost a macro, which is great for photography of details. It also renders colours very nicely. Bokeh is good, too. My copy is not sharp wide open, but it gets quite sharp if you stop down a little. The DA 35mm f2.4 is significantly sharper wide open. The DA 35mm also has the advantage of being smaller and much lighter. The DA 35mm is plastic, while the Flektogon is a big metal grenade of a lens. The other advantage of the DA is, of course, that it is a modern lens. Better lens coatings, full AF, full auto aperture, communicates focal length to camera, etc. The DA 35mm also has more modern, jagged bokeh. The Zeiss Flektogon is not a bad lens, though. I can recommend it if you want a cheaper "macro" 35mm for details and closeups. As long as you don't mind adapters and manual focus. It can be used in Av mode btw, because the lens will stop down as soon as you move the aperture ring. So you just keep it wide open to focus, then stop down the aperture and the camera automatically adjusts shutter speed (and ISO, if you choose). Pentax cameras also have the benefit of in camera SR and catch in focus, which make this manual lens slightly more "modern"

And here is a sample photo with the Flektogon:


Zeiss test