[Mistral75]

Two weeks ago Lomography launched a new project on Kickstarter: that of the Lomogon 32mm f/2.5 'Art Lens'.

The main feature of this lens is a dial-styled aperture mechanism with five circular apertures: f/2.5 - f/4 - f/5.6 - f/8 - f/11.



Additional specifications:

• Focal distance: 32mm
• Image circle diameter: 44mm (this is a 24x36 lens)
• Optical formula: six multi-coated elements in six groups
• Manual focus
• Minimum focusing distance: 40cm
• No coupling with the camera
• Filter diameter: 62mm
• Developed in partnership with KMZ (Zenit brand)
• Manufactured in China
• Canon EF, Nikon F and Pentax K(1) mounts
• Three versions:
  • Black anodised aluminium(1) (RRP: $499)
  • Black paint brass (RRP: $549)
  • Brass (RRP: $599)
• Scheduled availability date: November 2019

The Kickstarter campaign runs from 20 February until 22 March 2019. It offers 25% to 40% discounts on the RRPs above. As of now, 12 days before the end of the campaign, some 1,000 backers have pledged around $380,000.

The Lomogon 2.5/32 Art Lens by Lomography — Kickstarter

(1) Two restrictions apply to the Pentax K version:

1. 50 K-mount pledges until 22 March are needed for the K-mount Lomogon 32mm f/2.5 to become a reality. As of now, 12 such lenses have been pledged (black paint brass: $389; brass: $420).
2. The (least expensive) black anodised aluminium version is not available in K mount.

Press kit: Press Kit - Google Drive

Gallery of 13 pictures shot with the Lomogon: Lomogon 32mm F2.5 Sample Photos | Digital Photography Review

[BigMackCam]

Thanks for posting this!!

I acquired what I believe to be a prototype or pre-production example of this lens last year, and couldn't find any information about it anywhere on the web. So I'm delighted to read your post

Mine is for Nikon F-mount, which I adapt for use with my Sony A7 MkII. It's brass, but has some differences in machining and markings compared to those in the Kickstarter photos. The mid section of the body is wider on mine, and there's no flange at the rear. My front ring has the inscription "Manufactured in Krasnagorsk, Russia", and the serial number isn't prefixed with a "Z". There may be other differences too, but these are the things I notice just from casual inspection.

Here's my original post in the Non-Pentax forum:

Has anyone seen this Lomography lens before (apparently Canon and Nikon mount only)? - PentaxForums.com

[victormeldrew]

What an ingenious way to introduce dust and fluff to the lens internals. I can honestly not think of a more efficient way to do it.

[BigMackCam]

dust and fluff

... = rendering character

Seriously, though, no worse than the Lomography lenses with drop-in aperture plates.

I should be in their marketing department...

[boriscleto]

I can think of many better ways to spend $400

[victormeldrew]

Seriously, though, no worse than the Lomography lenses with drop-in aperture plates.

A bit worse, since according to that gif you'll be spinning away at it without looking.


Either way it seems like hipster flim-flam to me. More to look at and coo, than to use.

[Sandy Hancock]

What an ingenious way to introduce dust and fluff to the lens internals. I can honestly not think of a more efficient way to do it.

For the Daguerreotype Achromat, the Waterhouse plates are inserted in front of the front element, so the slot does not compromise the internals at all.

I suspect the aperture plate for this is behind the rear element, so the same most likely applies. It may even protect the rear element from finger prints, etc while still allowing a puff of air to shift dust

[BigMackCam]

A bit worse, since according to that gif you'll be spinning away at it without looking.

Either way it seems like hipster flim-flam to me. More to look at and coo, than to use.

A fair point, but owning what I think is a prototype, I'd disagree. In the same way that you get used to selecting the aperture on a manual lens, you quickly get used to this too. It clicks into each position very positively, just like a "normal" aperture ring. And there aren't that many selections to remember. It's easy enough.

As for the hipster flim-flam thing... It really depends what you like or are looking for in a lens. If you want one that's sharp edge-to-edge at all apertures, and provides smooth bokeh, this definitely ain't a lens to consider. But there are lots of folks who like weird and wonderful rendering... enough to have justified the production and sale of so many Lomography lenses already. Having used it, I think it fits well with the previous Lomography offerings such as the Daguerreotype, Achromat and both Petzvals. All of them can produce interesting and likeable photos in the right hands.

Would I pay $400 for one as a general use lens? Absolutely not. Might I pay that much for something with unique rendering character? Hmmm.... maybe. But plenty will... just look at the over-subscription on the Kickstarter campaign

I bought mine as a sort-of-fit within my Soviet and former-Soviet-Union lens collection, so I'm not all the bothered about how subjectively good or bad it is. But still, I rather like the way it renders. Maybe a bit too extreme for me wide open, but it's a fun bit of kit, and for some it'll be perfect. Those same folks likely won't be buying the D*FA50/1.4, though

[Sandy Hancock]

Those same folks likely won't be buying the D*FA50/1.4, though

Ohhh, I wouldn't be too sure about that

[Sandy Hancock]

For what it's worth, I just backed it.

To my DFA*50 - I still love you xx

[ogl]

Lomography lives in smartphones now. Such gear is the thing for very special amateurs.

[BigMackCam]

For what it's worth, I just backed it.

To my DFA*50 - I still love you xx

Nice I think you'll like it... The out of focus highlights are very pronounced at f/2.5, and the rendering generally has a very vintage feel.

[BigMackCam]

Lomography lives in smartphones now. Such gear is the thing for very special amateurs.

Smartphone cameras are fine at producing film-like emulations, and certain lens effects like distortion, vignetting, chromatic aberrations and artificial background blurring... but I've yet to see one that accurately captures the character of specific vintage and/or specialist lenses, especially where depth of field and out-of-focus rendering is concerned. Who knows, though... maybe one day they will...

[cg57]

I checked out the links for more info. I like what I saw. I'm intrigued and highly considering putting in to back this lens. I'm partial to the brass one. Have to revisit the website.

[jose_in_hcmc]

I'm in!