Originally posted by lbam The 35mm F2.4 Flektogon, and 135mm F3.5 Sonnar.
Yes, I have them both. I bought my Sonnar 20 years ago with a used Praktica camera, it was my favourite lens then, and I still use it a lot. I have a SMC-M 135/3.5 but I rarely use that. The Sonnar has a much better bokeh than the M135, and it is sharper too. Also the closest focus of the M135 is 1.5m whereas it is 1m for the Sonnar. The M135 has a wonderfully smooth focus ring (something that Takumars and manual focus Pentax lenses are famous for), you don't get as much focusing pleasure with the Sonnar <g>. The other advantage of the M135 is that Av mode on my K100D meters accurately, but with the Sonnar I have to add +1.5 or +2EV. Focusing is an issue with the Sonnar at smaller apertures, but I am in the habit of flicking the A/M button so I focus on A and meter (and shoot) on M.
I bought my 35/2.4 Flektogon recently. It looked a bit battered in the ebay picture, but it turned out that the optics were not affected - just the filter ring was mangled. I think stiff focussing rings are a problem of Zeisses of this age, because both my Sonnar and my Flektogon get stiff near close focus. That's a pain. I have a non-Pentax M42/PK adapter (without the leaf spring) that I use by screwing it on the lens and then treating the lens as a K-mount, but because of the stiff focus at close focus I tend to disengage the "K-mount" lens (I guess I could drill a hole for the body locking pin). When I use a genuine Pentax adapter (with the leaf spring) I don't have the problem, but since it is fiddly to remove the adapter it means that when I am out I have to treat the camera as M42 only. I took the Flektogon apart to clean the focusing - it turns out that the Sonnar and Flektogon share the same mechanics - so taking them apart is the same (simple) process. My Flektogon focuses much better now, but no where near as pleasantly as a Pentax lens. The Flektogon works fine in Av mode without any EV compensation, and again the bokeh is very nice. I have recently bought an SMC-M 35/2.8 so at some point I intend to do a like-with-like comparison between the Zeiss and Pentax lenses. (The closest focus of the Flektogon is 0.2m and with the M35/2.8 it is 0.3m.)
My initial reaction is that the Pentaxes are lovely lenses to use, but the images from the Zeisses - especially wide open - are much better.
Originally posted by lbam Anyone tried these Zeiss lenses, especially the Sonnar, and want to post a couple of pics and experiences?
I hope to do some comparisons between my Sonnar and M135, and between my Flektogon and M35 sometime in the next few days.
Originally posted by lbam p.s. I paid C$145 for the 35mm and C$97 for the 135mm, both look clean from photo's (we will see when I pick them up).
In the UK Sonnars sell for about £50 and Flektogons sell for about £80 (except for my battered one, which was £30). Since CDN = 0.50 UKP at the moment you appear to have paid about average UK ebay prices. (You mention that you had them sent to your parents in the UK, so I guess you bought them from ebay UK? If so, then that would explain the price you paid!)
Richard