Originally posted by Dartmoor Dave They've all got their own unique characters. The two I've owned are the 35mm/3.5 and the big first version 35mm/2.0 with the 67mm filter ring. The 3.5 is very sharp, has great contrast and gives beautifully saturated colours. The 2.0 has got a less in-your-face rendering style and gives a look that I can only describe as "cinematic". Somehow photos taken with it seem to always look like stills from a movie.
The one I'd really like to try is the 35mm/2.3, but they tend to go for sums out of my price range. There's also a later and much smaller version 35mm/2.0 with a 49mm filter ring, but my heart belongs to the big, heavy and really impractical first version 2.0.
Thanks Dave, very helpful. I too saw the Auto Tak 2.3 and was like "woah! that's an 'artistic lens'", cray cray bokeh! (and even weirder I see some reverse the front element which is apparently easy).
But the price tag... ouch!
Between the heavier 35/2 and the smaller 49mm threaded 35/2, is there said to be a difference in IQ between the two?
Has anyone done comparison tests between the distagon 35/2 and a Tak 35/2?