For Sale - Sold: Flektogon 35/2.4

morfic · 09-17-2008, 02:30 PM

PentaxForums.com Marketplace Listing

Item for Sale
Flektogon 35/2.4

Asking Price
$140

Item Description
I was hoping to be woed by the Flektogon as i once was, and optically, that may hold true, but i guess i have been too spoiled by KA lenses to have the patience for M42 lenses.
And with my plans to change my Zooms, the money from this sale would come in handy.

I'm about to head out the door to work, so i will post pictures of/by the lens not before tomorrow.

Glass is clean, aperture is dry and snappy. Serial Number 93XXX.

Are you the original owner of the item being sold?
No

Are you selling or trading this item?
Selling or Trading

Item Condition
Used
Good

Item Location
San Antonio, Texas

Shipping Charge
included

Shipping Services
USPS

Shipping Destinations
Continental U.S. Only

Accepted Payment Types
PayPal

Additional Details
.

Please send me a private message if interested in the item!

chemxaj · 09-17-2008, 02:51 PM

pm sent........

ftpaddict · 09-17-2008, 03:43 PM

Zeiss M42 lenses were indeed great... in their own era. But K-mount lenses provide a level of convenience that no ancient lens will offer.

Miserere · 09-17-2008, 07:29 PM

Originally posted by ftpaddict

Zeiss M42 lenses were indeed great... in their own era. But K-mount lenses provide a level of convenience that no ancient lens will offer.

Interesting... Unless it's an A lens or later, I prefer M42 lenses to K or M series as far as functionality is concerned (cos you can just shoot in Av with M42

).

Blue · 09-17-2008, 09:31 PM

Originally posted by ftpaddict

Zeiss M42 lenses were indeed great... in their own era. But K-mount lenses provide a level of convenience that no ancient lens will offer.

They do pretty darn good on Spotmatics and K1000 with the pentax adapter.

ftpaddict · 09-18-2008, 12:33 AM

Originally posted by Blue

They do pretty darn good on Spotmatics and K1000 with the pentax adapter.

But not such a good job on my K100D.

My Zeiss Tessar 50mm f/2.8 and Beroflex 135mm f/2.8 perform very well on film, but are horribly hopelessly soft on digital.

the_snark · 09-18-2008, 05:03 AM

Originally posted by ftpaddict

My Zeiss Tessar 50mm f/2.8 and Beroflex 135mm f/2.8 perform very well on film, but are horribly hopelessly soft on digital.

Why whould that be?

ftpaddict · 09-18-2008, 05:49 AM

Originally posted by the_snark

Why whould that be?

No idea, but it has happened to other people as well.

morfic · 09-18-2008, 05:59 AM

Originally posted by ftpaddict

But not such a good job on my K100D.

My Zeiss Tessar 50mm f/2.8 and Beroflex 135mm f/2.8 perform very well on film, but are horribly hopelessly soft on digital.

Originally posted by the_snark

Why whould that be?

Because camera manufacturers do not put the emphasis on the focusing screen calibration as they used to. I had the issue with the 30D, and now with the K20D i see the same, what is in focus on screen with a split screen is not in focus on the sensor, i need to move the screen further up, i got pretty close with the 30D screen i still had, it has a lowered edge and after i realized the raised inner part fits into my shim got focusing pretty darn close. BUT. I had tried to file the edge and slipped, those marks across the screen look quite ugly and are distracting, so i am back on the stock screen, but at least i know if i got some spare cash, a 30D screen will be perfect for me.
<myguess>Your lenses are soft when you try to use them wide open where the miscalibrated screen throws you off, you probably still have sharp stopped down images and the occasional sharp shot wide open you don't know how you got it </myguess>

Originally posted by Miserere

Interesting... Unless it's an A lens or later, I prefer M42 lenses to K or M series as far as functionality is concerned (cos you can just shoot in Av with M42

).

It's the counting of stops to be able to focus wide open and the counting backwards, remembering which lens has half or full stops and which that has third stops in which area is mounted that i dislike, not the metering thereafter

This would equally keep me from the CZ to P/K mount conversion i had been considering (I Do miss the Distagon 28/2.8 and got no grand for a 28/2 laying around)

Blue · 09-18-2008, 07:02 AM

Originally posted by ftpaddict

But not such a good job on my K100D.

My Zeiss Tessar 50mm f/2.8 and Beroflex 135mm f/2.8 perform very well on film, but are horribly hopelessly soft on digital.

I wonder why the "new" manual focus K mount Zeiss lenses work so well? I would guess the coating but apparently it has to do with the distance to the focal plane but would expect them to be the same.

Hi-Jack over on morfic's thread. This is a good lens for some people and if I didn't have a 35mm super-tak, I'd be all over it. In fact, I've been combating LBA on it.

ddhytz · 09-18-2008, 02:47 PM

I have this lens and some test shots are in this thread
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/30109-zeiss-m42-club-2.html I don't think I will ever sell it.

Originally posted by ftpaddict

But not such a good job on my K100D.

My Zeiss Tessar 50mm f/2.8 and Beroflex 135mm f/2.8 perform very well on film, but are horribly hopelessly soft on digital.

I also have a beroflex 135/2.8. To me it's sharp enough, see some pictures here
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/31353-off-brand-club-12.html

morfic · 09-18-2008, 06:40 PM

sold, if this is how i should mark it sold.

jsherman999 · 09-18-2008, 06:52 PM

Originally posted by ftpaddict

My Zeiss Tessar 50mm f/2.8 and Beroflex 135mm f/2.8 perform very well on film, but are horribly hopelessly soft on digital.

Yup, pretty dang soft:

Zeiss Tessar 50 f/2.8 wide open:

09-17-2008, 02:30 PM	#1
morfic Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 428 Feedback Score: 9 (100%)	[SOLD] Flektogon 35/2.4 PentaxForums.com Marketplace Listing Item for Sale Flektogon 35/2.4 Asking Price $140 Item Description I was hoping to be woed by the Flektogon as i once was, and optically, that may hold true, but i guess i have been too spoiled by KA lenses to have the patience for M42 lenses. And with my plans to change my Zooms, the money from this sale would come in handy. I'm about to head out the door to work, so i will post pictures of/by the lens not before tomorrow. Glass is clean, aperture is dry and snappy. Serial Number 93XXX. Are you the original owner of the item being sold? No Are you selling or trading this item? Selling or Trading Item Condition Used Good Item Location San Antonio, Texas Shipping Charge included Shipping Services USPS Shipping Destinations Continental U.S. Only Accepted Payment Types PayPal Additional Details . Please send me a private message if interested in the item!

09-18-2008, 06:40 PM	#12
morfic Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 428 Feedback Score: 9 (100%) Original Poster	sold sold, if this is how i should mark it sold.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: [Worldwide] CARL ZEISS JENA FLEKTOGON	rrodgers	Sold Items	1	03-11-2010 08:23 PM
For Sale - Sold: Carl Zeiss Flektogon 35mm 2.4 M42	lkgroup	Sold Items	1	12-09-2009 05:13 PM
For Sale - Sold: Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 20mm/4 and Tessar 50/2.8 Zebra style lenses	farfisa	Sold Items	3	10-09-2009 11:51 AM
For Sale - Sold: Carl Zeiss Jena MC Flektogon 35/2.4 (m42)	AnttiM	Sold Items	3	05-12-2009 09:25 AM
For Sale - Sold: FS: Zeiss Flektogon 35/2.4, Pentax M 50/1.4 (lots of demo pictures)	aegisphan	Sold Items	10	04-03-2008 06:21 PM

09-17-2008, 02:51 PM	#2
chemxaj Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Cambridge, MA Posts: 327 Feedback Score: 68 (100%)	pm sent........

09-17-2008, 03:43 PM	#3
ftpaddict Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Yurp Posts: 4,666 Feedback Score: 3 (100%)	Zeiss M42 lenses were indeed great... in their own era. But K-mount lenses provide a level of convenience that no ancient lens will offer.

09-17-2008, 07:29 PM	#4
Miserere Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Boston Posts: 1,993 Feedback Score: 30 (100%)	Originally posted by ftpaddict Zeiss M42 lenses were indeed great... in their own era. But K-mount lenses provide a level of convenience that no ancient lens will offer. Interesting... Unless it's an A lens or later, I prefer M42 lenses to K or M series as far as functionality is concerned (cos you can just shoot in Av with M42 ).

09-17-2008, 09:31 PM	#5
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Posts: 17,377 Feedback Score: 28 (100%)	Originally posted by ftpaddict Zeiss M42 lenses were indeed great... in their own era. But K-mount lenses provide a level of convenience that no ancient lens will offer. They do pretty darn good on Spotmatics and K1000 with the pentax adapter.

09-18-2008, 12:33 AM	#6
ftpaddict Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Yurp Posts: 4,666 Feedback Score: 3 (100%)	Originally posted by Blue They do pretty darn good on Spotmatics and K1000 with the pentax adapter. But not such a good job on my K100D. My Zeiss Tessar 50mm f/2.8 and Beroflex 135mm f/2.8 perform very well on film, but are horribly hopelessly soft on digital.

09-18-2008, 05:03 AM	#7
the_snark Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Adelaide Posts: 54 Feedback Score: 3 (100%)	Originally posted by ftpaddict My Zeiss Tessar 50mm f/2.8 and Beroflex 135mm f/2.8 perform very well on film, but are horribly hopelessly soft on digital. Why whould that be?

09-18-2008, 05:49 AM	#8
ftpaddict Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Yurp Posts: 4,666 Feedback Score: 3 (100%)	Originally posted by the_snark Why whould that be? No idea, but it has happened to other people as well.

09-18-2008, 05:59 AM	#9
morfic Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 428 Feedback Score: 9 (100%) Original Poster	Originally posted by ftpaddict But not such a good job on my K100D. My Zeiss Tessar 50mm f/2.8 and Beroflex 135mm f/2.8 perform very well on film, but are horribly hopelessly soft on digital. Originally posted by the_snark Why whould that be? Because camera manufacturers do not put the emphasis on the focusing screen calibration as they used to. I had the issue with the 30D, and now with the K20D i see the same, what is in focus on screen with a split screen is not in focus on the sensor, i need to move the screen further up, i got pretty close with the 30D screen i still had, it has a lowered edge and after i realized the raised inner part fits into my shim got focusing pretty darn close. BUT. I had tried to file the edge and slipped, those marks across the screen look quite ugly and are distracting, so i am back on the stock screen, but at least i know if i got some spare cash, a 30D screen will be perfect for me. <myguess>Your lenses are soft when you try to use them wide open where the miscalibrated screen throws you off, you probably still have sharp stopped down images and the occasional sharp shot wide open you don't know how you got it </myguess> Originally posted by Miserere Interesting... Unless it's an A lens or later, I prefer M42 lenses to K or M series as far as functionality is concerned (cos you can just shoot in Av with M42 ). It's the counting of stops to be able to focus wide open and the counting backwards, remembering which lens has half or full stops and which that has third stops in which area is mounted that i dislike, not the metering thereafter This would equally keep me from the CZ to P/K mount conversion i had been considering (I Do miss the Distagon 28/2.8 and got no grand for a 28/2 laying around)

09-18-2008, 07:02 AM	#10
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Posts: 17,377 Feedback Score: 28 (100%)	Originally posted by ftpaddict But not such a good job on my K100D. My Zeiss Tessar 50mm f/2.8 and Beroflex 135mm f/2.8 perform very well on film, but are horribly hopelessly soft on digital. I wonder why the "new" manual focus K mount Zeiss lenses work so well? I would guess the coating but apparently it has to do with the distance to the focal plane but would expect them to be the same. Hi-Jack over on morfic's thread. This is a good lens for some people and if I didn't have a 35mm super-tak, I'd be all over it. In fact, I've been combating LBA on it.

09-18-2008, 02:47 PM	#11
ddhytz Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Melbourne Posts: 602 Feedback Score: 24 (100%)	I have this lens and some test shots are in this thread https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/30109-zeiss-m42-club-2.html I don't think I will ever sell it. Originally posted by ftpaddict But not such a good job on my K100D. My Zeiss Tessar 50mm f/2.8 and Beroflex 135mm f/2.8 perform very well on film, but are horribly hopelessly soft on digital. I also have a beroflex 135/2.8. To me it's sharp enough, see some pictures here https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/31353-off-brand-club-12.html

09-18-2008, 06:52 PM	#13
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 8,237 Feedback Score: 61 (100%)	Originally posted by ftpaddict My Zeiss Tessar 50mm f/2.8 and Beroflex 135mm f/2.8 perform very well on film, but are horribly hopelessly soft on digital. Yup, pretty dang soft: Zeiss Tessar 50 f/2.8 wide open: