Originally posted by manntax great results ! and I agree with previous comment on the presentation of your film strips in that way you did - exellent idea ! BTW how do you find that zeiss flektogon 35mm f2.8 ? I have the 2.4 version but for collectors purposes sometime eyeing in the direction of the older one, but the one I had handled once was having pretty rough focusing.. Anyway great shots there which proves the quality of these older German lens ...
Thanks!
As for the Flektogon 2.8, I absolutely love it.
I was given it by a friend's father, when he heard I was using old screwmount cameras. He (and I) had no idea if it was any good. The aperture was a bit unreliable (not sticky, just "independently minded"), and the focusing ring was a bit stiff at some positions, loose at others.
I didn't think I'd use it much, and had been researching 35mm M42 lenses anyway. Having read the reviews for the f3.5 Takumar on this site, I decided to get one of those. I spent some time trying to find a nice copy on eBay, and got into a conversation with a guy called Lukas who had a mint copy but was asking a bit more than I was prepared to pay.
He also had an f2.4 Flektogon, and told me about its cult status. He took some sample photos with the Tak and the Flek 2.4, and emailed them over. The Flektogon shots appealed a little bit more.
I mentioned my f2.8 copy that was in need of attention. He wrote back to say the f2.8 version was widely underestimated, living in the shadow of the hype about the f2.4. He serviced and cleaned most of the lenses he sold on eBay himself, and offered to clean mine up and take a look at the aperture blades for £30. He said he didn't think I'd consider getting a Tak (or a Flek 2.4) once I'd seen the pictures from it, so I took a punt and posted it off to him.
It came back a week later with a lovely smooth focusing ring. Apparently many lens manufacturers didn't use top quality grease on the east side of the iron curtain, so it just needed cleaning and some fresh grease. He did his best with the aperture blades, and if I exercise the blades every months or so it works great.
And he was right about the Takumar – I do now have a very nice copy of the f3.5, but I'm yet to take a photo with it.
I've never handled a 2.4 so I'm not sure how it compares, but for close up work I absolutely love the results from the f2.8. One day soon I'll take it and the Takumar out and compare them on more normal (i.e. not macro) scenes.
Sorry, did I just give you more GAS? ;-)
If you'd like more examples I've got an album of Flek 2.8 shots here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/grahamashton/albums/72157650340054302
---------- Post added 01-19-16 at 09:47 AM ----------
Originally posted by tuco A scene from a trip a couple years ago. I posted a different version back then. I didn't scan this version because the framing was too low and some clouds rolled in. I was looking at it again and noticed the Pole star was really streaked as well as dotted/dashed star trials in it but not at the bottom of the frame so much.
I really like both of those. Do you have any tips for gauging exposure for those of us who fancy trying something similar?
I'd have to shoot on 35mm (or use my Holga), and the widest lens I've got is 28mm. I'm guessing as wide a lens as possible is the way forward?