Flek 2.4/35 v Mir-24M 2/35-Head to head -

[peterqd]

Well, we've discussed these two lenses a lot but never compared results, so here goes. This picture is of The Crescent at Buxton, originally built in 1780 as a hotel and town houses for the Duke of Devonshire, but used as offices for some time I think. It's empty at present and in desparate need of repairs, but there's recent good news that a hotel chain have bought it and are going to restore it and turn it back into a luxury hotel.

The reference picture was shot with the Mir:


Both lenses were set on infinity focus and all camera settings are constant. This is a very severe test I think!

100% centre crops:


I think there's actually very little to choose between the two from this test. The extra stop of the Mir is very usable at f2.0 although you can see some minor flaring. The slightly out of level shots of the Flek are my fault, having touched the tripod leg while changing lenses. The warmer colour rendition of the Mir is very noticeable.

100% corner crops:


Here is where the Flek shows its pedigree. At f2 the Mir is pretty poor at the corners, not forgetting this is a 1.6 crop camera. Sharpness becomes optimal at f8 but begins to fall off again at f16, whilst the Flek is much more constant, and it also has another stop to go (f22).

Close focussing is also an important factor for macro work, and I'll be posting a newspaper test soon.

[LucisPictor]

Hmmm... I would say the MIR got it in the centre and the Flek in the corners...
_________________
Personal forum activity on pause!

Carsten, Moderator
Things ON SALE
Carsten = "KAPCTEH" = "Karusutenu" | T-shirt?.........................My photos from Emilia: http://www.schouler.net/emilia/emilia2011.html
Sets:
Leica M8 - Voigtländer Heliar 4.5/15 & Ultron 2/28 & Ultron 1.7/35 & Heliar 2.5/75, Leica Summitar 2/50 & Elmar 4/90, Jupiter-3, Jupiter-8,
Nikon 1 V1, 10-30, 1.8/18.5, Fujian CCTV 1.7/35
Sony NEX-7 / NEX-3 - Tamron 2.5/24, Pentax-110 2.8 (18/24/50/70), Hexanon 1.8/40 & 1.4/57, Leica Hektor 4.5/135, Sony SEL 2.8/16 & 18-55 OSS & 55-210 OSS, Sigma EX 2.8/19 & 2.8/30
Canon EOS 5D - Zenitar 2.8/16, Rokkor 2/28, Summicron-R 2.0/50, Nikkor-SC 1.2/55, Nikkor 1.8/85, Tamron 2.5/135, Elmar 4/180, Tamron 8/500,
Tamron 2.8-3.8/35-80, Sigma EX 15-30, Sigma 1.8/24, Canon EF 1.8/50
Canon EOS 300D - Steinheil 2.8/35, Zuiko 1.4/50, Helios-44 2/58, Jupiter-9 2/85, Vivitar S1 2.3/135
Nikon D1 & Fuji S2 Pro - Tamron 2.5/28, MIR 2/35, Jupiter-37 3.5/135, Soligor 3.5/70-220, Tamron 18-200
Nikon D3100 - Nikkor AF-S 18-55VR, AF-S 18-70, Tamron 70-300
Ricoh KR10x - Pentax-M 1.7/50, Rikenon 3.4-4.5/35-70
Nikon F - Nikkor 2.8/24, Nikkor-SC 1.4/50 a.s.a.
Asahi Spotmatic SPII: CZJ Flek 4/20, Tamron 3.5/35-70, Industar 3.5/5cm, Mamiya 1.8/55
EXA Varex - CZJ Biogon 2/58
Leica IIIa syn & Zorki-4 - (LTM lenses)

Leica C2, Minox 35 GL,Yashica Electro 35 GS, Kodak Retina Ia, Agfa Super Silette, Vivitar Ultra Wide & Slim and some others...
Sigma DP1s, Lumix LC-5 & FX37, Lumix FZ20, Canon G3IR, Sony Mavica 300, Fuji 4800Z + 4900Z, Oly C3030, Pentax Optio S, Nikon CP950, Sony V1 & F505 a.s.m.
Old list: http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=65 (Not up-to-date, sorry!) | http://lucispictor.weebly.com | http://www.alensaweek.wordpress.com

[Orio]

But if you look closely at MIR's corner crops, you can see that there is a good half stop overexposure on it.
Avoid looking at the highlights (which flare naturally when overblown), concentrate only in the better exposed parts, you can see that the difference is not so huge.
Where MIR fails visibly is at f/11 - but it's so sudden and big, that I wonder if there is something else going on, like a slight movement of focus wheel, or even micromotion (look at the wheel). I'd like to see this part redone.
_________________
Orio, Administrator
T*
Support the Ornano film chemicals company and help them survive!
http://forum.mflenses.com/ornano-chemical-products-t55525.html