Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Flektogon 2.8/20 (Melissa on the balcony)
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 1:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="Orio"][quote="estudleon"][quote="Orio"]The 2.8 is sharper
The 4 has ideal control of distortion so it's better for architecture.[/quote]

What definitive you are, Orio!! Very Happy Very Happy

You have experienced with fleks, I know that. But it's prossible that a Good copy of the F/4 can be as sharp as the 2,8, or more. I heared some users said that. Specially at F/11, where they found the better rendition of the lens F/4[/quote]

Everything is possible Smile
I have 5 Flek 4/20 and have had two Flek 2.8/20 and my experience says what is quoted above.
If I had to choose between the two only one lens, I would take a 4/20, because for me the precision of lines is a better feature in a superwide than the sharpness. If I want to see details of an objects I use a tele lens on it, not a superwide Wink From a superwide I want that it shows me the most possible correct world.[/quote]

Orio

I think as you do about the precision of lines and the use of a tele, but if the superwide give me very low - or none - distortion plus very high sharpness, it's better, isn't it? Well, i'm looking for this.

If I found it....... Laughing Laughing


PostPosted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 3:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio wrote:
The 2.8 is sharper
The 4 has ideal control of distortion so it's better for architecture.

Orio, could you possibly post a couple of side-by-side shots to show me the difference in distortion control between the two?


PostPosted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 6:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

peterqd wrote:
Orio wrote:
The 2.8 is sharper
The 4 has ideal control of distortion so it's better for architecture.

Orio, could you possibly post a couple of side-by-side shots to show me the difference in distortion control between the two?


I have that in my schedule, Peter. I'll see if I can come up with something tomorrow.


PostPosted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 4:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Peter, I tried a test today, but I didn't have the tripod with me so I obtained two pictures that are not really comparable.
I'll redo with the tripod.


PostPosted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 6:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Looking forward to the side-by-side images, Orio!

One big surprise to me, was the close-focusing of the 4/20 that was mentioned. I am able to get about 2 1/2 inches from the subject! Talk about VERSATILITY! That is why the Flek 4/20 pretty much STAYS on my K110D.