Flektogon 35/2.4 MC vs. Elmarit-R 2.8/35

[darmodej]

Hi, finaly got the Leica-R eos adapter to play with.

Here is a left edge midle 100% crop from a Canon 40D, focus cca. 50cm
Compared the Flektogon 35/2.4 MC vs. Elmarit-R 2.8/35 (2nd late series 2660000).

The result is quite bad for the flek, will try to get a second copy to test.




_________________

DSLR: Canon eos 5D mkII
SLR: a few Prakticas, Canon eos 5
Medium Format: Mockba 5, Reflex Korelle, Flexaret VI

Lenses
CZ Contax: Distagon 2.8/28, Distagon 1.4/35, Planar 1.4/50, Planar 1.4/85
CZJ m42: Flektogon 2.8/20 MC, Pancolar 50/1.8
Schneider: Tele-Xenar 3.5/135 (m42), Xenar 2.8/80 (RK)
Meyer m42: Trioplan 100/2.8, Orestor 135/2.8
CCCP m42 Jupiter-9 2/85, Industar-50 3.5/50, Helios 44-2 2/58, Tair-3-PhS 4.5/300

Other m42: Yahinon DS 1.7/50, Yashinon DS-M 2.8/24

[martinsmith99]

That looks like a Friday afternoon lens or one that has been opened by a butcher.
_________________
MF Lenses User Real Names (add yours)
MF Lenses User Self Pics (add yours)
Gear: Canon 40d DSLR and a stack of M42 mount cameras and lenses
ms-imaging
my blog

[darmodej]

[darmodej]

got a good copy now, sorry for the 'test' here is the full open pix. much better the flek. the 'gloom' fully open is much more pronouced with the flek


_________________

DSLR: Canon eos 5D mkII
SLR: a few Prakticas, Canon eos 5
Medium Format: Mockba 5, Reflex Korelle, Flexaret VI

Lenses
CZ Contax: Distagon 2.8/28, Distagon 1.4/35, Planar 1.4/50, Planar 1.4/85
CZJ m42: Flektogon 2.8/20 MC, Pancolar 50/1.8
Schneider: Tele-Xenar 3.5/135 (m42), Xenar 2.8/80 (RK)
Meyer m42: Trioplan 100/2.8, Orestor 135/2.8
CCCP m42 Jupiter-9 2/85, Industar-50 3.5/50, Helios 44-2 2/58, Tair-3-PhS 4.5/300

Other m42: Yahinon DS 1.7/50, Yashinon DS-M 2.8/24

[Anu]

I took a picture of my lcd with my primary Flek 35/2.4 and it sure looks more like the Elmarit than the Fleks you tested

Of course it is rather unscientific as I have a different monitor, different LCD and different camera, but, I'd say that this Flek you tested is maybe not a a monday copy, but perhaps a friday copy

My second Flek on the other hand is somewhere inbetween the two copies you tested, but it does have quite a few scratches in the last element - anyone got a spare element to donate/sell to me?
_________________
Carl Zeiss Jena:20/2.8 Flektogon, 35/2.4 Flektogon, 50/2.8 Tessar, 135/3.5 Sonnar, 180/2.8 Sonnar, 200/2.8 Sonnar, 300/4 Sonnar
Asahi:SMC Takumar 50/1.4
LZOS:MC 3M-5CA 500/8 (Maksutov-type mirror lens)
Teleconverters:Carl Zeiss Jena 2x, KOHBEPTEP K-1 2x (USSR)
Other optics:Soligor Fisheye 180 Aux lens

[LucisPictor]

This shows the problem of this normally very fine lens.
When buying a Flek 2.4/35 you can get an excellent copy or an absolute dog!
The dispersion is enormous.

Whereas an Elmarit will most probably a very good lens (if it is in a good condition, of course!).
_________________
"KAPCTEH" | "Karusutenu" | "Carsten" | T-shirt?
Cams in use: EOS 5D, EOS 40D, EF/M, EOS 300, Spotmatic SPII, EXA 1c, Rollei 35XF, Minox 35 GL, Yashica Electro 35 GS, FED-3b, Kodak Retina Ia and some others...
Lenses in use: Asahi Pentax: 3.5/35;1.4/50;1.7/50;2.8/105;3.5/135 | Former GDR: CZJ Flek 4/20; Meyer 1.9/58; CZJ 4/135 | Leica: Summicron 2.0/35; Summicron 2.0/50; Elmar 4/180 | Mamiya: 1.8/55 | Nikkor: 2.8/24;1.4/50;1.2/55;1.8/85; | West German: Ludwig 2.9/50; Steinheil 2.8/85; Will 4.5/105; Zeiss 4.5/105; Schneider 3.5/135; Zeiss 4/135; Enna 4.5/240 | Olympus: 1.4/50; | Rikenon: 35-70 | Rollei: 1.8/50, 80-200 | Russian: Peleng 3.5/8; Zenitar 2.8/16; Volna 2.8/50; Industar 3.5/50; Industar 3.5/5cm; Helios 2/58; Jupiter 2/85; Jupiter 3.5/135; RF: Jupiter 2.8/35; Jupiter 2/50 | Soligor: 28-105;35-200;60-300;70-220 | Tamron: 2.5/135; 8/500 | Tokina: 28-85; 28-105 | Vivitar: 3.5/17;2/28;2.5/28 | Yashica: 2/5cm |
Green is the gear I use the most. More? http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=65
AF-lenses: Canon: 1.8/50 | Sigma: 1.8/24; 28-105; 18-125 OS | Tokina: 12-24; 24-200; 28-70 | Tamron 80-210 | http://lucispictor.weebly.com/

[darmodej]

Sending the 1st (quite bad) copy to the 'best' service guy in Slovakia now, should be back in 2 weeks, lets see if it's a bad assebly issue, or screwed up piece in general. had this thing also with the Pancolar 1.8/50 MC, had 4 pieces of which all were quite different regarding sharpness and gloom fully open (all in very good shape). The best was the 'electric' version, also the better flek of the 2 tested is an 'electric' version. Didn't observe this variation in older Carl Zeiss Jena lenses - the zebra or all aluminium.
_________________

DSLR: Canon eos 5D mkII
SLR: a few Prakticas, Canon eos 5
Medium Format: Mockba 5, Reflex Korelle, Flexaret VI

Lenses
CZ Contax: Distagon 2.8/28, Distagon 1.4/35, Planar 1.4/50, Planar 1.4/85
CZJ m42: Flektogon 2.8/20 MC, Pancolar 50/1.8
Schneider: Tele-Xenar 3.5/135 (m42), Xenar 2.8/80 (RK)
Meyer m42: Trioplan 100/2.8, Orestor 135/2.8
CCCP m42 Jupiter-9 2/85, Industar-50 3.5/50, Helios 44-2 2/58, Tair-3-PhS 4.5/300

Other m42: Yahinon DS 1.7/50, Yashinon DS-M 2.8/24

[no-X]

I think the cause of various glow on different Pancolar copies is caused by different coating.
_________________
for sale: Vivitar (Komine) 55/2.8 Macro 1:1 (K/AR) | CZJ Tessar 13,5cm f/4.5 (M42) | Vivitar 35/1.9 (M42) | (Carl Zeiss) aus Jena 1Q Biometar z. 80/2.8 P6

list of Helios 44 lenses | List of CZJ T-marked M42 lenses | I'm not absolutely retarded, English simply isn't my mother tongue :s)

up-to 30mm: Vivitar (Tokina) Series 1 VMC 28/1.9, Vivitar (Komine) MC close-focus 28/2.8, Zeiss Distagon T* 25/2.8 ZS
35mm: Super Takumar 35/2 PRO, S-M-C Takumar 35/2, S-M-C Takumar 35/3.5, CZJ eMC Flektogon 35/2.4, SC Curtagon 35/2.8, Vivitar 35/1.9, MG Primagon V 35/4.5, CZJ Tessar T 40/4.5
50mm: S-M-C Takumar 50/1.4, S-M-C Macro Takumar 50/4, Tomioka Cosinon MC 55/1.4, Tomioka Yashinon 55/1.2, Tomioka Macro Yashinon 60/2.8, CZJ Biotar T 58/2 preset, CZJ Biotar T 58/2 17-blades, CZJ eMC Pancolar 50/1.8, aJ Pancolar 55/1.4, KMZ Helios 44-2 58/2 00xxx, KMZ Helios 44-2 58/2 0xxx, MMZ Helios MC 44-3 58/2, Helios 77M 50/1.8, KMZ Zenitar M2s MC 50/2, KMZ Industar 50/3.5, MC Volna-9 Macro 50/2.8, MC Pentacon 50/1.8, MG Trioplan 50/2.9, MG Primoplan V 58/1.9, Voigtländer Color Ultron 50/1.8, Macro Prakticar 55/2.8
85mm:, CZJ Biotar T 75/1.5 M42, CZJ eMC Pancolar 80/1.8, aJ Biometar 80/2.8 P6 zebra, CZJ Biometar 80/2.8 M42, MG Primoplan V 75/1.9 [exa], MG Night Primoplan 80/1.9 [VP Night], KMZ Helios 40-2 85/1.5 (custom hybrid of 40 and 40-2), S-M-C Takumar 85/1.8, KMZ Jupiter-9 Π 8,5/2 M39, LZOS Jupiter-9 85/2 SLR M39, LZOS Jupiter-9 85/2 M42, Kodak Meniscus 90mm, MG Telefogar V 90/3.5, MG Trioplan V 100/2.8
over 100mm: Ernemann Kinostigmat 11cm, Voigtlander SL Macro APO Lanthar 125/2.5, Spiratone 135/1.8 plura-coat, KOMZ MC Jupiter 37AM 135/3.5, KOMZ Jupiter-11 135/4, KMZ Tair 11A 135/2.8, Pentacon preset 135/2.8 (bokehmonster), CZJ Sonnar MC 135/3.5, CZJ Triotar T 135/4, LR-A Pololyt 135/4.5 "T2", ZOMZ TAIR-3 300/4.5

[Orio]

I used to have two 2.4/35 Fleks (both MC, one of them was "Aus Jena electric") and both were weak at edges wide open.
Then of course copy variation has an influence.
But I think it's safe to say that the 2.4/35 Flek is not a lens designed to be performing at the edges wide open.
Then of course it has other qualities like close up focusing capability, affordable price, very good sharpness from f/4 on.
_________________
Lens sana in corpore sano
My Web Galleries: ORIOFOTO.NET
My Photography Blog (in Italian and English)

Read list of equipment HERE

[darmodej]