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 2.4/35
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 6:17 pm    Post subject: Flektogon 2.4/35 Reply with quote

There haven't been many opportunities for photography outdoors lately, but now we had a wonderful weekend (-5 C and sunny).

I took the chance to try out the Flektogon a bit more.
Basically I'm quite happy with it, especially the colurs, but the fact that the focus ring passes infinity can be annoying sometimes.
Most shots are from some old stables. They are still in use, but as a part of a recreational area, where riding is one possible activity.






Maybe not famous for the bokeh, but I don't think it's that bad.



Very basic design on this old tractor. Not much more than a motor and gearbox on wheels.





Frosty window


PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 6:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lovely series! Book quality ! Many thanks for sharing them!


PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 6:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Very good shots with a good lens!


PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 6:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks guys for your kind remarks.

The lens certainly has a special character. On sunny days like this it really excels with very blue skies and saturated colours.
On the Pentax I get correct light metering and with a wide angle I can set the DOF so it covers normal distances up to infinity. As easy as shooting AF.


PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Flektogon 35/2.4 is really a wonderful lens. Maybe my copy is not one of the best, because I've to close it beyond f/5.6 o f/8 to avoid soft corners. The Super Takumar 35/3.5 performs better at f/4 and f/5.6.
Is it my copy of the flek, or it is normal?

Another good thing about the flek is th performance in IR photo. Sharp, and no hot spots.


PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh don't get me started about this flipping lens again Laughing

Great shots with fantastic colours Smile


PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

YureW wrote:
The Flektogon 35/2.4 is really a wonderful lens. Maybe my copy is not one of the best, because I've to close it beyond f/5.6 o f/8 to avoid soft corners. The Super Takumar 35/3.5 performs better at f/4 and f/5.6.
Is it my copy of the flek, or it is normal?

Another good thing about the flek is th performance in IR photo. Sharp, and no hot spots.


On some shots I get the effect as on the picture below. This one is shot at f/4 (I think) and not cropped at all. I'm not sure if it's visible in lo-res, but the left bottom corner is not sharp but the right bottom corner is better. I thought that this maybe was due to some internal misalignment or maybe a fault on my M42 to Pentax K adapter, but I guess it might just be corner softness at low f-stops. I don't see it very often fortunately.



PostPosted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 8:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you, Sven.
I've the same effect with my flek, but on the right side.


PostPosted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 7:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

IMHO, this looks more like a misaligned adapter ring, or maybe even some misaligned lens elements. Soft corner sharpness would be visible around all four corners of your image, not just one.

I own a couple of Zeisses (not the Flek 35/2.4 though) and none of them behave in such way.

Personally I'd try to get some other brand adapter ring (some extra always come in handy) and see if the effect disappears.

Crispian


PostPosted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 7:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I had a very similar effect with my Pentax-M 1.7/50 and one PK-EOS-adapter.
First I thought the lens was broken, but when I tried another adapter the problem was gone!


PostPosted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 7:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hmmmm... I got similar issue with my copy.an internal ring was loose , and I got a "floating element" . this problem is not rare on this lens ! Very Happy


PostPosted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 7:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sven wrote:
YureW wrote:
The Flektogon 35/2.4 is really a wonderful lens. Maybe my copy is not one of the best, because I've to close it beyond f/5.6 o f/8 to avoid soft corners. The Super Takumar 35/3.5 performs better at f/4 and f/5.6.
Is it my copy of the flek, or it is normal?

Another good thing about the flek is th performance in IR photo. Sharp, and no hot spots.


On some shots I get the effect as on the picture below. This one is shot at f/4 (I think) and not cropped at all. I'm not sure if it's visible in lo-res, but the left bottom corner is not sharp but the right bottom corner is better. I thought that this maybe was due to some internal misalignment or maybe a fault on my M42 to Pentax K adapter, but I guess it might just be corner softness at low f-stops. I don't see it very often fortunately.



Yes, I see this.

But remember that the lens at the corners - at F/4 is so-so sharpness while at the center is a very good lens. To improve borders, F/ 8 and 11 This is one of the reasons for which I prefer pancolar 1,8/50. Its yield is evener.

Anyway, it seems to be a missaligned rear element/s.

Rino.


PostPosted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 7:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the tips guys!
If it was the adapter, wouldn't all shots show the same effect? Or would that also be F-stop related?
Since the problem seems to occur at random I guess it could also be an indication of something moving inside. Would there be anything observable on the outside if a floating element was the cause?


PostPosted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 8:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

2 of 3 flektogons I had, suffered from this issue. It's easy to fix it.

Open the lens:

http://www.kolumbus.fi/uusilehto/img/lenses/zeiss/disass/

and check:

1. if the last optical element of the front block is not loosy (and tighten it)
2. if both optical blocks are screwed tightly to the aperture block


PostPosted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 8:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks , no-X , it was precisely the last element of the front block ! It is ear-detectable , like a full or empty cartridge ... Mr. Green Very Happy


PostPosted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 9:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks No-X
And such a good description as well. This will be an exercise for Saturday when the light is good.


PostPosted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 10:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks no-X - very useful link


patrickh


PostPosted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 9:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The link was posted by another member a few months ago. I just saved it (because it helped to me, too) and reposted it Very Happy


PostPosted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 5:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I did lens maintenance according to this description today. Took less than 10 minutes, and sure enough the front lens in the rear lens assembly was loose and needed tightening.
Thanks No-x and also the forum member who originally posted this excellent description. Very Happy


PostPosted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 5:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't know, but I think that many CZJ lenses suffer from very typical problems:

Pancolar Zebra 50/1.8 - blades stays wide-opened
Pancolar MC 50/1.8 - focusing is not uniform, oil on blades, blades don't close completely
Pancolar 55/1.4 - blades don't close completely
Flektogon MC 35/2.4 - loosy optical element
Sonnar MC 135/3.5 - real aperture values don't match the numbers on aperture ring


PostPosted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 5:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Love the old stable and the others also. But most of all I love the Zeiss colors.

I have this lense, that I got from that Attila guy, LOL, and I love it.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 6:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

no-X wrote:
I don't know, but I think that many CZJ lenses suffer from very typical problems:

Pancolar Zebra 50/1.8 - blades stays wide-opened
Pancolar MC 50/1.8 - focusing is not uniform, oil on blades, blades don't close completely
Pancolar 55/1.4 - blades don't close completely
Flektogon MC 35/2.4 - loosy optical element
Sonnar MC 135/3.5 - real aperture values don't match the numbers on aperture ring


With my lenses:

Pancolar MC 1,8/50. I put it at the direct sun to UV, and nothing wrong. Blades are OK. Focusing like Rolls Royce. The unique non Leica M lens that I love. (near but no so, the hexanon 1,8/85).

Sonnar MC 3,5/135. No problems. All is OK

Flektogon MC 2,4/35 Optics elements OK. But blades. . . .dissapointing. And it's very unsharp at corners.


Rino.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 6:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

no-X wrote:
I don't know, but I think that many CZJ lenses suffer from very typical problems:

Pancolar Zebra 50/1.8 - blades stays wide-opened
Pancolar MC 50/1.8 - focusing is not uniform, oil on blades, blades don't close completely
Pancolar 55/1.4 - blades don't close completely
Flektogon MC 35/2.4 - loosy optical element
Sonnar MC 135/3.5 - real aperture values don't match the numbers on aperture ring


There's something to be said for the Russian presets with nicely oiled blades.


PostPosted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 7:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Flektogon MC 2,4/35 Optics elements OK. But blades. . . .dissapointing. And it's very unsharp at corners


I sympathize Rino. Mine is excellent but for the bottom left corner. All the elements are tight. Frustrating how fuzzy that corner is no amount of stopping down helps.
If I used it on a cropped sensor it would be perfect.

The colors from this lens are truly beautiful Zeiss Smile


PostPosted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 7:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sichko wrote:
There's something to be said for the Russian presets with nicely oiled blades.

That's why I prefer Jupiter 37A over Sonnar 135/3.5. I had 3 copies of Jupiter - all of them perfect mechanic condition. Now I have 3 copies of Sonnar and every has an issue... Optical performance is similar (Jupiter has smoother bokeh due round iris) a Jupiter is 3 times cheaper...