Flektogon 35mm 2,4 - 35mm 2,8?

[kuuan]

I have read a lot praise about the Flektogon 35mm 2,4

my question:
there is the earlier 'auto',
the later 'electric' version
and also a 35mm 2,8.

how do they compare?
is the 35mm 2,8 similarily highly regarded than the 2,4?

[Attila]

35mm 2.4 better and higher priced, but difference is not too big.

[LucisPictor]

I neither have this nor that version, but I agree to Attila that the f2.4 is overpriced at the moment whereas the f2.8 can still be found for a decent price.
Actually, I believe that personal taste plays a big role which lens you like better... (as always).

[carlo saarland]

hi kuuan,

i guess, i have the answer for you bout the two different Flek ..
they both are good.

read this..

hxxp://m42.artlimited.net/lens_detail.php?lid=37

[Attila]

I know only lower priced MF lenses and over priced AF lenses...

[bob955i]

The 2.4 is multi-coated while the earlier 2.8 in any version is very likely only single-coated - this may make a difference to contrast if you have very strong highlights or the sun in your subjects unless you use a hood. As it is, a hood is a good idea anyway irrespective of a lens' coating as long as it doesn't cause vignetting.

The 2.8/35 was produced firstly in preset and later in automatic versions - the preset has an alu finish, while the automatic can have a leatherette type focus ring, a pip type ring or a zebra type. There may have been an electric version of the 2.8/35 but in any case this has no effect on the lens' operation with other cameras as it is meant for use on certain Praktica bodies to transmit the lens aperture information to the camera metering - there are contacts on the rear of the lens. There is no optical difference other than sample variation between any of the different versions of the 2.8/35.

As for the 2.4/35, this was produced in both electric auto/manual and non-electric auto/manual - both versions looking identical apart from the trim ring indication and the contacts on the lens' rear. Again there is no optical difference between the two versions. It was also remounted for Praktica bayonet and marketed as a 'Prakticar'.

One thing they all do is close focus and that ability coupled with the focal length makes them a great walk-around lens IMHO.

[Attila]

Nice to see you here Carlo!

[kuuan]

thank you for all the valuable input.

the reason I had asked was because the f2,4 sells too expensive, from what you say I'll rather look out for a 2,8.

the 20mm Flektogons are also selling very expensive, 200 euroish ?
well, all 20mm lenses are quite costly, but for flektogons my impression was that the 35 is regarded higher than the 20mms which of course must have their own merits though.
( prizes sometimes go crazy, had watched a trioplan that just went for over 100 Euro, others that I had watched lately had sold for 25 and 40 resp. )

and yes, LucisPictor, personal taste should be the deciding factor. I am just playing with my first MF lenses and I am quite amazed of the differences of rendition of the various 135mm lenses I have, and so far I don't like the Jupiter 9 which seems to be a darling of many
if I am to buy more lenses for now it will be lenses between 20 and 35mm, maybe 50mm.

[Attila]

[kuuan]

so Attila you say that you find that the 20mm Flektogon is worth 200 Euro and more, that this is a good prize

[Attila]

yes, generally I sell them between 165-190 GBP. MC f2.8

F4 zebra cheaper last I sold around 100-120 GBP

I talk about mint like new lenses.

[Retro]

@kuuan:
Genaraly I fully agree with Attila.
I own both (the nostalgic aluminium Flektogon 2.8/35 and the "modern" black Flektogon 2.4/35), tested them intensively by myself and have asked experts.

I think this are solid statements:

(1) They are nearly equal in picture quality. The black one produces a slightly (very, very slightly) better contrast, but this is neglectible ´cause of the possibility of minimal electronic picture manipulation. The alu one is in close distance shots a little bit better.

(2) The black one has a minimum focus distance of 18 cm, which is a valid pro against other lenses (often beginning with 45 or 50cm) and especially against the alu with 35cm. So the black-one has Makro qualities.

(3) The alu-one ist underestimated, so it usually has a lower price (if you can get one...).

(4) I have a second alu-Flektogon which was very cheap: it made marvellous pictures, but they had a very low contrast. So I had to discover, that the cement at the rear lenses had aged. So if you buy the alu, watch carefully the pictures at auctions or ask explicitly by e-mail about cloudiness!

(5) The alu-one can produce problems, when mounting on a DSLR because going to infinity, the rear lens-part is a little bit intruding into the camera-box and can with some models collide with the mirror or as with my Sigma SD9 or SD10 with the dust protection shield. The problem is fully satisfying to be resolved with a very thin distance peace, but one has to know how.

(6) The expressions "auto", "electric" and whatever else with the black Flektogon is without any meaning to quality differences. They are all the same. Nevertheless as a collector and connoisseur, I´m happy to have a version without this additional expressions.

My personal favorite is the alu-Flektogon, due to its wonderful nostalgic appearance (see my avatar-picture left).
Nevertheless I would advise you the "Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35" in black. It´s more versatile and so more "professional".

A link to your question: http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=1428&highlight=flektogon

[lahnet]

Hej kuuan

I have just posted some pictures i the Gallery. My Flek is Zebra 2.8 single coated.

Tread is called Copenhagen Pictures.

[peterqd]

[Attila]

Me too. One superb quality lens is more than hundred of garbage

[kuuan]

thank you all for the infos.

there was a 35mm 2,8 on ebay but I let it pass and it got sold cheaply for just 35,50 Euro. I guess I made a mistake, it was neither alu nor black but 'striped': http://cgi.ebay.at/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=120219251631&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT&ih=002

just today I had taken my first photos with my SuperTak 35mm 3,5 which is in mint condition and I was VERY happy with the result.
So no hurry to get another 35mm and I know that for me it will not be only a Flektogon, Pancolar or a Sonnar

[bob955i]

The one in the link is the last version of the 2.8 before the 2.4 appeared.

We identify the lenses with this design as "zebra".

[Retro]