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

kjhg.
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Jun 16, 2016 5:54 am    Post subject: kjhg. Reply with quote

mnb

Last edited by francotirador on Sun Jul 24, 2016 9:43 pm; edited 2 times in total


PostPosted: Thu Jun 16, 2016 6:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

They are different. Which is the best is up to the choice of the photographer.


PostPosted: Thu Jun 16, 2016 1:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would choose Prakticar which should be the same as Flektogon and a safe bett. Laughing


PostPosted: Thu Jun 16, 2016 5:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Zeeke wrote:
I would choose Prakticar which should be the same as Flektogon and a safe bett. Laughing

I had the 35mm f2.4 Flektogon. And while I liked the handling of midtones he has amazed not me. I changed it for Distagon. Right now he appeared for sale a new Prakticar, and is the latest version and has the most complex Coating. But I think the Fujinon a better definition and Bokeh although I have not experienced. In the group I found nothing.


PostPosted: Thu Jun 16, 2016 5:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

calvin83 wrote:
They are different. Which is the best is up to the choice of the photographer.


Exactly!

Best for one shot will often not be best for another.
There are so many variables in lens design some of which are mutually exclusive, requiring compromises.

Even lens flaws can work to improve the image in some cases, especially if a dreamy image is wanted.


PostPosted: Thu Jun 16, 2016 9:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DConvert wrote:
calvin83 wrote:
They are different. Which is the best is up to the choice of the photographer.


Exactly!

Best for one shot will often not be best for another.
There are so many variables in lens design some of which are mutually exclusive, requiring compromises.

Even lens flaws can work to improve the image in some cases, especially if a dreamy image is wanted.


There are quality standards, such as definition, bokeh, response to the highlights, midtones range. There who likes the Helios 58 2.0 and is a bad lens. No wonder about personal taste, if not, on those quality standards that makes Objectively better lens to another.

I ask anyone knows the Fujinon EBC 35 mm 1.9?


Best regards.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 17, 2016 1:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

35/2,4 has good close focus, some say it's macro lens in disguise, while Fujinon 35/1,9 has very long MFD ( someone tempted me, once, but long MFD isn't for me)
So if you like to shoot closer, you what to choose


PostPosted: Fri Jun 17, 2016 4:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

IAZA wrote:
35/2,4 has good close focus, some say it's macro lens in disguise, while Fujinon 35/1,9 has very long MFD ( someone tempted me, once, but long MFD isn't for me)
So if you like to shoot closer, you what to choose


Thank you so much IAZA
Macro I do not, so I think I incline by the EBC Fujinon 35 1.9
In the examples I saw, it has more 3D effect, and higher definition.
Best regards
Sergio