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

Flekt 2,8/20 or 4/20?
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 4:09 pm    Post subject: Flekt 2,8/20 or 4/20? Reply with quote

I have aa flekt 4/20 (really I have three but I like only one).

I can now buy a Flekt 2,8/20

You are a specialist in CZJ. Please tell me

I will use only one - 2,8 or 4 -. Which is better?

A particular sell it in u$s 350. Now for me is important money.

Thanks, you are my reference, as always.

Rino.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 4:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The 2.8 is a beauty, but light and looks aside, it is not better than the 4.0, and in some aspects noticeably inferior - it is much more subject to flare, and it is a bit softer.

YMMV, though, as my 2.8 was GDR govt. surplus, while the 4.0 presumably was export grade - so it may be a matter of home vs. export, or 70s/Practica vs. 60s/Exakta.

Sevo


PostPosted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 5:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks, Sevo

I didn't know this questions.

Regards, Rino


PostPosted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 8:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have both, and my 2.8/20 is sharper than either of my 4/20s. That said, I like both for what they do well, which is what it's all about really. The 2.8/20 is MC while the 4/20 is SC by the way, but the 4/20 can still be surprisingly good even in near contre jour.

One thing about either lens though is that if you don't like it for whatever reason, you'll still sell it in a flash.

So if you can afford the 2.8/20 then I would suggest you buy, try and compare with your 4/20s to see if it meets your requirements.

If it's not to your satisfaction, you WILL be able to sell it, and if it is to your satisfaction, then you have the best of both Flek 20 worlds. Smile


PostPosted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 8:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

They are different lenses, for architecture might be 4/20 better for nature I vote for 2.8/20 . I am behind Bob's opinion anyway. Judge by your self and keep what you think is better for you.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 8:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I forgot to add that I'm talking in FF terms too so I can see everything the lens does, or doesn't do well.

Attila wrote:
for architecture might be 4/20 better for nature I vote for 2.8/20


I would agree with that as the 4/20 is superbly distortion free while the 2.8/20 is sharper - both attributes have their place.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 9:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bob 955i and Attila

Thanks for both

You are right, I have to judge by miself. But I prefer, in abstract, the rectilinear to the sharpness in the superwide world.

I will wait and use my old and scratches 4/20, and try to sell the other two.

Your opinion is very important, guys. Smile


PostPosted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 9:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I can help you in selling to advertise your lenses, if you planning to sell them on Ebay let me their item number.