rawhead
Joined: 09 Feb 2009 Posts: 1525 Location: Boston, MA
Expire: 2014-04-29
|
Posted: Fri Apr 17, 2009 2:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
rawhead wrote:
Thanks for all the 6x6s! As a recent Pentacon Six users, all of them are greatly appreciated!
What's your take on the Flek 65/2,8? I see it on Ebay once in a while, and seeing how it usually goes for a bit cheaper than the 50/4, I'm tempted to snatch one one of these days, but am also slightly worried that it might be cramming things in between my 50/4 and 80/2.8. _________________ Sony α7R, Pentax 67II, Kiev-60, Hasselblad 203FE, 903SWC, Graflex Norita 66, Mamiya M645 1000s, Burke & James 8x10, Graflex Pacemaker Speed Graphic (4x5 and 3x4), Century Graphic (2x3), R.B. Graflex Seried D, Rolleiflex SL66E, Rolleiflex 2.8C Xenotar, Mamiya C330f, a few M42, six P6, three OM, four Hasselblad, two Pentax 67, two Mamiya 645, one Noritar, and a sprinkle of EF. Oh, and an Aero Ektar and Leica Noctilux |
|
patrickh
Joined: 23 Aug 2007 Posts: 8551 Location: Oregon
Expire: 2011-11-18
|
Posted: Fri Apr 17, 2009 5:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
patrickh wrote:
Your affection for the countryside shows in every shot you take.
patrickh _________________ DSLR: Nikon D300 Nikon D200 Nex 5N
MF Zooms: Kiron 28-85/3.5, 28-105/3.2, 75-150/3.5, Nikkor 50-135/3.5 AIS // MF Primes: Nikkor 20/4 AI, 24/2 AI, 28/2 AI, 28/2.8 AIS, 28/3.5 AI, 35/1.4 AIS, 35/2 AIS, 35/2.8 PC, 45/2.8 P, 50/1.4 AIS, 50/1.8 AIS, 50/2 AI, 55/2.8 AIS micro, 55/3.5 AI micro, 85/2 AI, 100/2,8 E, 105/1,8 AIS, 105/2,5 AIS, 135/2 AIS, 135/2.8 AIS, 200/4 AI, 200/4 AIS micro, 300/4.5 AI, 300/4.5 AI ED, Arsat 50/1.4, Kiron 28/2, Vivitar 28/2.5, Panagor 135/2.8, Tamron 28/2.5, Tamron 90/2.5 macro, Vivitar 90/2.5 macro (Tokina) Voigtlander 90/3.5 Vivitar 105/2.5 macro (Kiron) Kaleinar 100/2.8 AI Tamron 135/2.5, Vivitar 135/2.8CF, 200/3.5, Tokina 400/5,6
M42: Vivitar 28/2.5, Tamron 28/2.5, Formula5 28/2.8, Mamiya 28/2.8, Pentacon 29/2.8, Flektogon 35/2.4, Flektogon 35/2.8, Takumar 35/3.5, Curtagon 35/4, Takumar 50/1.4, Volna-6 50/2.8 macro, Mamiya 50/1.4, CZJ Pancolar 50/1,8, Oreston 50/1.8, Takumar 50/2, Industar 50/3.5, Sears 55/1.4, Helios 58/2, Jupiter 85/2, Helios 85/1.5, Takumar 105/2.8, Steinheil macro 105/4.5, Tamron 135/2.5, Jupiter 135/4, CZ 135/4, Steinheil Culminar 135/4,5, Jupiter 135/3.5, Takumar 135/3.5, Tair 135/2.8, Pentacon 135/2.8, CZ 135/2.8, Taika 135/3.5, Takumar 150/4, Jupiter 200/4, Takumar 200/4
Exakta: Topcon 100/2.8(M42), 35/2.8, 58/1.8, 135/2.8, 135/2.8 (M42), Kyoei Acall 135/3.5
C/Y: Yashica 28/2.8, 50/1.7, 135/2.8, Zeiss Planar 50/1.4, Distagon 25/2.8
Hexanon: 28/3.5, 35/2.8, 40/1.8, 50/1.7, 52/1.8, 135/3.2, 135/3.5, 35-70/3.5, 200/3.5
P6 : Mir 38 65/3.5, Biometar 80/2.8, Kaleinar 150/2.8, Sonnar 180/2.8
Minolta SR: 28/2.8, 28/3.5, 35/2.8, 45/2, 50/2, 58/1.4, 50/1.7, 135/2.8, 200/3.5
RF: Industar 53/2.8, Jupiter 8 50/2
Enlarg: Rodagon 50/5,6, 80/5,6, 105/5.6, Vario 44-52/4, 150/5.6 180/5.6 El Nikkor 50/2,8,63/2.8,75/4, 80/5,6, 105/5.6, 135/5.6 Schneider 60/5.6, 80/5.6, 80/4S,100/5.6S,105/5.6,135/5.6, 135/5.6S, 150/5.6S, Leica 95/4 |
|
Laurence
Joined: 26 Mar 2007 Posts: 4809 Location: Western Washington State
Expire: 2016-06-19
|
Posted: Fri Apr 17, 2009 5:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Laurence wrote:
rawhead wrote: |
Thanks for all the 6x6s! As a recent Pentacon Six users, all of them are greatly appreciated!
What's your take on the Flek 65/2,8? I see it on Ebay once in a while, and seeing how it usually goes for a bit cheaper than the 50/4, I'm tempted to snatch one one of these days, but am also slightly worried that it might be cramming things in between my 50/4 and 80/2.8. |
You are welcome, rawhead...of course this is not a 6x6, but rather a 4.5x6 from the Pentax 645.
I had read up extensively on the Flek 65 on the web - well, I shouldn't say "extensively" since there is not much about it. Most of the reports I read said it was at best a mediocre lens, at least that was the impression to me. But, I was lucky enough to get the lens for a very small amount of money, so I went for it.
I personally feel that the Flektogon 50/4 seems sharper, and that might be part of the "negatives" on the web. BUT...the colors are strong, and the corners hold up well, and since I don't "pixel peep" down to the purest single pixel, then the difference in "sharpness" is a non-issue.
This particular image has been enlarged to a 16x20, and the result was fantastic with the 65/4. The print REALLY popped.
I think that in the case of primes, the 65 would NOT be cramming between the 50 and the 80. The 35mm equivalent of about 40mm is an awfully nice focal length, and the difference between the 50 and the 65 is actually more than it seems that 15mm of difference would give you. So, if you had all three, you would basically have a 30mm, 40mm, and 50mm, give or take.
One thing the 65 DOES do nicely, is to utilize extension tubes for close up work. I use the 15mm extension tube extensively with the 65. _________________
Assent, and you are sane;
Demur,—you ’re straightway dangerous,
And handled with a chain.
Emily Dickinson
Cameras and Lenses in Use:
Yashica Mat 124 w/ Yashinon 80/3.5,
CV Apo-Lanthar 90/3.5SL, (Thank you Klaus),
Pentax 645,
Flek 50,
Pentax-A 150
Pentax-A 120 Macro
Voigtlander Vitomatic I w/Color Skopar 50/2.8
Konica TC and zoom lenses (thanks Carsten)
Contax AX
Yashica ML 50/2
Yashica ML 35/2.8
Carl Zeiss Contax 50/1.4
Tamron Adaptall SP 17/3.5
Tamron Adaptall 28/2.5
Tamron Adaptall SP 300/2.8 LD (IF)
|
|