Distagon 18/3.5

[Sven]

I got the opportunity to borrow this lens over the weekend. We celebrated Sweden's national day yesterday and there was a veteran vehicle exhibition in a town nearby, I thought that could be a suitable place to test the lens.
The lens breathes quality and both rings are silk smooth. I produces quite nice pictures too, but 1500 USD is a lot of money as well. I'm not sure if it's that much better than my MIR for 100 USD.
Some samples:




I don't think that this tractor was this shiny even as new.






100% crop









Not such a good capture, but I thought the tractor was worth looking at





A 100% crop. Some CA in the high contrast areas (or is it sensor bloom?). The red and green on the lamp post look like CA to me.



And finally, one more tractor

[Attila]

Great captures, so shiny pictures! Thank you for sharing them!

As usual no lens lot better than Russian ones that for sure, but people rare willing to pay any reasonable amount for Russians and they love to pay a lot for big names like this one.

[sichko]

Nice shots. Great colours and, as Attila says, a nice finish.

Which Mir are you comparing it with ?

[Orio]

I don't know which of the two 20mm MIRs you are talking about.
If it's the MIR-20M, I had that lens, and although it has great colour saturation, it also has HUGE flare and distortion problems. I sold it.
It was not even comparable with my Contax Distagon 4/18 and also with my 4/20 and 2.8/20 Flektogons.
I don't have the new ZF 3.5/18, so I can not speak about it, but even if it should be a bit worse than the Contax lens, I think it is not very likely that it would not be visibily better than the MIR-20.

[Sven]

Thanks guys
The shiny parts in my pics. can mostly be contributed to the vehicle owners. Many hours of dedicated polishing.
It was the MIR20, but more of a general reflection. I haven't done any comparisons that could be called even remotely scientific. I only had the lens over the weekend. Its handed back now.
For sure, the Distagon is a lot better when it comes to build standard. It's also sharper, but the difference is not dramatic.
I guess my point is that the difference in cost between the Distagon and the MIR and also between the Distagon and a Flek 2.8/20, might not fully reflect on the perceived extra value.
It probably makes sense for a pro, but the general amateur it might not always be the case.
Anyhow, I actually took a test shot with the MIR and one with the Distagon. Not very scientific, since they don't even have the same focal length, but this is how it looks.

Distagon 100% crop



MIR 100% crop