| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Arctures
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Posts: 295
|
 Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2010 12:00 pm Post subject: Flektogon 35/2.4 SMC Takumar 35/2.0 Mir-24 |
 |
|
Arctures wrote:
Hi everyone.
I have some deals of either Flektogon 35/2.4 and S-M-C Takumar 35/2.0. I know both are really good lens. But my budget is limited now before vacation and I am going to choose only one. F/2.8 to f/5.6 sharpness is my main question for both the lens. I will be greatly appreciated if anyone could share some samples at 2.8-5.6. Also there are some different versions of Flek and Tak. What are the best in terms of overall IQ?
_________________
Sony A7, NEX-5n, Panasonic GH5(Oly12-40/2. , Contax Distagon T* 28/2.8, Contax Planar T* 50/1.4, Contax T* 80-200/4,
Minolta Rokkor MC 58/1.2, Minolta MC Rokkor-X PF 50/1.7, Minolta MD 50/2.0, Konica Hexanon AR 50/1.8,
Konica Hexanon 57/1.4, Rokkor-PF 55/1.7, Konica Hexanon 40/1.8, Auto Yashinon 50/2.0, Canon FD 50/3.5
Voigtl�nder APO Lanthar 90/3.5 M42, Topcon RE.Topcor 58/1.8, Helios-44-2 58/2.0, Canon FD 24/2.8,
Canon FD 135/2.5 SC, Auto Topcor 135/3.5, Pentax SMC 55/1.8, Minolta 35/2.8, Minolta MD 35-70/3.5
Last edited by Arctures on Sat Jul 17, 2010 10:43 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57865
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2010 12:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
Unfortunately I don't have experience with both lens, but generally one stop can help a lot in sharpness. So Takumar 35mm f2.8 can be more sharp than Flek wide open even if Flek is sharp at wide open.
_________________
-------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LucisPictor
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 17633
Location: Oberhessen, Germany / Maidstone ('95-'96)
Expire: 2013-12-03
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2010 12:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LucisPictor wrote:
Hmmm... the Tak is a little faster and surely a good lens.
If you can find a good copy of the Flek it will be a fantastic lens, but you can easily get a poor copy.
The Tak 2/35 does not work on a 5D at infinity AFAK.
_________________
Personal forum activity on pause every now and again (due to job obligations)!
Carsten, former Moderator 
Things ON SALE
Carsten = "KAPCTEH" = "Karusutenu" | T-shirt?.........................My photos from Emilia: http://www.schouler.net/emilia/emilia2011.html
My gear: http://retrocameracs.wordpress.com/ausrustung/
Old list: http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=65 (Not up-to-date, sorry!) | http://www.lucispictor.de | http://www.alensaweek.wordpress.com |
http://www.retrocamera.de |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arctures
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Posts: 295
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2010 2:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Arctures wrote:
Thanks for answers. Lucis, are there any tips how to characterize a good Flek copies? (serial numbers, special marks etc?) And yes - so far as I can see now from some forums Tak35/2.0 doesn't work at infinity. That is pretty bad but any way it is great performer as far as I am intended to use it as a fast and close focus lens. As for me I had Flek35/2.4 in my wish list for a long time and I want Flek more. But now I can see it may be hard to get a good copy a fortiori remotely.
_________________
Sony A7, NEX-5n, Panasonic GH5(Oly12-40/2., Contax Distagon T* 28/2.8, Contax Planar T* 50/1.4, Contax T* 80-200/4,
Minolta Rokkor MC 58/1.2, Minolta MC Rokkor-X PF 50/1.7, Minolta MD 50/2.0, Konica Hexanon AR 50/1.8,
Konica Hexanon 57/1.4, Rokkor-PF 55/1.7, Konica Hexanon 40/1.8, Auto Yashinon 50/2.0, Canon FD 50/3.5
Voigtl�nder APO Lanthar 90/3.5 M42, Topcon RE.Topcor 58/1.8, Helios-44-2 58/2.0, Canon FD 24/2.8,
Canon FD 135/2.5 SC, Auto Topcor 135/3.5, Pentax SMC 55/1.8, Minolta 35/2.8, Minolta MD 35-70/3.5 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57865
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2010 3:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
| Arctures wrote: |
| Thanks for answers. Lucis, are there any tips how to characterize a good Flek copies? (serial numbers, special marks etc?) And yes - so far as I can see now from some forums Tak35/2.0 doesn't work at infinity. That is pretty bad but any way it is great performer as far as I am intended to use it as a fast and close focus lens. As for me I had Flek35/2.4 in my wish list for a long time and I want Flek more. But now I can see it may be hard to get a good copy a fortiori remotely. |
I had at least 20 copies of them , none of them was bad or average just some of them are fantastic.
_________________
-------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arctures
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Posts: 295
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2010 3:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Arctures wrote:
| Attila wrote: |
I had at least 20 copies of them , none of them was bad or average just some of them are fantastic. |
That is great news, Attila, thank you. May be some tips to try in order to detect a fantastic one?
_________________
Sony A7, NEX-5n, Panasonic GH5(Oly12-40/2., Contax Distagon T* 28/2.8, Contax Planar T* 50/1.4, Contax T* 80-200/4,
Minolta Rokkor MC 58/1.2, Minolta MC Rokkor-X PF 50/1.7, Minolta MD 50/2.0, Konica Hexanon AR 50/1.8,
Konica Hexanon 57/1.4, Rokkor-PF 55/1.7, Konica Hexanon 40/1.8, Auto Yashinon 50/2.0, Canon FD 50/3.5
Voigtl�nder APO Lanthar 90/3.5 M42, Topcon RE.Topcor 58/1.8, Helios-44-2 58/2.0, Canon FD 24/2.8,
Canon FD 135/2.5 SC, Auto Topcor 135/3.5, Pentax SMC 55/1.8, Minolta 35/2.8, Minolta MD 35-70/3.5 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57865
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2010 3:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
| Arctures wrote: |
| Attila wrote: |
I had at least 20 copies of them , none of them was bad or average just some of them are fantastic. |
That is great news, Attila, thank you. May be some tips to try in order to detect a fantastic one? |
Just buy , try, sell or try to get from members who say this is fantastic copy 
_________________
-------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arctures
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Posts: 295
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2010 3:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Arctures wrote:
| Attila wrote: |
Just buy , try, sell or try to get from members who say this is fantastic copy |
Got it
_________________
Sony A7, NEX-5n, Panasonic GH5(Oly12-40/2., Contax Distagon T* 28/2.8, Contax Planar T* 50/1.4, Contax T* 80-200/4,
Minolta Rokkor MC 58/1.2, Minolta MC Rokkor-X PF 50/1.7, Minolta MD 50/2.0, Konica Hexanon AR 50/1.8,
Konica Hexanon 57/1.4, Rokkor-PF 55/1.7, Konica Hexanon 40/1.8, Auto Yashinon 50/2.0, Canon FD 50/3.5
Voigtl�nder APO Lanthar 90/3.5 M42, Topcon RE.Topcor 58/1.8, Helios-44-2 58/2.0, Canon FD 24/2.8,
Canon FD 135/2.5 SC, Auto Topcor 135/3.5, Pentax SMC 55/1.8, Minolta 35/2.8, Minolta MD 35-70/3.5 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LucisPictor
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 17633
Location: Oberhessen, Germany / Maidstone ('95-'96)
Expire: 2013-12-03
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2010 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LucisPictor wrote:
| Attila wrote: |
| Arctures wrote: |
| Thanks for answers. Lucis, are there any tips how to characterize a good Flek copies? (serial numbers, special marks etc?) And yes - so far as I can see now from some forums Tak35/2.0 doesn't work at infinity. That is pretty bad but any way it is great performer as far as I am intended to use it as a fast and close focus lens. As for me I had Flek35/2.4 in my wish list for a long time and I want Flek more. But now I can see it may be hard to get a good copy a fortiori remotely. |
I had at least 20 copies of them , none of them was bad or average just some of them are fantastic. |
You're a lucky guy, Attila.
I did shoot with three copies: one was really bad (something obviously wrong with that lens), one was average and the third one was fantastic!
Anyway, you are right with your hints how to buy. 
_________________
Personal forum activity on pause every now and again (due to job obligations)!
Carsten, former Moderator
Things ON SALE
Carsten = "KAPCTEH" = "Karusutenu" | T-shirt?.........................My photos from Emilia: http://www.schouler.net/emilia/emilia2011.html
My gear: http://retrocameracs.wordpress.com/ausrustung/
Old list: http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=65 (Not up-to-date, sorry!) | http://www.lucispictor.de | http://www.alensaweek.wordpress.com |
http://www.retrocamera.de |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
peterqd
Joined: 28 Feb 2007
Posts: 7448
Location: near High Wycombe, UK
Expire: 2014-01-04
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2010 7:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
peterqd wrote:
The big plus for the Flek is the very short focussing distance, almost like a macro lens. The lens retaining rings tend to be loose sometimes, which is often the cause of the poor image quality reported by some people. Tightening them up often improves this.
About the Tak 2/35, there are three versions, a Super-Takumar with 70mm filter size, and both a Super-Tak and S-M-C Tak with 49mm filter. The larger lens is rarer and has better IQ than the other two so it's more expensive. I believe the version that doesn't work on the 5D is the S-M-C but both the Super-Taks are OK.
If you want a good 2/35 for a little less money (and be sure it works OK on the 5D), I would recommend the Russian Mir-24, either in M42 mount (24M) or in Nikon mount (24H). Its strengths are sharpness and dense and warm colours. Min focus distance is a little more than the Flek, around 25cm, and it often needs a hood. I've only used it on a crop camera, Carsten can tell you about its corner performance on FF.
_________________
Peter - Moderator |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arctures
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Posts: 295
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Arctures wrote:
Thank you, Peter especially for Super-Tak vs S-M-C difference explanation. Yes it looks like 70mm version is really hard to catch. Also I know about Mir-24 and to be honest I was a little surprised to get such a suggestion. As per different reviews posts and etc Tak35/2.0 and Flek35/2.4 either have better overall performance haven't they?
_________________
Sony A7, NEX-5n, Panasonic GH5(Oly12-40/2., Contax Distagon T* 28/2.8, Contax Planar T* 50/1.4, Contax T* 80-200/4,
Minolta Rokkor MC 58/1.2, Minolta MC Rokkor-X PF 50/1.7, Minolta MD 50/2.0, Konica Hexanon AR 50/1.8,
Konica Hexanon 57/1.4, Rokkor-PF 55/1.7, Konica Hexanon 40/1.8, Auto Yashinon 50/2.0, Canon FD 50/3.5
Voigtl�nder APO Lanthar 90/3.5 M42, Topcon RE.Topcor 58/1.8, Helios-44-2 58/2.0, Canon FD 24/2.8,
Canon FD 135/2.5 SC, Auto Topcor 135/3.5, Pentax SMC 55/1.8, Minolta 35/2.8, Minolta MD 35-70/3.5 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57865
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
You have 5D thin about Nikon and Olympus OM lenses too. They have fantastic image quality and more less fit into your budget.
_________________
-------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arctures
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Posts: 295
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Arctures wrote:
Attila, what are the great Nikkors in 35mm category?
_________________
Sony A7, NEX-5n, Panasonic GH5(Oly12-40/2., Contax Distagon T* 28/2.8, Contax Planar T* 50/1.4, Contax T* 80-200/4,
Minolta Rokkor MC 58/1.2, Minolta MC Rokkor-X PF 50/1.7, Minolta MD 50/2.0, Konica Hexanon AR 50/1.8,
Konica Hexanon 57/1.4, Rokkor-PF 55/1.7, Konica Hexanon 40/1.8, Auto Yashinon 50/2.0, Canon FD 50/3.5
Voigtl�nder APO Lanthar 90/3.5 M42, Topcon RE.Topcor 58/1.8, Helios-44-2 58/2.0, Canon FD 24/2.8,
Canon FD 135/2.5 SC, Auto Topcor 135/3.5, Pentax SMC 55/1.8, Minolta 35/2.8, Minolta MD 35-70/3.5 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57865
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
| Arctures wrote: |
| Attila, what are the great Nikkors in 35mm category? |
I think all , but I try only 35mm f1.4 AIS. If you would go wider 20 and 24mm f2.8 AIS both are exceptional.
I did try Olympus OM 35mm f2.0 more less same than Flek. Don't forget Carl Zeiss Distagon 35mm f2.8 Contax lens. I don't how they are compatible with 5D without mirror saving.
_________________
-------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arctures
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Posts: 295
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Arctures wrote:
Thanks, Attila.
_________________
Sony A7, NEX-5n, Panasonic GH5(Oly12-40/2., Contax Distagon T* 28/2.8, Contax Planar T* 50/1.4, Contax T* 80-200/4,
Minolta Rokkor MC 58/1.2, Minolta MC Rokkor-X PF 50/1.7, Minolta MD 50/2.0, Konica Hexanon AR 50/1.8,
Konica Hexanon 57/1.4, Rokkor-PF 55/1.7, Konica Hexanon 40/1.8, Auto Yashinon 50/2.0, Canon FD 50/3.5
Voigtl�nder APO Lanthar 90/3.5 M42, Topcon RE.Topcor 58/1.8, Helios-44-2 58/2.0, Canon FD 24/2.8,
Canon FD 135/2.5 SC, Auto Topcor 135/3.5, Pentax SMC 55/1.8, Minolta 35/2.8, Minolta MD 35-70/3.5 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
peterqd
Joined: 28 Feb 2007
Posts: 7448
Location: near High Wycombe, UK
Expire: 2014-01-04
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 12:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
peterqd wrote:
| Arctures wrote: |
| Thank you, Peter especially for Super-Tak vs S-M-C difference explanation. Yes it looks like 70mm version is really hard to catch. Also I know about Mir-24 and to be honest I was a little surprised to get such a suggestion. As per different reviews posts and etc Tak35/2.0 and Flek35/2.4 either have better overall performance haven't they? |
Not sure where you saw that, the Mir competes very well with the others for my money.
I did Flek v Mir test some time ago. The Mir won in the centre but the Flek is better in the corners, at least at wide apertures. The Mir's warmer colours are shown up too.
http://forum.mflenses.com/head-to-head-flek-2-4-35-v-mir-24m-2-35-t1338.html
Our member No-X also did a comparison between all three Takumar 2/35s, plus the 3.5/35 and the Flek. The 3.5/35 was the winner.
http://forum.mflenses.com/super-or-s-m-c-takumar-2-0-35-t12229.html
_________________
Peter - Moderator |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
woodrim
Joined: 14 Jan 2010
Posts: 4060
Location: Charleston
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 12:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
woodrim wrote:
Arctures: Here are samples from my Flek, but since it is M42, I do not have a record of aperture used http://www.pbase.com/mdlempert/zeissflek35
_________________
Regards,
Woodrim |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Blue
Joined: 26 Jul 2008
Posts: 304
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 3:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Blue wrote:
Don't dismiss the Auto-Tak 35mm f2.3 especially if equipped with a hood.
http://www.yaotomi.co.jp/blog/used/2009/07/pentax-auto-takumar-35mm-f23.html
Not my blog.
However, I have this lens and it deters me from LBA and pursuing a Flek. I may jump on a big front element Super Tak at some point to keep my Model 1 Super Tak 28mm f3.5 company. 
_________________
Pentax: K, H2, H3, S3, SV (late & early), SV black, Spot F, K2 chrome, K2 black, ME F, SuperProgram, 6x7, Auto 110, Asahiflex IIB late
Pentax "modern": MZ-3, *istD, K200d, K20d
Mamiya: C3 TLR, NC1000
Canon: EOS 10s, AE-1
Chinon: CP-7m
IKON: Contax D, Praktiflex FX & Victar 50mm f2.9
Contessa-Nettel Piccolette - 7.5 cm Tessar & Compur shutter
Rangefinders: Argus C4 and Ricoh Five-One-Nine |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arctures
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Posts: 295
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 5:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Arctures wrote:
Wow, many thanks, guys!
peterqd: that was extremely verbose! Actually I haven't seen that direct test and my conclusion was based on different pics from different lens.
woodrim: those are really nice photos and that is the reason I am looking to Flek side. I haven't seen SUCH beautiful shots from Mir as I saw from Flek. May be Mir is just not so popular?
Blue: Thanks for suggestion, I'll check that locally
_________________
Sony A7, NEX-5n, Panasonic GH5(Oly12-40/2., Contax Distagon T* 28/2.8, Contax Planar T* 50/1.4, Contax T* 80-200/4,
Minolta Rokkor MC 58/1.2, Minolta MC Rokkor-X PF 50/1.7, Minolta MD 50/2.0, Konica Hexanon AR 50/1.8,
Konica Hexanon 57/1.4, Rokkor-PF 55/1.7, Konica Hexanon 40/1.8, Auto Yashinon 50/2.0, Canon FD 50/3.5
Voigtl�nder APO Lanthar 90/3.5 M42, Topcon RE.Topcor 58/1.8, Helios-44-2 58/2.0, Canon FD 24/2.8,
Canon FD 135/2.5 SC, Auto Topcor 135/3.5, Pentax SMC 55/1.8, Minolta 35/2.8, Minolta MD 35-70/3.5 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aoleg
Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Posts: 1387
Location: Berlin, DE
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 5:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
aoleg wrote:
| peterqd wrote: |
| If you want a good 2/35 for a little less money (and be sure it works OK on the 5D), I would recommend the Russian Mir-24, either in M42 mount (24M) or in Nikon mount (24H). Its strengths are sharpness and dense and warm colours. Min focus distance is a little more than the Flek, around 25cm, and it often needs a hood. I've only used it on a crop camera, Carsten can tell you about its corner performance on FF. |
Another vote for the Mir. My MC Mir-24M (35/2) is fantastic; pin sharp in the centre straight from wide open (corners get equally sharp by f/5.6), pleasing bokeh (something that I can't say about, say, Nikkor 35/2) and great colors. I got mine from molotok.ru, and paid about $60 for a near-mint copy in a case with three filters. I also bought a Chinese wide-angle hood for it, and it really helps control flare (the Mir is not perfect with respect to flare BTW; Yashica ML 35/2.8 is way better with flare, but it's a 1/stop slower lens with a tiny front element).
I see that you have a Distagon 28/2.8 already, so getting another sharp and contrasty lens in similar focal length makes less sense than getting a "character" lens such as Mir-24M.
_________________
List of lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aoleg
Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Posts: 1387
Location: Berlin, DE
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 5:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
aoleg wrote:
| Arctures wrote: |
| Attila, what are the great Nikkors in 35mm category? |
The Nikkor 35/2.8 is quite mediocre. 35/2 is better, but I dislike its rendering at and near wide open. Lots of coma, too. The 35/1.4 is by far the best of the bunch, but very expensive, too.
_________________
List of lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arctures
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Posts: 295
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 5:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Arctures wrote:
Hmmm, looks like Nikon Ai Nikkor 35/1.4 not so expensive as for example Canon 35/1.4L Less than 500usd for a super-fast wide Nikkor is very interesting indeed. And it looks like Nikkor's performance wide open is astonishing.
_________________
Sony A7, NEX-5n, Panasonic GH5(Oly12-40/2., Contax Distagon T* 28/2.8, Contax Planar T* 50/1.4, Contax T* 80-200/4,
Minolta Rokkor MC 58/1.2, Minolta MC Rokkor-X PF 50/1.7, Minolta MD 50/2.0, Konica Hexanon AR 50/1.8,
Konica Hexanon 57/1.4, Rokkor-PF 55/1.7, Konica Hexanon 40/1.8, Auto Yashinon 50/2.0, Canon FD 50/3.5
Voigtl�nder APO Lanthar 90/3.5 M42, Topcon RE.Topcor 58/1.8, Helios-44-2 58/2.0, Canon FD 24/2.8,
Canon FD 135/2.5 SC, Auto Topcor 135/3.5, Pentax SMC 55/1.8, Minolta 35/2.8, Minolta MD 35-70/3.5 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aoleg
Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Posts: 1387
Location: Berlin, DE
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 6:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
aoleg wrote:
| Arctures wrote: |
| And it looks like Nikkor's performance wide open is astonishing. |
Er, no, not really. At f/1.4, it gives a dreamy look with "glow" around highlights. Fine for low light and indoors though, but I wouldn't call its performance wide open "astonishing". By f/2, it's the sharpest 35mm lens around. What is special about this lens is its sharpness from f/2, great colors and contrast, and extremely pleasing rendering.
Review http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_wide.html (scroll down to Nikkor 35/1.4)
_________________
List of lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arctures
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Posts: 295
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 6:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Arctures wrote:
| aoleg wrote: |
but I wouldn't call its performance wide open "astonishing".
|
Under "astonishing" I mean Nikkor's bokeh at f/1.4. It looks really awesome. If f/2.0 or even f/2.8 bokeh looks similar to f/1.4 than this lens is truly a gem.
_________________
Sony A7, NEX-5n, Panasonic GH5(Oly12-40/2., Contax Distagon T* 28/2.8, Contax Planar T* 50/1.4, Contax T* 80-200/4,
Minolta Rokkor MC 58/1.2, Minolta MC Rokkor-X PF 50/1.7, Minolta MD 50/2.0, Konica Hexanon AR 50/1.8,
Konica Hexanon 57/1.4, Rokkor-PF 55/1.7, Konica Hexanon 40/1.8, Auto Yashinon 50/2.0, Canon FD 50/3.5
Voigtl�nder APO Lanthar 90/3.5 M42, Topcon RE.Topcor 58/1.8, Helios-44-2 58/2.0, Canon FD 24/2.8,
Canon FD 135/2.5 SC, Auto Topcor 135/3.5, Pentax SMC 55/1.8, Minolta 35/2.8, Minolta MD 35-70/3.5 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aoleg
Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Posts: 1387
Location: Berlin, DE
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 7:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
aoleg wrote:
| Arctures wrote: |
| aoleg wrote: |
but I wouldn't call its performance wide open "astonishing".
|
Under "astonishing" I mean Nikkor's bokeh at f/1.4. It looks really awesome. If f/2.0 or even f/2.8 bokeh looks similar to f/1.4 than this lens is truly a gem. |
Ah, the bokeh! Yes, it's wonderful at all (relatively large) apertures. Wide open, it's glow and vintage; f/2, it's sharp and beautiful. It's not a Contax Distagon 35/1.4 by any stretch of imagination, but the Nikkor costs about 50% less. It's a good lens by itself, and "you get what you pay for", in this order
_________________
List of lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
