Exif data has been modified in order to record the right exposure data
Same scenario, this time with a Zeiss 1.4/35mm ZE @ f/2.8 and focused at MFD (=30cm) IMG_1395 por jopeme, en Flickr
What can I say? One more from the Flek IMG_1411 por jopeme, en Flickr
However, at mid and far distances the Flek doesn't perform that good. Here, the ZE shines. As for corner sharpness, again, the ZE is far ahead even wide open at 1.4
Still, I'm trying to understand this behaviour of the Flek. I fail to understand this performance difference depending on focusing distance.
jopeme wrote:
However, at mid and far distances the Flek doesn't perform that good. Here, the ZE shines. As for corner sharpness, again, the ZE is far ahead even wide open at 1.4
Still, I'm trying to understand this behaviour of the Flek. I fail to understand this performance difference depending on focusing distance.
I've read something on the mflenses forum about a mechanical weakness (IIRC some ring around a lens element that can be too tight or too loose) in this lens that can reduce the performance. Reportedly it should be quite easy to fix. It might be worth having your lens adjusted by a repairman (unless you want to try it yourself).
AhamB wrote:
I've read something on the mflenses forum about a mechanical weakness (IIRC some ring around a lens element that can be too tight or too loose) in this lens that can reduce the performance. Reportedly it should be quite easy to fix. It might be worth having your lens adjusted by a repairman (unless you want to try it yourself).
I've found my Flek to be decent at infinity on the NEX, but not so much on FF.
I've just acquired a nice copy of this lens and I'm very impressed. The guy I bought from was using it for close up work at weddings, rings, flowers etc and CU ability is very impressive. I need to give this a full work out but as of now, this is a very pleasant little lens to work with!
This lens is great where it's great, but I do question whether it's as good at distance, and I've seen that many have issues in one or both upper corners. The corner problem doesn't seem to exist at short distance or when stopped down, and it is also likely to be a quality control issue versus lens design. I have had mixed feelings about mine, mostly because I had a very low percentage of perfect focus shots. That isn't the same issue now as it was before because I now have a NEX with the focus zoom. Here are some of mine, but taken with my Sony A200...
I just bought a flektogon 35mm 2.4 that looks brand new, it has MC and its serie number is 2039, I'll buy an adapter to test it but in the meantime I'd like to hear any opinion on this lens. Does its serie number 2039 means something good or bad?
When I move it I can hear something moving inside, is it normal?
Panchoskywalke wrote:
I tried an adapter without AF the other day and I wasn`t able to mount it on my 5DII. Are there special adapters for full frame cameras?
There are no special adapters for FF cameras. There are lenses that need a modification before they can be mounted on a FF camera though, but I don't know whether that's the case with the Flektogon 35/2.4.
Up on this page michael49 and dbehrens also posted pictures taken with the lens on a 5Dmk2, so there must be something wrong with Panchoskywalke's adapter or something special with his copy of the lens.
