Konica Dual 21-35

[oldwino]

Howdy!

Does anyone have any shots taken with this lens at 35mm? All I see on Flickr and on a google search are shots at 21mm.

I'd like to see how it looks at 35. Anyone?

 

[Dante_Stella]

I have a bunch and can dig some up, since I'm pretty sure I metadata coded them. At 35mm it is sharp as hell because, well, it's a 35/4 lens, and it's hard to miss focus. Performance at 35 at f/4 is better than at 21 at f/3.4.

Dante

 

[michaelwj]

There was a thread either here on on LUF where m9reno(?) posted a good range of 21 and 35 images make with the dual. It's an intriguing lens that I've constantly thought about but never jumped. IIRC at 35 distortion was significant

 

[Dante_Stella]

The optimization of the 21-35mm is for extreme sharpness, not unlike the 24-40 AT-X Tokina, which I strongly suspect is its cousin. Here are some throwaway shots at 35mm, which should show you just how insanely sharp this is (it will easily moire on an M240). Hopefully, you can see these at full resolution.

https://dantestella.smugmug.com/Other/Konica-21-35-Dual-35/n-wk89VK/i-Z4P5GtR

Distortion is mild, a +4 at 35mm if you are doing something critical.

I would note that this lens is a lot sharper in the corners with the 240 than a lot of symmetrical lenses are, in part due to its retrofocus design.

Dante

 

[f16sunshine]

It's a great travel lens.
I enjoyed mine in those years I used a digital M. It's very reliable and super at both 21 and 35.
What Dante is not saying is.... it's "boring" at 35mm. Just sharp and sharp.
Most of us if we are honest want some character in a lens.
Even a slow lens has character at wide open most of the time.
The 21/35 Dual is maybe too perfect at f4/35mm.

 

[Rayt]

I had my 21/35 collimated by DAG for the M8 at the suggestion of Dante. Back then there was some controversy about using KM lenses on M bodies. Anyway mine is extremely sharp at 21 and 35 a bit too sharp if there is such a thing. I was just in Quebec last week with it and what a travel lens it is. These two FLs are just what I need to travel the world.

 

[Dante_Stella]

Never such a thing as too slim, too rich, or too sharp. 🙂

But as f16sunshine says, it's not the kind of lens to buy if you love aberrations.

By the way, the 35 always struck me as a touch wider than 35, but I have not had the time to systematically test that. It is an internal focus lens, so maybe the field size varies more with focus?

D

 

[f16sunshine]

This old shot from a smoky California beach is all I have online.
It's from an RD1, close focus, and cropped.
Look how young little Hugo looks then.

 

[DwF]

Nothing like a nice pic to tell a thousand words about a lens! I certainly know that 35mm at f4 even without full frame, subject isolation is possible but your picture here says it best 🙂

David