hilltime
Well-known
Recently picked this lens up and looked forward to its results. To say I was very disappointed is an understatement. MY example does have some haze and minor fungus issues, but the results with Fuji 160 Pro were terrible. No contrast, very much flare or glare even though I was using a Summaron lens hood.
Anyone have experience with this lens and should I expect much better results with a professional cleaning? Even though this lens is coated, it had more flare than a nickel 50/3.5 Elmar I have.
Regards,
Gary Hill
Anyone have experience with this lens and should I expect much better results with a professional cleaning? Even though this lens is coated, it had more flare than a nickel 50/3.5 Elmar I have.
Regards,
Gary Hill
hilltime
Well-known
After a very good professional cleaning from John at Focal Point, this lens was what I was expecting, although a bit lower in contrast than the Leica lenses I am used to. But what a difference and well worth the $ spent.
Gary Hill
Gary Hill
maddoc
... likes film again.
I have had never heard about this lens before but now that you have mentioned it .. I would like to see some photos taken with it !
hilltime
Well-known
Here are few shots with the 35/2.8 Xenogon shot on Fuji 400 Superior mounted on a Voigtlander R2 Olive body.
Regards,
Gary Hill
Regards,
Gary Hill
hilltime
Well-known
Maybe a couple more.
Gary Hill
Gary Hill
David Murphy
Veteran
I just bought one, but have not had a chance to test it yet - I'll try to post some results here soon. If you haze and fungus this explains the washed out results. This lens is worth a CLA (I pay around $50-60 at a local camera tech).