petermcwerner
Member
Today I mounted a Zeiss Flektogon 20mm/4.0 in M42 (Pentax) mount with a converter from Cameraquest on the M8. The depth of field is so great that guesstimating the distance and using the DOF scale of the lens is enough, rangefinder focusing is not really nececcary. Here are a few results form a Sunday afternoon walk in the countryside.
All photos taken at f/5.6 Aperture priority - RAW converted with C1 and resized in PS CS2
There is no vignetting at all, sharpness is very good in the center, still good in the corners. Contrast is lower than in most modern lenses, but I like the dreamy color rendition. The lens has an enormous front element and is subject to flare if direct light or the sun is in the picture.
This lens can be found for around $150 on ebay. It is a focal length I would not use very much and was quite a revelation for me.
Peter
All photos taken at f/5.6 Aperture priority - RAW converted with C1 and resized in PS CS2
There is no vignetting at all, sharpness is very good in the center, still good in the corners. Contrast is lower than in most modern lenses, but I like the dreamy color rendition. The lens has an enormous front element and is subject to flare if direct light or the sun is in the picture.
This lens can be found for around $150 on ebay. It is a focal length I would not use very much and was quite a revelation for me.
Peter
willie_901
Veteran
Peter
Very nice. Do you think this version is better than the 20/2.8 Flektogon?
willie
Very nice. Do you think this version is better than the 20/2.8 Flektogon?
willie
petermcwerner
Member
I do not know the 20/2.8, Willie. Sean Reid told me he uses one on the Canon 5D, but I do not know if he has ever used the 20/4willie_901 said:Very nice. Do you think this version is better than the 20/2.8 Flektogon?
petermcwerner
Member
I had a look at Sean Reids reviews and he indeed has compared the 2.8 with the 4.0. in his article Ultra-Wides for EOS. He thinks the 2.8 is superior to the 4.0
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
The 2.8 is the newer lens, made during the last years of lens production in East Germany. It's multicoated (most 4.0s aren't) and considerably more expensive. Everybody I know who has both lenses says the 2.8 is better. I would like to have a 2.8 one day for use on my Canon FDs.
$150 sounds like a lot, I've seen the 4.0 on photo fairs sell for between 80 and 100 EUR.
Does the DOF scale work? It's laid out for a 20 mm lens on full frame, while you have a 27 mm-equivalent lens, and the DOF should be somewhere in between. DOF should be narrower than the scale on the lens. Does that match your experience?
Philipp
$150 sounds like a lot, I've seen the 4.0 on photo fairs sell for between 80 and 100 EUR.
Does the DOF scale work? It's laid out for a 20 mm lens on full frame, while you have a 27 mm-equivalent lens, and the DOF should be somewhere in between. DOF should be narrower than the scale on the lens. Does that match your experience?
Philipp
willie_901
Veteran
Thanks for the info everyone.
kbg32
neo-romanticist
Those Flektogons are supposed to be really nice wide angles. I remember looking at one years ago and images from it. Have fun with it!
Last edited:
ywenz
Veteran
Very film like.. especially the 1st and 2nd..
gurtch
Established
Since SLR lenses were made to clear the mirror, and M bayonet bodies (I assumed) had much shorter back focus, I'm surprised you can focus properly---but the proof is in the pudding.
Dave
Dave
petermcwerner
Member
Dave, you have to use adapters that compensate for the difference, in fact 2 adapters.gurtch said:Since SLR lenses were made to clear the mirror, and M bayonet bodies (I assumed) had much shorter back focus, I'm surprised you can focus properly---but the proof is in the pudding.
First adapter: M42 to Leica Screw
Second adapter: Leica Screw to M bajonet.
The first one is made by Voigtlander and sold by cameraquest. Probably Novoflex would have one too
The second one can be original Leitz or copies of doubtful precision and quality found on many ebay shops. I use some original Leica ones (bought used on ebay) and some new Voigtlander ones sold by cameraquest.
Since I have various LSM lenses, I keep an adapter on each lens, makes for faster lens changing.
Peter
petermcwerner
Member
Philipp,rxmd said:Does the DOF scale work? It's laid out for a 20 mm lens on full frame, while you have a 27 mm-equivalent lens, and the DOF should be somewhere in between. DOF should be narrower than the scale on the lens. Does that match your experience?
There is only a single DOF scale on the lens and it does not state the f/ stop value, so I assume it is for the diaphragm fully open. Using this scale at f/5.6, my usual working aperture, seems to be fine. Anyhow, the DOF is so huge that I can usually even put some reserve.
Last edited:
Share:
-
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.