Zeiss Flektogon 20mm/4.0 on the M8

[petermcwerner]

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

​

 

[willie_901]

Peter

Very nice. Do you think this version is better than the 20/2.8 Flektogon?

willie

 

[petermcwerner]

Very nice. Do you think this version is better than the 20/2.8 Flektogon?

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 20/4

 

[petermcwerner]

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]

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

 

[willie_901]

Thanks for the info everyone.

 

[kbg32]

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!

 

[ywenz]

Very film like.. especially the 1st and 2nd..

 

[gurtch]

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

 

[petermcwerner]

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, you have to use adapters that compensate for the difference, in fact 2 adapters.

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]

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,
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.