**** you wrote:
Hi Could you give me any comparison on the following lens? I may choose one of them.
Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 35/2.4 MC
Pentax K 35/3.5 Thanks! Frankie
****
Although I do not have direct experience with any one of them, I have
seen both and my friends have used both. Also, take my writing with a
bit of scepticism - it's more theoretical (but based on sound
information).
first, very quickly:
If you need it for K mount camera, get the
3.5/35mm UNLESS you do low-light work, ie shoot wide open all the
time. Then get the M42 2.4/35mm (used with adapter K).
If for M42 camera, get the 2.4/35, but check if it's one of the later
versions (better coatings).
now not so quickly:
1) The Pentax K 3.5/35 is simple 5-element design, it's just a Tessar
with negative element in front of it. It's the most primitive
wide-angle retrofocus design, used quite early. Still,
simple design+SMC means this is super-contrasty lens, because of so
fewer elements compared to other wideangles. BTW, Yoshihiko's
tests rate it very highly, which may be partly due to high contrast. I
still believe this design to be somewhat primitive and unsuitable for fast
apertures, because Tessar itself is not good fast, best Tessar types
start at f/4.5 - f/6.8 apertures or f/9 (Apo-Tessar). But as this lens is 3.5
(relatively slow) aperture, I believe in Yoshihiko's tests :).
Note, that from seeing this lens I think it has no clickstops between 3.5 and
5.6, making a 1.3 stop transition from wide open to first stopped
down. Clearly no lens for low light, where you value even small
increase in sharpness by stopping down a 2 lens to 2.5. In fact, most
Pentax lenses are disappointing in this, as they have wide open and
than nothing until full stop later. Such as the 1.4/50, which has 1.4
(awful performance) and nothing till 2 (very good performance). If it
had 2.4 (good performance) between, it would be much better.
2) OTOH, the CZJ 2.4/35mm is among the latest traditional (non-ED and
non-AL) designs, which has small and rather flat front element compared
to earlier -and not as good- CZJ 2.8/35mm Flektogon. This lens is by my CZJ collecting
friends rated among the best CZJ lenses, near such gems as 1.8/80. So
I think this is a very good lens, even near wide open. As it is also
full stop faster than the 3.5/35 and can be stopped down better
But this lens is only available in M42 and Praktica B mounts, so it's
rather hard to use it in K mount unless you shoot wide open all the
time (because when used via the Adapter-K it becomes manual-aperture
lens, when you have to manually open the aperture to have bright view
to focus then stop down to selected shooting aperture, which is a pain
unless you shoot at its maximum aperture or near it). So, for
landscapes or normal day-light or flash shooting get the 3.5/35 if you
are using K mount camera.
The CZJ coatings, although adopting Multicoating quite nearly
(seventies, just after the western Carl Zeiss invented it), have worse
MC than contemporary SMC. And yes, it's visible in the images - more
flare. Lens hood is needed. But CZJ's later coatings (more orange in
colour, compared to more pinky older coatings) are quite good, not as
SMC but still good. Still, even their early multicoating is way better
than Kiron's multicoating.
I hope this helps, and now I am looking to people who own both lenses
to compare them practically.
Frantisek
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
