Zeiss Flek 35 f/2.4 vs DA 35 f/2.4


Mongoose

Link Posted 02/09/2013 - 12:16
I have an old M42 mount Zeiss Flektogon 35mm f/2.4. It is an excellent lens which I love, but its fully manual nature limits how much use it gets.

All the time I have owned the Flek, its value has slowly crept up, and I have always joked that I would sell it the day I could buy a 35mm Limited Macro with the proceeds.

That day has yet to dawn, and realistically it never will. However, I probably could buy a DA 35 f/2.4 for a very similar price to what I could get for the Flek.

I am currently torn, the Flek is a lovely lens, but an automatic DA would certainly get more use. The question is, what is the DA like optical quality wise vs the venerable Flektogon?
you don't have to be mad to post here



but it does help

johnriley

Link Posted 02/09/2013 - 13:29
Probably better suited to digital capture. In any event, the image quality of the new lens will be superb.

I think you'll have change to spare from your deal.
Best regards, John

Mongoose

Link Posted 02/09/2013 - 13:47
thanks John, that's very much my current thinking.

What is the quality of the plastic like on the mount of the DA? My one significant concern is the longevity of a lens whose body is made entirely from plastic.
you don't have to be mad to post here



but it does help

johnriley

Link Posted 02/09/2013 - 14:34
I have had plastic mount lenses before and they seem to have lasted fine. It goes against the grain, but in reality there's little wear at the interface and they do seem to do the job.
Best regards, John

jemx99

Link Posted 02/09/2013 - 21:11
Mongoose wrote:

What is the quality of the plastic like on the mount of the DA? My one significant concern is the longevity of a lens whose body is made entirely from plastic.

There's very little weight in the lens so not much pressure on the mount.
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.