|Home||About us||Commercial Photography||Print Gallery||Articles/reviews/blog|
You still have to manually turn the lens focusing ring, but it's a little easier when the AF confirm light comes on in the viewfinder. That said, half the fun of using some of these old lenses is having to learn, or for some of us, return to using the lens distance and depth of field scales.
I used liveview on my 1Ds Mk3 to check for best focus for the tests below.
The adapter was originally obtained to use with my Russian MTO1100A 1080mm mirror lens (purchased in 1978) where it works very well.
- You should note that some old M42 lenses protrude into the camera too much when focused at infinity - there is a list I found, included in the additional info at the end of this article.
I've also got an adapter to use my Olympus Zuiko 50/1.2 lens on the EF mount. I do use the lens every so often where I want the minuscule depth of field that f/1.2 gives. If I used it enough, I'd probably get the Canon 50/1.2, but the Olympus lens cost over £300 in 1985, so it will do for the time being.
The Canon EF mount is a very flexible design - you can see how much bigger it is than the M42 screw mount below.
Note that there is no mechanical activation of the aperture stop-down for the lens. You will have to manually adjust the aperture ring of the lens (and set to 'M').
We'll add more short lens tests over time as we sort through the 'spares box'.
One of those lenses that gets mentioned a lot in the history of 35mm camera lenses.
A lens of East German origin.
The question is, like many classic cars, is it actually any good?
People may go on about oddly named lenses of yesteryear, but often conveniently forget how far lens design and manufacturing has come since the days of film and manual focus lenses.
The nit-pickers in forums may go over images at 100% magnification - levels of magnification unknown to many who acquired up their skills in a darkroom.
But how well do the lenses perform on today's cameras?
I'm seriously not into detailed lens testing, but a few sample images shot outside my house should give a general idea of lens quality.
I'm comparing the Flektogon with my old Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L.
This is the Mk1 version of the 16-35 which some decry as not good enough for the likes of my 1Ds Mk3.
I must remember that, next time I print up a 17"x25" print taken with it.
It's a sunny day in Leicester, outside of my front door.
The six example shots are taken at f/2.8 and f/8 at 100 ISO
It's nice and bright, so the slowest shutter speed was 1/200 and the fastest 1/1600
I've used a cable release and my most solid tripod.
The camera is levelled, so the various vertical lines in the picture give a good feel for any distortions in normal photography.
I know some of the 'sharpness fans' would insist on using mirror lock-up as well, but life is sometimes just too short...
I use a tripod for my architectural/interior work, but rarely ever have one with me when I'm doing landscape print work. I'd have to check, but I believe there are only two shots in the 350+ in the gallery on this site where I used a tripod ;-)
- This article tries to give a bit of a feel for using the old lens rather than any detailed optical analysis - and when it comes down to it (IMHO) photography is about actually taking photos ;-) I'd suggest doing some quick tests like this for any new lens you try out, just to get a feel for what differences it might offer.
I've used liveview to focus on the brickwork next to the red door over the road.
If you move your mouse over the images, you can see the improvement at f/8 compared to f/2.8
Note the vignetting and lower contrast at f/2.8
Some vignetting, but the lens is noticeably more contasty.
Note that the field of view is slightly different - the camera EXIF data says 20mm was the focal length for the Canon...
I've used the camera white balance in Adobe Camera Raw, to convert the RAW files.
There was a slight difference in colour, but hardly enough to show meaningfully in small compressed, non colour managed web images like these here.
Next, the centre of the frame - Flektogon.
and Canon 16-35
The corners show the biggest difference (and also why I tend to use the 16-35 at ~f/8 for landscape work.)
So, I get a feel for how the low contrast/vignetting of the Flektogon gives a different look to images.
Depending on what I was taking the pictures for, this may be important. Given my general dislike for tripods, you'll probably guess that ultimate sharpness is not always the key factor in deciding whether I like the results of my photography. Other photographers may take a different approach ;-)
I find it helpful too, to know what sorts of options I've got in processing my camera RAW files.
I'll normally use ACR in Photoshop.
For some work though, I choose to use a RAW converter such as DxO Optics Pro. It works best for lens/camera combinations that are fully supported, but offers conversions whatever lens you are using.
- Note - I've a full review of the current version of DxO
The image below (f/8) shows it's slightly improved sharpness and contrast when you fine tune the settings.
More noticeable in the corners where I've tuned out most of the chromatic aberration.
You can do this in ACR as well
The real benefits come with a supported lens, such as the 16-35 (at f/8 again) - not bad for the corner of the frame.
Just a few quick tests, but I think I was most surprised by how soft the image was at f/2.8, and how much it improved at f/8.
A few other quick tests showed that even at f/5.6 it was considerably better than at f/2.8.
Since I get bored easily, you'll have to search out some of the more detailed tests of the Flektogon if you -really- have to see lens test charts and the like.
The picture to the right (@f/8) was taken of a brilliantly coloured flower in my conservatory.
The detail below looks pretty good to me, particularly the smooth out of focus areas.
The lens focuses down to 20cm or so.
I've never used a crop sensor camera, but the x1.6 crop from a 50D/500D takes the equivalent focal length to 32mm, so although you just use the sharper parts of the lens image circle, 32mm is not 'wide' in my books.
However, if I'd just got a 5D or original 1Ds and didn't have the cash to get all new Canon 'L' glass, it would make a good wide angle lens for landscape use. You'd need to be careful with the post processing to get the best out of it.
Even at f/2.8 the images are very usable, although a focusing screen designed for manual focus or an adapter with AF confirmation would be a great help.
One thing I did notice when focusing the Flektogon with liveview, was that the distance reading on the lens scale was slightly too low.
This suggests that the lens is fractionally too close to the camera image plane.
I was able to calibrate the distance scale by setting the lens at infinity and then focus the image (of something a long way away) by slowly unscrewing the lens from the adapter. The error is only a fraction of a millimetre but can affect image quality.
Once I know the amount to unscrew, I can create a shim washer to keep the lens in the correct position.
I suppose the proper way would be to make something out of thin brass, but I just used very thin card, since it took less than a quarter turn to get the scale reading correctly.
Once I've got a feeling for what a lens works like, it's worth remembering that I've put it there to take photos with ;-)
It's lost a bit of crispness in reducing it to fit on the web page, but gives a nice feel for what the lens can do.
Would I use this lens very much? Seems perfectly OK for some pictures...
Probably not though, given I've got the Canon 16-35 2.8L :-) I've had the 16-35 for several years now and have found that on my 1Ds and then 1Ds3 it's a very fine lens - more than adequate for much of my work, when images are processed carefully with software such as DxO.
Having used manual focus regularly until well into this century I didn't have any issues with using the lens, although if you've only used AF before, then it might take some getting used to.
Also, you will forget to stop the lens down sometimes.
Pre-setting the focus distance and aperture and learning about hyperfocal distances is a useful lesson for any photographer. I'd happily recommend a period getting the best out of a lens like this on a DSLR as an excellent way to improve almost anyone's skills.
It's no harm either having to move to change framing rather than just tweak the zoom a bit...
I may use expensive AF zooms and primes for my paying work, where real image quality can count, but I still enjoy the change in how you think about photography, when you turn off 'easy mode' for a bit.
For something even more odd, attached to a DSLR, see my view camera adapter.
Thank you for supporting our site.
The articles and reviews are written in my spare time - I really do appreciate all the people who have taken the time to write to me to say when they have been useful.
Could you help? -- I'm determined to keep this site 100% free, but if you'd like to contribute at no extra cost to yourself then just use one of my links to visit an Amazon site or other supplier when you want to buy something.
If you follow a link below and then buy absolutely anything (not even camera related) we get a small commission
Amazon UK / Amazon France / Amazon Germany | Amazon USA / Amazon Canada / Amazon Italy | B&H | Adorama | Macphun | Topaz | Wex (UK)
(Other ways to help the site)
Just found the site via the rumours pages? - please do have a look round the articles and reviews, since they are far more important to me, in helping people get more out of their photography.
Thanks again - Keith and Karen at Northlight Images
An old lens design that's a bit soft at full aperture but gives surprisingly good results at smaller apertures, with sufficient care in image processing.
Excellent for experimenting with wide angle and full frame on a budget.
There are lots of cheap old M42 lenses about - get an adapter and give some of them a new lease of life.
Just remember that (IMHO) it's about actually taking photos not just the techy stuff ;-)
Keith is always happy to discuss matters raised in his articles. You can Email Us
Northlight Images prides itself on its independence when giving advice. We do not sell hardware or software and have no direct commercial links with any of the software or hardware vendors that may be mentioned here. See our Review Policy for more information.
Our reviews never recommend the 'best product' for you - see why this matters at:
Why we never recommend the best
You can search all the many hundreds of articles and reviews on the site for more information
Have you found an article on the site useful or helpful?
If so, please consider sharing a link to the article or mentioning it on a forum or blog - Thanks to everyone who's helped the site become better known.
Explore our site... Digital Black and White photography and printing - some of Keiths thoughts, techniques and tips for those interested in a digital approach to black and white. There are many hundreds of entirely free articles and reviews on the site. New site content appears on the News, articles and reviews page.
Northlight Images is based in Leicester in the UK and supplies Commercial Photography services.
Visiting Leicester? - see hundreds of Keith Cooper's local photos at our Leicester Photos site
Commercial Photography - UK Architectural Photography services - Industrial - Print Gallery - Landscape Photographer
Photography Training - Digital Black and White - Colour Management
Latest articles, reviews and blog - Canon Rumours - Contact Us