Introduction
The Flektogon 35mm 2.4 is a highly regarded lens from Carl Zeiss Jena in the former German Democratic Rebpulic. It is the predecessor to the Distagon design still used for many modern lenses. But does this oldie still have a place on today’s digital cameras? Let us find out in this review.
Sample Images
Most of the sample images in this review can be found in full resolution here.
Version History
There is quite a bit of background information on the Flektogon series to be found here. The design principle of the Flektogon lenses is the same as what is today usually referred to as retrofocus design. Carl Zeiss Jena (Eastern Germany) and Angenieux were apparently the first to come up with such designs before it was adapted by Carl Zeiss Oberkochen (Western Germany) and named Distagon, a term which is still used today for Zeiss’ retrofocus lenses. There is an older version which only offers a maximum aperture of f/2.8 but I am looking at the faster f/2.4 version here which was apparently released in 1976.
Specifications
The Flektogon 2.4/35 reviewed here has the following specifications:
-
- Diameter: 64 mm
- Field of view: 63° (diagonally)
- Length: 48.5 mm (at infinity without adapter)
- Weight: 240g
- Filter Diameter: 49 mm
- Number of Aperture Blades: 6 (straight)
- Elements/Groups: 6/6
- Close Focusing Distance: 0.2 m
- Maximum Magnification: 1:2.4
- Mount: M42
This lens can only be bought used and prices start at $200/130€ on ebay.com/ebay.de (affiliate links).
Handling / Build Quality
This sample has quite a nice build quality. The focus ring has very nice resistance and travels ~280° from the minimum focus distance (0.2 m) to infinity. But as I am not sure about sample variation (rumors are that there is quite a bit) and this lens might have been serviced recently I cannot speak about CZJ lenses in general here.
The aperture ring has 1/2 stop click stops. It travels about 60° from f/2.4 to f/22. The click stops are a bit noisy, so this might not be your best choice if you are into video shooting.
The lens is made from a mix of metal and high quality plastics. All markings are painted and engraved.
Vignetting / Colorcast
The lens is rather small and wide open there is strong vignetting of roughly 2.2 EV, stopped down to f/2.8 vignetting improves to still rather strong 1.9 EV, at f/4.0 it is 1.4 EV and at f/8.0 still 1.0 EV. This is comparable to other small 35mm lenses at shared apertures.
I did see a very slight green color cast in the extreme corners on my A7rII.
Sharpness
infinity
Good news is the lens barely has any focus shift issues. The center is a bit soft at f/2.4 and f/2.8 but improves significantly at f/4.0, same is true for the midframe.
The corners look best at f/11, but I would rather use f/8.0 because otherwise center and midframe suffer a bit due to diffraction.
close (0.20m), center
100% crops from center, A7rII
The performance at the minimum focus distance in the center is really astonishing. Even wide open there is nothing to complain about. There is also pretty much no focus shift, which is present on so many other fast 35mm lenses.
close (0.20m), midframe
100% crops from midframe, A7rII
Unfortunately already in the midframe performance ain’t that great anymore. There is lots of astigmatism and it takes stopping down to f/5.6 to get okay performance in the thirds of the frame. Still, f/2.4 in the center looks better than f/5.6 in the midframe.
Flare resistance
Flare resistance stopped down is quite good for such an old lens. While there is a loss of contrast, ghosting is not really an issue. Wide open the situation is quite different, at f/2.4 you can catch really bad artifacts across most of the frame. Luckily stopping down to f/2.8 already solves this issue.
Unlike many other lenses this one has barely any issues with the sun in one of the corners, so a hood won’t be of much use I guess.
Coma
As was to be expected coma performance wide open isn’t great but already quite good at f/4.0. Still I have seen much worse from older lenses like this and for web usage you could even use it for handheld wide open cityscape shooting during blue hour without completely ruining the shot.
100% crops from extreme corner, A7rII
Distortion
Whilst not as bad as the Voigtlander 35mm 1.4 Nokton E classic there is distinct barrel distortion which you will want to correct for shots with straight lines running near the borders. At least it is not wavy so you can correct it rather easily by plugging in +8 in Lightroom or Photoshop.
Bokeh
Bokeh is a subjective matter, yet many people claim this lens has rather good rendering in that regard, so I will go a bit more into detail here.
In general I think the bokeh is not that bad, as the transition zone is comparably smooth for a 35mm lens. Yet you have to be a bit careful with the background, especially tree branches can show double edged structures and at certain distances the corners will be much less out of focus compared to center and midframe.
Many people like to use fast 35mm lenses for environmental portraits. With a maximum aperture of f/2.4 this works good for head shots and reasonably well for half body portraits. For full body shots on the other hand f/2.4 is not enough and the background will only show marginal blur.
Cat’s eyes towards the corners are not that much pronounced, but outlining gets strongers:
In real world shots this translates to more nervous bokeh in the corners, actually comparable to using wide angle rangefinder lenses on Sony cameras:
You can also encounter slightly ninjastar-shaped highlights, but luckily only at f/2.8, so this can easily be avoided:
I did a thorough comparison of four other 35mm lenses in my 35mm comparison and just lately reviewed the Voigtlander Nokton 35mm 1.4 FE Classic. I enjoy this Flektogon’s bokeh more than that of the Loxia 35mm 2.0 or the aforementioned 35mm 1.4 Classic but not as much as the Voigtlander 1.7/35’s or the ZM 1.4/35’s.
Sunstars
With 6 rather straight blades you don’t get overly great sunstars. Have a look at our Best lenses for Sunstars article if you want to know more about this.
Chromatic aberration
lateral
Sony A7rII | Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 35mm f/2.4 | f/16 | 100% crop from border region
There are some lateral CA visible but as usual they can easily be corrected using e.g. Lightroom.
longitudinal
In close up scenarios the longitudinal CA are corrected pretty well, it is actually hard to spot any color fringing at all.
In real world shots they are visible but rather unobstrusive as well, you really have to look for them:
Alternatives
Zeiss Loxia 35mm 2.0:
This lens based on an older rangefinder design. I think the Loxia’s Bokeh is actually worse and corner as well as coma performance at f/2.0 to f/2.8 isn’t great either. Still, almost no distortion and a really great landscape and architecture lens at f/8.0.
If you are looking for a compact manual 35mm lens with mainly stopped down shooting in mind I think this is the better choice, get a used one as new they are a bit too expensive.
Voigtlander Ultron 1.7/35:
A very good performer for a decent price. A modern lens which is a great performer and offers the smoothest bokeh of all small 35mm lenses. If you want to make the best of it on your Sony camera get an Optosigma 5m PCX filter.
Voigtlander Nokton 1.2/40 E:
This is the modern interpretation of very fast yet still decently compact wide angle lens. While it isn’t a perfect lens I think it is optically better in every regard.
Zeiss ZM 35mm 1.4 T* Distagon:
This is Zeiss’ most recent rangefinder lens and while there is so much to like it also suffers from midzone dip on the Sony cameras and as there is the Voigtlander Ultron 1.7/35 I find it hard to recommend.
Sony/Zeiss FE 35mm 2.8 ZA:
Worse minimum focus distance, worse vignetting, half a stop slower. Should be much better in terms of sharpness, flare resistance and coma correction.
Other 35 mm SLR legacy lenses:
We haven’t reviewed many of these. Most will have a worse minimum focus distance, but without a direct comparison it is hard to compare bokeh, flare resistance and across frame sharpness. You may want to have a look at our Canon FD 35 mm comparison nevertheless.
Conclusion
good
|
average
|
not good
|
I have reviewed lenses with barely any flaws which I still didn’t really enjoy using. Shooting with this lens – despite it’s shortcomings – I actually did enjoy: build quality, handling and size are great, the minimum focus distance allows for interesting shots, bokeh is quite good (especially for an old 35mm lens, but look for foliage in the corners) and it is sufficiently sharp and contrasty stopped down.
So if you are looking for an interesting 35mm lens or something wider to complement your Jupiter-9 85mm 2.0 this one might be worth a look.
A remake of this lens I would rather welcome than the Voigtlander 35mm 1.4 Nokton E Classic. While you can argue both have character (uncorrected aberrations) this one has a character I like and that doesn’t really get in the way of producing nice images.
This lens can only be bought used and prices start at $200/130€ on ebay.com/ebay.de (affiliate links).
Sample Images
Most of the sample images in this review can be found in full resolution here.
Further Reading
- Sony FE lenses: Our comprehensive and independent guide
- Voigtlander 40mm 1.2 Nokton Review
- 35mm comparison: Zeiss, Leica, Voigtlander
- Tripods for mirrorless cameras
Support Us
Did you find this article useful or just liked reading it? Treat us to a coffee!
via Paypal
This site contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase using any of the links marked as affiliate links, I may receive a small commission at no additional cost to you. This helps support the creation of future content.
Latest posts by BastianK (see all)
- Review: Zeiss Otus 28mm 1.4 Apo Distagon - December 24, 2024
- Leica M to Sony E Close Focus Adapters - December 21, 2024
- Analogue Adventures – Part 37: Santa Color 100 - December 15, 2024
Hello,
great review!
Colors remember me a lot the ones obtaining utilizing the Sony FE lenses…
Regards
I’m surprised this lens has plastic parts; I would have thought it was too old for that.
Great review!
One the thing to note regarding build quality. This lens seems to be very susceptible to decentering (if that’s the correct word, I don’t know). On my copy one side of the frame is significantly less sharp than the other and it’s very difficult to adjust without proper equipment (if I remember correctly the front element must be adjusted). Maybe I was just unlucky and got a rare bad copy but it really was bad and it was a pain to fix.
Here you can see how to adjust the front element:
https://youtu.be/w1J46rZSa0o
Hi Bastian,
interesting review. Too bad you weren’t able to compare to the CY Zeiss Distagon 2.8/35
Should you be interested in that lens (or other CY Zeiss lenses) for review purposes, we could take advantage of the fact that we both seem to be from the Wiesbaden area.
All the best
I did only spend a weekend in Wiesbaden, but thanks for the offer 🙂
Other CZJ review ideas 🙂
135/3.5 Sonnar
50 /1.8 Pancolar (regular 6 blade and the very sharp 8 blade zebra with tons of ThO2)
and then the Stasi-lenses SO 3.1, 3.2, 3.3…
Anyhow, I used to own a couple of copies of the 35/2.4 – one APS-C scope with 24MP it was quite nice indeed. Very easy to CLA too like most MC jenas. Nice build quality, though with a couple of plastic parts inside.
Due to copy variation I’d buy a copy with some wear and tear in appearance – or a PB-mount version as they tend to be cheaper.
About the review: the click noise etc. depends largely on wear&tear and CLA – also if I recall right, eliminating click stops should be easy.
radioactivity of such levels are not harmful for health at all. Less panic please…
Hey Philip,
in the comparison post you wrote about the A7 and the A7 II, at the end you said that you returned the A7 II you tested and you want to stick with the A7.
As I’ve seen in recent posts from you, you’re now calling an A7 II your own.
I’m now going for the step from the NEX Series to the Alpha Series and im not sure if I should choose the A7 or the A7 II.
Can you write something about your switch from the A7 to the A7 II? Would be really helpful for me. 🙂
Best regards, Sascha
The short version is that my a7 developed a defect, so I didn’t trust it any more and had to replace it. Since the price difference had decreased and I had a bit more money available I decided not to buy a new a7 but go for the a7II. At them moment prices for the a7II are really down because people replace it with the a7III so unless money is really tight I would recommend to get the a7II which is without a question the better camera.
Thanks a lot for your explanation!
Do you think it makes sense to buy the A7 II used for around 850€ (without lenses) instead of spending 1200€ for a new one, or do you see any risks?
Thanks again for your reply 🙂
At that price I would buy used since unlike the a7 it doesn’t have any real issues I know of.
Can you please tell who was the sculptor of that wonderful Greek-looking statue . . . . either of a god or goddess or a soldier? It is so beautiful. Thank you.
This lens can adapt at mirror less camera?
Yes
hi Bastian,
enjoyed the review, as I am considering a 35/40mm manual lens fod some time now I must admit this Flektogon was on my radar, but as you I too read about sample variation of this lens whicb allway kinda turns me away from it… currently I am trying to find any usefull reviews of CV 2.4/35mm color skopar but not having much luck, do you perhaps have any information/opinion on the color skopar?
Keep up the good work, it’s much appreciated… 🙂
Cheers A.
Unfortunately I don’t, but I wasn’t too happy with the Color Skopars 50mm 2.5 and 21mm 4.0, as both were lacking contrast quite a bit.
thanks for the reply, I guess the search continues…
cheers, A.
Great review :)!
And you tested a good copy of the lens. There are many decentered copies out there. There are only a few people in the world now that can fix that.
I have this lens from a long time and I quite like it. It is a very versatile tool.
Hi, I adapted the Carl Zeiss Jena Prakticar 20 2.8 to sony and seems the edge need to be fixed with pcx filter. do you have any suggestion what kind of pcx filter fit that lens?
I am not sure the image quality near the edge is any good with this lens.
Many of those old wide angle lenses are decentered.
So I doubt getting a PCX filter will help or make sense.
I am thinking of picking one of these up for my a7ii. Can you recommend an adapter?
K&F worked fine for me.
Thanks, that was the one I was thinking. Cheers.
Hey! Nice review! Are there any different mounts on this lense? If found some with m42 and some with pratica b bajonett? is there any difference between those lenses then?
This lens was produced for different mounts, I guess they are optically the same, but I cannot guarantee as I only tried an M42 one.
How would you compare to Pentax 28 3.5 K mount? The way the Pentax renders blue skies is amazing. And so sharp.
But is this more of a bokeh and all around lens?
An nice review which sums up well the pros and cons of the Flektogon 35/2.4.
Some users have noticed that it is difficult to judge focus accurately in the range 3m to infinity. Even a very small turn of the focussing ring covers a considerable distance in this range. In landscapes, the area in focus is sometimes rather short of infinity. Sometimes the lens reaches infinity just before the hard stop. Some lenses do not reach infinity. This has been blamed variously on too thick a M42 to bayonet adapter, or on loose elements caused by inexpert servicing before online sale.
A comparison with an SMC Pentax-M 35/2 showed that the Pentax reached infinity at the hard stop and landscape shooting became easier. Though introduced just a few years after the Flektogon, it controlled flare from the peripheral light better than the German lens. It appeared to sharper than the Flektogon at all stops.
I’ve found this lens to be razor, razor sharp wide open at 2.4, probably one of the sharpest vintage lenses I own (CZJ, Nikkors, Tokinas, Soviet, still waiting for Contax:) However, I do not use it for photography, I use it on my BMPCC4K with Metabones Speedbooster XL, which should improve sharpness and since it is 1,19x crop the edges and borders are great. With fantastic character and mindblowing close focusing, actually going to 19cm, this lens is a real gem for filmmaking.
just got this lens because of your review and it takes beautiful pictures 🙂 I’m pretty sure I used your affiliate link too. I only had a question about infinity focusing. I got a Gobe practika to e mount adapter and I am used to lenses focusing a little bit beyond infinity but i’ve noticed that my infinity sharpness is rather unimpressive and I must focus it all the way to get the best infinity sharpness. This makes me think that maybe the adapter is too thick. Do you have any experience with these adapters and this issue?
Gobe is not an adapter brand I am usually using.
One possibility is that the adapter is too thick, another one that the lens has once been cleaned/dismantled and not properly adjusted afterwards.
hmmm I wonder if it would be a bad idea to try to fix it at home haha lmk if you have any resources. thanks agian
The colours in your examples sure look very nice. Did you manipulate them in any siginificant way, or do they represent your camera’s output when the Flektogon is attached?
The test images are unedited, some of the samples may be edited, but not regarding colors here.
Excellent, thank you.
I have this lens and adapting it with K&F Concept M42-E adapter. I have noticed a problem with sharpness on long distance focus, and the focus to infinity is all wrong so I just have to use the magnifying option on my Sony A7III. I am wondering if there are any better adapters as quite a large number of users are having the same issues. My copy also had stuck aperture blades, and I had it cleaned. Right now, it seems I have been subject to all possible faults of this lens, and I must admit I lost a bit heart to it. Already thinking of selling it – I guess it’s easier to have a native lens so I am considering buying a Voigtlander so I can focus on photography and not on gear issues.
Probably a good idea.
A lot of these old lenses have been badly serviced.