NEW Lens V. VINTAGE Lens! Zeiss Sonnar 35mm f2.8 FE and CZJ Flektogon 35mm f2.4 Reviewed And Tested! 

I think that's a very nice idea to compare side by side the old vintage lenses and modern ones. I would love to see more.

There is something magical in the way the CZJ renders - everything seems to be in balance, whereas the sharpness of the ZS, while at first glance catches my attention, I find it ultimately less satisfying. It could also be related to how the lenses render out of focus areas, the CZJ somehow feels to convey more depth to my eyes. Having said all that Nigel - keep both!

Great review of what seem to be 2 great lenses. I think this channel is about trying to achieve something with old equipment that cannot be easily be achieved with today’s latest and greatest. The pictures from the modern lens are awesome in their punching power, helped a lot by perfect focus every time, something definitely not guaranteed in manually focused hand held pictures. I get a similar difference between my Sigma Art zoom and my 40 year old Nikkor primes, if time is short and shooting has to be fast and right every time, then the newer lens gets the job, but if not so urgent, there’s time to allow the old timers to make a very pleasant picture that actually captures reality in a less exaggerated and gentler fashion than it’s super computer designed counterparts

Keep them both. When you are feeling artistic, use the Flektogon. When you just want a bang on great photo with a more modern feel, use the Sonnar.

I love the Sonnar 35 f2.8, it is my always on lens on A7 II since years. I use it for nearly everything, landscape, street, portrait, travel.

I‘d definitely go for the CZJ lens. CZJ lenses are fabulous, especially when considering their age. I got a Tessar from the sixties and the sharpness is absolutely impressive.

Keep them both. The Sonnar 35mm was the first expensive lens I bought for my A7 along with the Sonnar 55mm f1.8. There are a lot of E-mount 35mm lenses that get a lot more press but I can't bear to give up what I consider to be the best walk around lens ever.

Hello Nigel, A superb review, as always. It would definitely be the CZJ lens for me, sharpness is not everything in an image, as you have mentioned in your previous reviews, and I think the mere fact that the Flektogon is comparing very favourably with a lens so much more modern, tells us all we need to know about this wonderful old optic. I felt that the images from the Flektogon were more pleasing to the eye overall. I also cannot help wondering how well. or not, the auto focus, and 'fly by wire' focussing systems are going to be operating 40 years from now!.

I have the Flektogon and prefer it over the modern Sonnar....because I find very characterful especially on film, but it still shows through on the Sony. Kudos to Jena.

You should be able to turn off that automatic 'zooming in' when manual focusing somewhere in the menus. It should be called 'focus assist', or 'MF assist', or something like that. I like that feature in some scenarios (for example when doing wide open portraits), but I find it more annoying than helpful in most circumstances, so I mostly turn it off.

CZJ for me every time. Modern Zeiss lenses are so precise these days they are a bit too clinical. They produce outstanding images, but the character has been polished out of them.Those little imperfections that the scientists at Zeiss in Oberkochen during the cold war years slowly and methodically removed by refining the polishing and coating processes. A 1960's Flektogon or a Pancolar will still produce beautiful images today, but they have their character intact.

I am not a fan of current Zeiss lenses. Being a working photographer for a bit over fifty years I think of Zeiss lenses as having a fine McIntosh stereo amplifier and turning the treble up full. For a pittance of the cost, TTArtisan lenses have really impressed me. So much in fact I have sold several Leica lenses I've had for decades at an obscene profit. Give me a vintage Jena Zeiss lens every time. The new 7Artisan 50mm f2 lens is a bargain masterpiece. Age has it's gifts, arthritis and knowledge.

Keep both 😊 Though I prefer the CZJ, has more personality to it

I have now two 35mm Lenses for Sony, the first I got is the excellent Voigtländer APO-Lanthar 35mm 2.0 Aspherical which have outstanding optical image performance, second to none ! The second 35mm I just got used for US$215 is the Sony Carl Zeiss Sonnar 35mm 2.8 ZA which is so light and compact that you can use it as a Camera body cap, always mounted and ready to go, so I am happy with both my 35mm Lenses.

A few months ago i bought a SONY A6300 and i have discovered your youtube channel as i was searching for some vintage lenses and first of all i would like to say thank you for all your great videos and all the important informations about photography, vintage lenses and so on. Today i have a problem, i bought a Helios 44M-4 lense with an aperture blade broken, one of the two pins is missing. So i have a question, do you know where can i find an aperture blade to fix this problem ? i am from france.

I'm sure you've made your choice by now. If I had to choose one, I'd go with the CZJ. In fact, that's what I'm shopping for now. The Flektogon has a bit more character, and the short minimum focusing distance is a big selling point for me. And it's less expensive! If I want to punch up colors a bit more, either globally or selectively, I can do it in post. I used this beautiful lens on an APS-C camera, about 15 years ago, and have regretted selling it from the moment I received the first auction bid. The Pictorialism Movement (ca. 1885-1915) wanted a more painterly effect in their photography. They thought lenses of *that* time were too sharp and lacked character.

I like my vintage Carl Zeiss Distagon 2,8/35mm made in West Germany. Shoots very nice pictures on modern digital cameras.

Loved this comparison! I love the character of the vintage lens.

i love my vintage lenses for their render, as these two are so closely matched in render, esp the bokeh being similar i would say go for the one with the auto focus they are both outside of my preferred ƒ stop that being ƒ1.8 for the vintages like the takumars and pentacons

No contest for me: keep the CZJ!

You really have the most positive attitude on RU-vid

I would keep the CZJ. A bit more versatile because of less contrast and more aperture choices for vignetting. A wedding photog might benefit from autofocus on the Sonnar but otherwise I think the CZJ is a winner. 😀 Thanks as always for the superb and exhaustive video.

Sharpness on different copies of vintage lenses may be more or less. I had 3 CZ Flek’s and the other two were rubbish compared with this one at sharpness and flare. The 35mm f/2,8 T* lacks character in my opinion and the corners are just a no go (at least for me). Can’t believe that 50 years passed and the older one performs better (Again in my opinion) Great review you made here! 🌱

Keep em both. Small enough to pack both. The autofocus fir when you are not worried about focusing ant the manual one when manual focus is critical. I’ve got the Sony 35 but don’t see many Flecktogons over here in the USA.

I think i prefer the old school but in the end it comes down to personnel taste. Speaking of old school you looked to be sat in a lovely old school car, I'd love to know what it is. Cheers, keep up the great vids....👍

Great review, as always. I must declare my bias here because I have the CZJ Flektogon already, and love the results it helps me produce with my Fuji X cameras, and my Spotmatic F. My sense is that you also lean towards the Flek.

Hello, Nigel, and thanks for your nice reviews - one of them made me a Hexanons fan :) As for the comparison, I would definitely keep the Flektogon, without any doubts.

more of this format please!

For me size and wheight are essencial factors since Photoshop has plenty of tools to modify a raw file. So than I would keep the Sonnar

I like the older lens images more but both old and new very good I would choose the older lens myself.........

Maybe an irrelevant answer after 2y, but as long as you have a Sony camera, it makes all sense to keep that little jewel Zeis 2.8. Sell it if ever change systems. As far as the CZJ, it’s hard to justify parting with it… You’ll always be able to use it regardless of camera system.

What a quandary to be in, Nigel. On the one hand, an old favourite, a lens that you have grown to love and understand all its little foibles. On the other hand, a modern, brash, Johnny-come-lately of a lens, sharper than a black market spiv, more contrast than chalk and cheese. How do you decide? Well, for me I would hang onto the Flektogon. The Sonnar is, at the moment, the more expensive lens, but they are still making them, if you want one all you have to do is smack your £350 on the counter and you can get one. The price of the Sonnar will almost certainly drop below that of the Flektogon, either by depreciation or by the Flek increasing in price, because they aren't making them any more. But there is one massive plus point, for me, that rules in favour of the Flektogon. You can use it on your latest all-singing, all-dancing, modern digital camera with the addition of a simple adapter, but more importantly, you can use it natively on the myriad of M42 bodies and shoot film! Let's see the Sonnar perform that trick. The Flek will only appreciate in value (remember, they don't make them any more) and demand is always going to be out there, Let's see if there's the same clamour for the Sonnar in a couple of years. Sorry this was a bit long winded, but I wanted to show my thoughts as to why I made the choice that I did. Regards George

I have two of the Zeiss Sonnar for my Leicas. They are unique lenses and a 1930's design which has been technically upgraded but still has the character of vintage lenses. They render in a way that is unique and more characteristic of lenses from the past. .

A mistake in your your title says "Zeiss Sonnar 35mm f2.4 FE"

I prefer the images made by the Sony Sonnar 35mm f/2.8, but do not sell the other lens. The vignetting with the Sonnar can be corrected in post if you find it objectionable. See Brian Smith's images of Haiti, all shot with the Sonnar 35mm f/2.8. Brian won a Pulitzer Prize for photojournalism and is an outstanding photographer.

Love your videos, I've learned so much from watching them! I recently purchased a Helios 44-2 and when adapted to Pentax K mount on my Vivitar V335, I have issues focusing to infinity. I don't have any m42 screw mount slr's so I am unsure if this is due to the adaptor or the lens. Would you happen to know which it might be?

Enjoyable video Nigel, but what a can of worms you are opening :-) I remember a video of yours comparing the Sony kit zoom with a vintage lens or lenses, I can't remember, but the Sony kit zoom had more contrast and sharpness. From the point of view of showing someone that while modern lens performance is superb, fantastic characterful images can be made with a vintage lens. Neither is 'better'. I am in Greece at the moment with my Sony A7iii, mostly shooting with an amazing Tamron 'travel zoom', but I also have my much loved CZJ Flektogon here and will occasionally take that out for a walk as it has a look that is completely different to the modern stuff. I use the Flek, by the way from f2.4 to f9.0, not just for wide open. I shot a crowd watching an entertainer in Spain last year, the resolution of the Flek around f8 of the sea of faces was amazing. I will never sell my Flektogon, but neither would I give up modern AF!

Keep both

Very nice video again, Nigel, you're spoiling us! I'd probably prefer the czj, but kept them both, for the size of the sonnar, if it makes the Sony fit in a pocket. There are so many wonderful 35s, I haven't tried those. A comparison with my very favourite 35, the FD 2.0, or my second, the Nikkor 35 2.0 would be very interesting as well. My best bang for the buck, is the Minolta Rokkor 2.8, a good lens for small money.

I think you should keep the Flek. Besides it having more character, by the moment the flexible printed circuits and motors in the Sonnar guts get tired (which could be in not much time depending on the hours you put on it, the weather conditions and a bit of -bad- luck), the Flek would only need just a CLA to keep delivering.

Super video. Before just I watched, I had buyed new one. Thanks alot.

Focus by wire gives me uneasy feeling when I use it. I had a Fuji one and sold it after a week of owning it. I am too old school.

Keep them both.

In comparison with other lenses of its time the CZJ Flek is one of the best. Besides, I have made some attempts to compare my Flek with Mir 37 b and in high contrast scenes Mir is pretty interesting.

Did you mention what body you're testing these with? Also, are the sample images SOOC? Just curious. Really appreciate your videos!

Keep both Nigel!

Love your videos, having shot film in the past, and currently looking for a 35mm having got the zeiss 21mm loxia, which i love, but i'm thinking the Voigtlander 35mm f2 Apo-Lanthar Lens might be my solution, so this content is most helpful , thanks, keep up the good work. ps your accent sounds like you're from Stockport, am i wrong ? , i only spent a year there.

I'm not sure which one you should keep, since I'm not you, but I love my CZJ flecktogon. The combination of a medium-wide 35mm focal length with a very short close focusing distance makes it a very versatile walking around lens, at least for the things I like to shoot. I did find your remarks about comparative sharpness interesting. My CZJ is, by turns, charming and maddening in this regard. Sometimes, it makes images sharp enough to cut yourself with, and sometimes they end up looking a little soft, no matter how carefully I focus. I assume this this will get better as I continue to work with the lens, but I did find it interesting that you found the CZJ could match the modern lens in sharpness, but not consistently.

Great review my friend...🤓♥️

I work with old lenses for my HDR work because they are of low contrast, and I have purposefully sought out lenses that have no coatings at all. A very good review, and no way would I ever buy any of these modern Zeiss lenses, they would be unusable for me.

The Loxia 35mm f2 is sharper than both and focuses closer, a wonderful lens. Probably the price of both of these though.

CZJ Flektogon 35mm f2.4 shots look more exposed, it is probable that the metering adds more light with this lens and that can also offset a little the perception of saturation : a lighter image feels less saturated. I think the old lens is letting more light, meaning the T stops must be closer to the F stops, than the modern light where it might be more a T3 lens. The higher exposure of the CZJ Flektogon 35mm f2.4 shots could also be a bias due to the less contrasty nature : if the highlight is dimmer, then the body will allow more exposure.

Thank you for the 35mm comparison Simon. I think you will hold on to the Flektogon, because of your old soul... happy hunting 🙋‍♂️📸

It would've been great to compare it to the Zeiss Biogon 35mm f2.8 from the Contax System, which is actually a soonar named Biogon 😊

I think that in your choice of lens I would suggest that you use only you can decide and that you can in deciding it’s a choice of what turns your clock so to speak, if you like high contrast, the background I did seem a little flat, contrast was a bit heavy and that, across-the-board I think the latter gave a better overall moody look and the former was a bit clinical for me, in photography it has to be that you have to get a feedback from it and I don’t know whether you’ve got that, certainly from the way you where commenting, I felt that you got more from the Flecktacon, than you did the former lens. Anyway thanks again you know it’s your time and I know it’s your pleasure, but you also give a lot of other people pleasure from your polite enthusiasm, so I’d like to thank you anyway. DG New Forest uk

Slightly off-topic: Could you tell us about your video setup on this clip?

Sonnar! Thank you for video!

As far back as I can remember you loved that vintage lens keep it as far as the new one goes yes better sharper and modern but I wonder if it will still be here in 40 + years lol

Keep the Sonnar and send the Jena Flektogon to me please ☝🏻😬. One day I will have a Flektogon, because personally I do not like to have high contrast images. I do like to have a wide range of colors or greytones in my images, without being too contrasty. At least on film, as I only shoot film for about 38 years now. So my choice would be definitely the Flektogon.....but it's a matter of taste. Sorry for my bad english and many greetings from Berlin! Denis

I remember my Zeiss primes for my Contax RTS II. If you shot chrome, you had a learning curve to go through. Very high contrast. Walks in a dappled sunlight forest were extremely challenging. I went back to my National Geographics to see what I could learn. I sold my Contax gear and went Nikon, thinking if that's what they use.... In terms of your Sony Focus Assist, with it's magnification, can you turn it off? You can on my Fuji body...

I’m shocked how much more vignette the Sonnar produces. Flektagon is much cleaner in the corners as well as looking more cinematic due to lower contrast - keeper!

I have the Zeiss 35mm f/2.8 ZM Biogon manual focus lens for my Leica (and fits my Sony with and adapter) it is one of the finest 35mm lenses I have ever used, bar none. Don't know anything about the Sonar though.

Keep Both 👍

Keep both 👍

The czj is more versatile as adaptable to other mirrorless systems. Keep them both!

Hello. Thank you once more for your review: I was looking for a very compact lens to use as every day tool on my old Sony 6300 and the newer 6700. It seems to me that the original lens shade though very compact, it doesn't really fend off stray light. Do you have any brand's name of a proper lens shade i could buy in Europe?

The resulta maybe similar.. but Sony lens only func on Sony E-Mount and CZJ You can use on Fuji canon Sony etc and vintage cameras... Keep two.. 😅

Beautiful review. Some Jena lenses you mention in your videos like pancolars are beautiful but at a cost of radiation. Kindly make a video on vintage radioactive and nonradioactive lenses.

I mean Flek is very good in shoting against light as compared to most of vintage lenses. Of course recent Zeiss T must be better.

Have you ever tried the kipon/iberit 35mm f2.4?

I'd have to ask whether you can really part with your beloved Flektogon in favour of a more modern lens? Some decisions are as much about heart over head?

keep the flektogon, its so easy to fix the "pop" in lightroom

That is a tough one, those colours are great ,but the corners , a bit more glass could have aimed for a bigger circle. But that would likely attract more flair and washout. Sharpness is kinda lost on me I have the lowest resolution a7s and double vision in both eyes. Having an autofocus option for when your in snappy mode is Handy, fbw vaigue manual focus is not something I enjoy. It's ultimately your choice, I'd suggest disregarding images removing the lens from the camera and seeing what feels better in the hand. When you said you'd expect modern lense design not to have dim corners I quite agree, do you think there's a better modern flek equivalent in this time where logos branding and marketing take priority over the actual product, I think there might be, maybe, possibly , hopefully. All they gotta do is make what the computer tells them to make, maybe the Samyang 35 mm F1.4 or the TTartisanAF 32mm F2.8 are ok or at least not terrible. I think the finite nature of the old glass should be considered, and you started the channel with it. although modern companies are manufacturing the same availability issue with limited runs and perpetual out of stock labels. Then 9 months later eBay is awash with them . Just bought myself a early hexanon 50 1.4 that's full of things , hopefully on closer inspection it will become obvious how to open it up.

I'd probably stick with the CZJ. I know the vignetting on the Sonnar would drive me barmy.

za 35mm 2.8 and 55mm 1.8 is outstanding lens.

Thank you - again a Nice video from you. 🙏 I would keep both. 😉 Never sell the Jena. You should try the Sony RX1. 👌

If I had both lenses, I would keep the new and sell the vintage. It wouldn't be easy to let go of a good copy of the CZJ... but that's my vote.

Keep the CZJ. You know you won't regret it.

The Flektogon is better suited for filming.

It would be worth comparing the Zeiss Sonnar T* 35mm f2.8 to the Zeiss Distagon T* 35mm f/2.8 C/Y

I love your videos. I think your saturation is too high. It might be my screen though.

14:09 - could the difference in depth of field and sharpness between 2.4 and 2.8 and sharpness be making some of the difference here? Perhaps comparing the Flektogon at 2.8 might give it more of a fighting chance.

Keep the Flektogon. The images seem to be more "real" as per the ivy image comparison. Bright and shiny is not always good!

Nigel, you should definitely sell your CZJ Flektogon lens (to me). 😁 Cheers, Chris.

I'd keep the Flek.

have you ever tried the kipon iberit 35mm f2.4 version of the zeiss flectakon?

The solution is always "keep both" :-)

Thx:)

I think you should send them both to me, and I'll test them out and make a decision for you- and I'll send back the better one. No? Oh alright then; it was worth a try. No, I think you should keep the Sonnar as while the Flektagon has the more interesting character, you've got a fair few characterful lenses.

CZJ - every day of the week. For my taste, anyway. The character is unbeatable.

The lightweight modern Sonnar is ideal for a compact gimbal, and the autofocus is often important, but it's overpriced. So is the new Sony 40mm f2.5.

Keep your old friend.

Great Contest, I.bought a xf23f2 for my Fuji and test it out against the CZJ Flektogon 35 2.4 and what is the end . I will sell the Fuji xf23f2 because not sharp for minimum distance and not worth for 300€

That cart looks like plush place to be....

Hi Zen, A question I just purchased a "Carl Zeiss Jena flektogon 35mm 2.8 silver version" and when stepped down to f16 the aperture does seem very open ( around 6mm) not quite the pinhole I would expect, is this expected or do you think there may be an issue with the aperture I know it's not easy without seeing it but anything would help. ta in advance keep up the good work love the videos

They both seems pretty nice lenses. If it were me, I'd probably keep both but if I had to choose, it would probably be the Flektogon. I've actually been thinking about doing a similar comparison between my CZJ Pancolar 50mm F1.8 to my modern Canon 50mm F1.8 STM (which I had first,) to see which one I'd rather carry around as my main nifty fifty. Both are razor sharp and have the same apertures so it would really come down to my preference on color, character, etc.

automatik magnify shouting manual is a settings in the camera and can be cancelled. , i think its called MF assist

You can't part with your favourite vintage lens. If you had something else to fill the hole it would leave in your vintage collection then maybe but you can't part with your fave's!

I think it's unfair to compare Older Lenses to new ones that were formulated to work with Film of their time, instead of Sensors like more modern ones!.. I still use my Flektogon 2.8-35mm Lens, and find it a very worthy Lens to have when Shooting Film!

This Soonar is one of the weaker lenses on the market (especially considering the price). Minolta MD (and later MC) 35mm 2.8 is sharper from wide open, which is objectively measured, and also with nicer colours and overall rendering (this is my humble, subjective opinion). There are many better options today, luckily. Of course, it's a decent lens, a good photographic tool, and I could recommend it for half its price or less.