Upload & Sell: On
Aaron D wrote:
Quick question, and I know the real answer to this (buy a real lens), but I'd like some info...
What about a high quality, wide angle converter / add-on to put on my Chinon 50/1.9? How much light loss could I expect? Would it be anything like using one of Canon's teleconverters? Because right now, since I need to use an adapter for an older mf lens anyways, I'm strongly leaning towards just getting a used Nikon 38/1.8 DX. In this price range, the optics are bound to be better than any older alt mf lens I can find for...Show more →
Just because the Nikon is newer does not mean that it is better optical quality. For one thing, keep in mind any lenses that is adpated to Canon will mean you are using manual focus. Manual focus, IMO, is much better on a lens designed for manual focus than on one designed for autofocus. Also keep in mind that this Nikon lens does not have an aperture ring, so you will need an adapter that allows control of the aperture. I think you will find that these are not cheap. The Nikon lens is a good lens and I think a great deal on a NIkon camera, but, IMO, not the best choice for a Canon camera. If f/2 is acceptable, then I would pick the Olympus OM 28 f/2, or the 35 f/2, or the Pentax K mount (first K Mount, M series or A series) 28 f/2, or 35 f/2, or the Minolta 35 f/1.8 that I mentioned earlier. The Kiron/Vivitar is obviously your best low cost option and is also a good lens. I would go with any of these over the Nikon and the high priced adapter it would require. They are made for manual focus and newer is not always better. This older lenses have very nice rendering. The newer lens with have two advantages: better coatings to resist flare and a more circular aperture which makes more pleasant out of focus highlights when the lens is stopped down. The older lenses, however, are more rugged made for manual focus, and have unique looks. So there is lots of choice. My advice and take some time and do a bit more investigation.