I have a question for anyone who has used the Zeiss Jena 20mm (either the 2.8 or 4): I would very much like to come up with a something in the super wide angle realm that is better than my 17-40L, but doesn't cost an arm and a leg--would the Zeiss Jena 20mm be an upgrade? This is for full frame, I am currently using a 5d mk II. The 17-40L is a nice lens, but I would like to do a little better. The 21mm Distagon is way out of my price range at this point, but I see some of these Zeiss Jena 20mm lenses going for $150 or less. Also, if it would be worth buying one, does anyone have a recommendation on the 2.8 vs. the 4? Thank you.
I hear the 20mm f/3.5 Nikkor is rather good. I haven't used the Zeiss 20's or the Nikkor though so my opinion might be invalid. What kind of shooting? Wide open? Or stopped down to f/8 or smaller for landscape?
EDIT: There is also the 20/4 nikkor AI but I can't find any tests of it in my brief searching.
Thanks--well, stopped down shooting, f8, also sometimes f11. Mostly in interior spaces, medium to low light. On a tripod. Speed of the lens is not real important to me, overall image quality and sharpness/resolution from corner to corner are what I am looking for. The 17-40L is a nice lens, but I am hoping that I might be able to do a bit better. But like I said, price is definitely a consideration.
I had both a 17-40L, and a Flektogon 20/2.8 MC (which I still have; never got around to listing it). I found that the Flektogon was a tad better, but not enough to carry two lenses, and the flexibility of the zoom kept me using that. I didn't test them against each other at f/8, but if as someone else said, it is very good at f/8, then I suppose the improvement lasts that far into the aperture range.
I think you should rather save your money for a *real* improvement, like the Contax 21 or the Nikon 14-24. If it takes longer to get it, due to the higher cost, then so be it, but in my experience, the intermediate steps can vary, but in the end, you will end up with the same lens. Buying many experimental lenses in between just increases the ultimate cost.
If I can't talk you out of it, and you are interested in my Zeiss-Jena, drop me an email.
Btw, I sold my 5D and bought an M8, so I cannot provide comparison shots, sadly.
Carsten provides pretty reasonable advice as usual.
He makes 2 assumptions -- that you will eventually feel like spending $1500+ on one of the lenses he mentions, and that you don't really have a pressing need for a good 20-21mm lens now.
However, if these assumptions hold, then the CZJ 20/2.8 MC Flektogon isn't a bad choice -- especially if you can get one for $150. I've seen them sell for as much as $300. I have one and I like the way it renders. It's not the sharpest or most contrasty lens you will find, but it is better than most, has a pleasing bokeh, and is compact. At f8 or f11, I am sure you will be as pleased with this lens as any other -- perhaps more so because it's relatively cheap.
Also, don't go cheaper and get the CZJ 20/4.0 Flektogon -- not as sharp (especially at f4.0 and f5.6), if not as fast by an entire stop, contrast isn't as good, suffers from flare (not MC - multi-coated), and suffers from wider sample variation.
Yes, I agree on my end also--Carsten is absolutely correct about saving up and getting a real improvement. The ultimate lens I would like to get indeed is the 21 Distagon. The problem on my end, and the reason for my inquiry, is that I leave for Europe in a couple weeks and want to take a slightly better lens with me, and unless I win the lottery I am definitely not going to afford a top end lens by then. I will email him about the Flektogon.
I have a Flektogon 20mm f/4 (zebra). Got it cheap a while ago, and never used it much until recently. So far, I've found just one application for this lens. Stop it down to f/8, focus it at 1 meter and go shooting Lomo-style.
Seriously though, I don't think this lens will give you any edge over 17-40 quality-wise. My Canon 35mm f/2 is so much better than this Flektogon... But that's probably like comparing apples and oranges, right?
