p.1 #1 · Best Wide Angle M42 mount (without breaking the bank)
I'm new to alternative lenses. I've just aquired a Asahi SMC 55/1.8 and very excited to try it out. I have a 28mm 2.8 Vivitar that I'm actually surprised by. However, I shoot on a Rebel XTi so I'm trying to find something wider. Any recommendations for a quality wide angle....prob somewhere between 10-17mm. (and I am on a budget :-)
p.1 #2 · Best Wide Angle M42 mount (without breaking the bank)
Only M42 lens that wide I can think of off the top of my head was the 17mm Super Takumar fisheye. I can't think of any rectilinear lenses that wide in M42 at all...anyone else? If you do find one, it won't be cheap I'm afraid. 28mm was kind of the standard in that mount it seems. There are a few 24mm lenses, but again they aren't cheap. Lots of 28s out there though. I have a Super Tak 28/3.5 that's a good performer, and wasn't that expensive.
Anyone else?
p.1 #3 · Best Wide Angle M42 mount (without breaking the bank)
I once had a Tokina SL RMC 17/3.5 in M42 mount that was a pretty good performer on Pentax film bodies. The widest rectilinear M42 Takumar is the 20/4.5 Super-Takumar or SMC Takumar (see Asahi Optical Historical Club). The Tamron SP 17/3.5 Adaptall mount might be a good option, and you can also find Spiratone Pluracoat 18/3.5 and 20/2.8 YS mount lenses that can take a M42 adapter. They all have very good reputations, but I haven't tried them myself.
p.1 #4 · Best Wide Angle M42 mount (without breaking the bank)
Not 17mm, but worth taking a look at - Carl Zeiss Jena MC Flektogon 20mm f/2.8 or a slower/older version 20mm f/4. The 20/2.8 is not a budget lens - goes for about $250 these days. The 20/4 goes for about $150.
p.1 #5 · Best Wide Angle M42 mount (without breaking the bank)
I had the 20 2.8 Flektogon and was not impressed at all. In fact, my old Nikkor 20 3.5 UD was much better in all respects. That lens has a great rep though so perhaps I just got a bad copy. It was in absolutely mint shape though. If I were to try that lens again, I would try the F4 version. Thinking about it, the only weakness of the Nikkor is not so hot corner sharpness on full frame which would not even affect your XTi. Might want to look for that Nikkor if 20mm is wide enough. I paid about $150 years ago.
p.1 #8 · Best Wide Angle M42 mount (without breaking the bank)
Tariq Gibran wrote:
cogitech, that looks very good. Do you find the Tamron sharp in the extreme corners on your 5D? That lens used to have a pretty good rep as I recall.
Hey Tariq,
I've added some crops.
The lens is not like a CZ21 in the corners, but it is fairly decent, nonetheless. To be able to resolve the wire re-inforcement in the glass in the extreme corner of a 17mm lens on a 12MP, FF dSLR is a tall order, but the Tamron manages to put up a good fight. I love the way it is so consistent across the frame. None of the "Monet-like" smearing that some much more expensive lenses can achieve in the corners, and this lens has a good compromise between contrast and resolving power. Neither are superb, but both are sufficient. Excellent overall geometry too, I think.
No CA correction or distortion correction has been applied here, and it is a single exposure, despite the fact that it has an "HDR" look. One more exposure and I could do a very nice HDR with it.
BTW, this was a "pull the camera out and shoot hand-held quickly before the train arrives" kind of shot. Far from a "controlled test".
Edited by cogitech on Sep 22, 2007 at 09:40 PM GMT
p.1 #9 · Best Wide Angle M42 mount (without breaking the bank)
Thanks for posting those crops and I have to say you did a great job for a quick, from the hip shot. I just did a search for that lens on the bay out of curiousity and only one comes up from a dealer who wants close to $250 for one. I bet that lens is getting harder to come by at bargain prices. I will have to pull my Nikkor out and see what it can really do. It does flare if pointed directly towards a light source as it has a huge front element but it gives a really cool flare effect.
p.1 #10 · Best Wide Angle M42 mount (without breaking the bank)
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I had the 20 2.8 Flektogon and was not impressed at all. In fact, my old Nikkor 20 3.5 UD was much better in all respects. That lens has a great rep though so perhaps I just got a bad copy. It was in absolutely mint shape though. If I were to try that lens again, I would try the F4 version. Thinking about it, the only weakness of the Nikkor is not so hot corner sharpness on full frame which would not even affect your XTi. Might want to look for that Nikkor if 20mm is wide enough. I paid about $150 years ago....Show more →
yes, the 20/2.8 flektogon seems to have a rather wide variance in quality - i owned 2 and one of them was a dog, while the other performed quite well. many say that 20/4 was sharper, but i never owned this one...
p.1 #11 · Best Wide Angle M42 mount (without breaking the bank)
Jon Courtney wrote:
Any recommendations for a quality wide angle....prob somewhere between 10-17mm. (and I am on a budget :-)
Hi Jon,
On a budget... You can buy a new Zenitar 16mm fish-eye. When used on the 1.6 crop sensor it is useable as both a semi fish eye and as a rectilinear lens if you straighten it in PP. Fun, good, cheap and recommended.
p.1 #13 · Best Wide Angle M42 mount (without breaking the bank)
In C/Y mount, the Contax Zeiss stuff will be well out of budget range. Maybe Yashica or a third party made something this wide in C/Y mount, but it won't be easy to find. I have seen the Tokina 17/3.5 and Sigma 18 (I think) in C/Y mount, but not often. These third-party options from Tamron, Tokina, and Sigma can be found more easily in Nikon F mount and Olympus OM mount, which are more easily adapted to EOS than C/Y (the adapter precision does not seem to matter as much).
I battled with these issues and went through many lenses until getting a 5D. Now it seems the choices are easy.
The Peleng 8mm and Zenitar 16mm fishes are good, budget options and are available in all the popular mounts, including native EOS. I used both and liked both, but find them unnecessary now.
p.1 #16 · Best Wide Angle M42 mount (without breaking the bank)
The Flek 4/20 is not sharper than the 2.8/20, but it's better in corner performance, and much better with regards to distortion - or lack thereof.
I remember having read once a test review that showed how the Flek 4/20 was much better, distortion-wise, than the highly praised Distagon 21. Of course, the Distagon 21 is much sharper, has much better coating etc. etc.
I have all four versions of the Flek 4/20 - leatherette, with studs, zebra, and black/orange- I think I am one of very few on earth who has them all :-)
If you go for sharpness, you should look elsewhere, but if architecture fidelity is important for you, I think that there is no better 20mm in the world than the old Flek 4/20.
But ok I'm a fan so perhaps I am biased :-)
p.1 #18 · Best Wide Angle M42 mount (without breaking the bank)
eosslr wrote:
yes, the 20/2.8 flektogon seems to have a rather wide variance in quality - i owned 2 and one of them was a dog, while the other performed quite well. many say that 20/4 was sharper, but i never owned this one...
Actually, the CZJ 20/2,8 MC Flektogon is much improved over the earlier 20/4,0. If you considering a CZJ 20mm Flektogon, spend the extra money and buy the latest f2,8 version you can get (there is a reason why it costs more to buy than the f4,0 version -- it's noticeably better). Also, make sure, at the very least, it is an "MC" (multi-coated) version. (I don't know if all the f2.8 lenses were also "MC", they might have been).
As with all East German lenses, there is sample variation. But I suspect that ANY 20/2,8 MC Flektogon is going to be better than even the best of the 20/4,0 Flektogon. Much better flare and ghosting resistance of the MC 2,8 alone is worth the premium over the early 4,0 version.
