Home
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Affordable lenses ,filtrers, for landscape photography. Tips
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Dec 03, 2017 11:40 am    Post subject: Affordable lenses ,filtrers, for landscape photography. Tips Reply with quote

Hi,
my passion for landscape photography go on .
I've buyed a carbon tripod and my gear is apcs fujii camera and Canon FD 28mm.
I want to find affordable lenses .
Distagon is one of the best but is expensive .
I thinked to search canon fd 24mm 2.8.
Recensions are ok and potential is evident but the focal isn't the best on my not full frame camera .
Tips for best affordable lenses under 24 ?

Can I use c-Mount for landscape and outdoor photography?
here, some use polarizers and nd filtrers? vintage filtrers are good or moderns are best ?
Thank to all .


PostPosted: Sun Dec 03, 2017 12:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Get a modern UW such as Samyang 12mm f/2.0 and modern filter.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 03, 2017 1:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What's affordable? There is no really cheap ultra wide lens.

Maybe in 24mm you should consider the Tokina RMC 24mm/F2.8 which performs stunningly good and is available for little money.
I've done a comparison on APS-C with some other lenses here: http://forum.mflenses.com/24mm-lens-comparison-minolta-pentax-tokina-t76783.html

On the other hand you may try stitching for landscapes. In this case you can use even short tele lenses for huge landscapes and panoramas as well. Here is an example of a multi-picture panorama shot freehand with a 75mm lens on APS-C (clickable for larger view):



Filters: I would recommend Hoya filters. They are not that expensive and very good.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 03, 2017 1:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

FWIW .. I have that Samyang 12mm f2 .. for Sony-E and it is a very good lens ... but I was laughed away here when I said I found a bargain Konica Hexanon 28mm f3.5 but it seems to have an amazing resolving power as a landscape lens especially visible in the "distant" parts of the scene. It can render quite some detail in far away scenes instead of showing kind of smudges like many others do. I will compare it for his with my other 28mm lenses including the Pentax K, Minolta Rokkor-X and the SMC Takumar 28mm ... I'm curious to see the results myself ..


PostPosted: Sun Dec 03, 2017 1:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tb_a wrote:
What's affordable? There is no really cheap ultra wide lens.

Maybe in 24mm you should consider the Tokina RMC 24mm/F2.8 which performs stunningly good and is available for little money.
I've done a comparison on APS-C with some other lenses here: http://forum.mflenses.com/24mm-lens-comparison-minolta-pentax-tokina-t76783.html

On the other hand you may try stitching for landscapes. In this case you can use even short tele lenses for huge landscapes and panoramas as well. Here is an example of a multi-picture panorama shot freehand with a 75mm lens on APS-C (clickable for larger view):



Filters: I would recommend Hoya filters. They are not that expensive and very good.



Amazing detail in your stitched panorama. Is that a huge windfarm on the horizon.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 03, 2017 1:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

3dpan wrote:
Amazing detail in your stitched panorama. Is that a huge windfarm on the horizon.


Well, the Voigtlaender Color-Heliar 75mm/F2.5 is an amazing lens. Wink

Yes, indeed. That's a rather huge windfarm. We have quite a lot of these in the eastern part of Austria.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 03, 2017 1:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think something like the Samyang 12mm would be very convenient for panoramas. One click of the shutter and you've got a wide angle, wall-to-wall panorama.

But, my experience is that once I had that one-click ultra-wide pic there was an inevitable desire to zoom in and look more closely at some element of the picture. with the also inevitable disappointment at the lack of pixels.

So, for me at least, the answer is (as Thomas demonstrated) to use a standard or short tele lens and stitch several frames together.

Of course you may have to buy a bigger computer to process the bigger files Smile Smile


PostPosted: Sun Dec 03, 2017 2:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hoya circular polariser was rated to be better and cheaper than other expensive brands, by Lenstip. I have one now and it has a much better frame than my B+W Kaesmann CPOL which rattles, although it transmits less light overall and has a shallower frame and threading.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 03, 2017 2:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Get XC 16-50mm if you have not get one if the budget is tight.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 03, 2017 2:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

For 24mm, Konica AR, Canon FD, Minolta MD are all good and not very expensive, I used my SSC FD on my NEX-7 quite often, and had zero complaints.
Wider than 24 starts to become a challenge, selection drops, and prices climb.
OM 21/3.5, Konica AR 21/4, FD 20, Tokina 17, Nikkor 18/4, and that's about where my experience drops off, I never found an inexpensive UWA for APS-C, CV 15 v1 & v2 might work, but they are still relatively expensive and I don't know if the will work on your sensor, as they didn't work well on my NEX-7v3 will work, but it's current @ around $700.
The early CV12 might be cheaper now that the v3 is out, I haven't looked because I'm now FF and very happy with my CV15III, I don't have much desire to find another UWA.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 03, 2017 2:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Landscape is pretty low bar. Almost any lens looks good at f/8 and the low resolutions of digital sensors, and if it doesnt, get a good one or a noncurved macro lens. Done.


UWide is not for "getting it all in".

But I understand that 28mm may be a bit long on APSC. Unfortunately, your cheapest bet may be the kit lens at 18mm. You do have a kit lens?


PostPosted: Sun Dec 03, 2017 3:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lightshow wrote:
The early CV12 might be cheaper now that the v3 is out, I haven't looked because I'm now FF and very happy with my CV15III, ...


The first CV 12mm/F5.6 is a fantastic lens if used on the right camera. Unfortunately most sensors have problem with it hence the output is color shift and smeared edges. On my Ricoh GXR-M (which has been optimized for such lenses) it's more than OK:



PostPosted: Sun Dec 03, 2017 7:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Canon FD 20mm 2.8 can be had for around 200 USD. It was my best landscape lens prior to the puchase of the loxia 20mm 2.8 (which is a remarkable lens but not what I would term affordable). Twenty millimeters is not really considered UW on apsc c by most people though, as it gives the view corresponding to a 35 ish lens on 35mm film camera.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 03, 2017 7:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Af lenses is now out of my budject .

My choice :

Canon fd 24 mmm 2.8
Pentax 100 - 18 mm , 24 mm in c mount
Tokina rcm Wide Angle manual lenses .

For long focal :
Industar 61 ( i’ve see some pics of landscape with this lens and the quality for the price is great) very affordable and cheap .


For details:
Canon fd 135 2.5
Hexanon 135 3.5 ( very sharp) or jupiter 11


PostPosted: Mon Dec 04, 2017 8:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

fujicorry wrote:

Hexanon 135 3.5 ( very sharp)


If you already have an adapter for Konica: try finding the above mentioned 28mm f/3.5 (Hexanon 7 element, not Hexar version) or even the 24mm f/2.8. Konica lenses are often cheap, especially if you buy a set (Camera with 2 or 3 lenses). These lenses are extremely good and can be used for stitching panoramas easily.

For normal use the 50mm f/1.7 Hexanon will surprise you, it can be had around 15 euros and is truly an excellent lens! (just test the aperture, some are oily!)

The 135mm f/3.2 version is even better than your f/3.5!


PostPosted: Mon Dec 04, 2017 9:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I ‘ve already a konica lens ( hexanon 40 mm 1/ Cool but i never use it because i do not have adapter ring
I can use it for landscape ?


PostPosted: Mon Dec 04, 2017 9:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

a very good and cheap wide angle lens is the vivitar (exakta) (cosina) 24mm 2.8 MC .
available in different mounts for under 30 euro/dollars. excellent on aps-c.
you can find several threads here.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 04, 2017 10:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

fujicorry wrote:
Af lenses is now out of my budject .

My choice :

Canon fd 24 mmm 2.8
Pentax 100 - 18 mm , 24 mm in c mount
Tokina rcm Wide Angle manual lenses .

For long focal :
Industar 61 ( i’ve see some pics of landscape with this lens and the quality for the price is great) very affordable and cheap .


For details:
Canon fd 135 2.5
Hexanon 135 3.5 ( very sharp) or jupiter 11


Most probably the Tokina 24mm lens would be best in terms of price vs. quality relationship. Bear in mind that lenses for small formats (Pentax 110 or c-mount) are rather weak in the corners which might be disturbing for landscapes.

The Industar 61 L/D is a very good choice when on low budget. Best performance at F8. I would recommend to use it with sunshade. A cheap rubber one from China is good enough.

The Jupiter 11 would be my choice. I've recently compared it to some other 135mm lenses from different manufacturers like Pentax, Minolta, Leitz, Zeiss, etc. and only the Leitz Elmar was able to beat it. However, the use of a sunshade is also highly recommended.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 04, 2017 5:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tb_a wrote:
...
The Jupiter 11 would be my choice. I've recently compared it to some other 135mm lenses from different manufacturers like Pentax, Minolta, Leitz, Zeiss, etc. and only the Leitz Elmar was able to beat it. However, the use of a sunshade is also highly recommended.


I guess the Pentax was not Super-Multi-Coated.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 04, 2017 6:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

visualopsins wrote:
tb_a wrote:
...
The Jupiter 11 would be my choice. I've recently compared it to some other 135mm lenses from different manufacturers like Pentax, Minolta, Leitz, Zeiss, etc. and only the Leitz Elmar was able to beat it. However, the use of a sunshade is also highly recommended.


I guess the Pentax was not Super-Multi-Coated.


It was the Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 135mm/F3.5 introduced 1971. I have 2 copies of this lens and both perform equally. It showed less contrast and much more CA's compared to the Jupiter-11. Interestingly even the non-SMC Takumar (Bayonet) from 1980 was slightly better than the older SMC one but also below the Jupiter. Not even the Zeiss Tele-Tessar AKA Voigtlaender Color-Dynarex from 1974 was able to beat the Jupiter w/o at F4.
BTW, my Jupiter 11 is the M39/LTM version from 1970 and the Leitz Elmar also in M39/LTM is from 1961.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 04, 2017 6:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tb_a wrote:
visualopsins wrote:
tb_a wrote:
...
The Jupiter 11 would be my choice. I've recently compared it to some other 135mm lenses from different manufacturers like Pentax, Minolta, Leitz, Zeiss, etc. and only the Leitz Elmar was able to beat it. However, the use of a sunshade is also highly recommended.


I guess the Pentax was not Super-Multi-Coated.


It was the Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 135mm/F3.5 introduced 1971. I have 2 copies of this lens and both perform equally. It showed less contrast and much more CA's compared to the Jupiter-11. Interestingly even the non-SMC Takumar (Bayonet) from 1980 was slightly better than the older SMC one but also below the Jupiter. Not even the Zeiss Tele-Tessar AKA Voigtlaender Color-Dynarex from 1974 was able to beat the Jupiter w/o at F4.
BTW, my Jupiter 11 is the M39/LTM version from 1970 and the Leitz Elmar also in M39/LTM is from 1961.


Surprising! Especially assuming other lenses were stopped to f4 for comparison.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 04, 2017 7:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Many Pentax K mount lenses use a 49mm filter size. Combine with a set of 49mm Hoya filters and you wont go far wrong.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 04, 2017 7:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

visualopsins wrote:
Surprising! Especially assuming other lenses were stopped to f4 for comparison.


Indeed very surprising. Comparison was always at same aperture setting; i.e. stopped down when max. aperture bigger than F4.
Target was infinity landscape but always manually focused at the very same point at max aperture, F4, F5.6 and F8.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 04, 2017 10:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

fujicorry wrote:
I ‘ve already a konica lens ( hexanon 40 mm 1/ Cool but i never use it because i do not have adapter ring
I can use it for landscape ?


Of course, it is hell sharp, a pure jewel for the price !


PostPosted: Mon Dec 04, 2017 11:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tb_a wrote:
visualopsins wrote:
Surprising! Especially assuming other lenses were stopped to f4 for comparison.


Indeed very surprising. Comparison was always at same aperture setting; i.e. stopped down when max. aperture bigger than F4.
Target was infinity landscape but always manually focused at the very same point at max aperture, F4, F5.6 and F8.


Was a Nikon 135/4 included in your testing? I ask because it has also 4/3 optics.

Curious about the better contrast, what color does the Jupiter front element reflect, please?

PS, everybody knows, right? About the list of Russian lenses and optical formulae at http://www.baierfoto.de/russobj/objektive.html