Hoya HMC 2.8/28mm

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

Hi folks

Another lens I picked up for almost nothing, it's Contax/Yashca mount but works great on my EOS with adapter and will hit infinity.

Colours are very vivid and contrast is good, not sure I like the bokeh though, a bit busy, also, doesn't seem to be all that sharp, but is probably sharp enough to be called 'acceptable'.

My usual wide-open sharpness test subject:

100% crop:

DigiChromeEd · Joined: 29 Dec 2009 Posts: 3462 Location: Northern Ireland

Did your friend lose three fingers and a thumb in an industrial accident or something? Wink

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

I believe it was a masturbation-related incident actually... lol

DigiChromeEd · Joined: 29 Dec 2009 Posts: 3462 Location: Northern Ireland

ManualFocus-G · Expire: 2014-11-24

Looks good Smile

I had the 24/2.8 version, and it was sharp in the centre from wide open. I think these are Tokina made.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

Yeah, I like it, I think it's maybe not quite as good as my Ensinor 2.8/28.

I have 7 or 8 28s now, I need to do a comparison test between them and decide which to keep and which to sell on...

Lloydy · Expire: 2022-01-01

I've just found one today in Canon FD mount, it's a nicely made lens, and light.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

I shot this lens on my NEX and it was really good, so if that FD mount one is very cheap, should be worth a punt.

However, it's not better than that Vivitar CF 28 you have or the common and dirt cheap Pentacon 2.8/28.

It's strong points are it's bokeh, colours and coatings.

Lloydy · Expire: 2022-01-01

I've got two now ! Laughing

One Canon FD and a Olympus OM.

I've still only got an M42 adapter for the NEX, so these are on film duty at the moment.

fermy · Joined: 17 Feb 2012 Posts: 1974

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

I never had any flare problems at all, none, and others reported the same. I'd also say it's sharper than the FD 2.8/28, particularly wide open and it doesn't suffer from CA like the FD 2.8/28 either.

fermy · Joined: 17 Feb 2012 Posts: 1974

Well, in my experience it is the other way around. FD 28/f2.8 is sharper wide open, better coatings too, superb lens. I've sold it to a forum member, so hopefully he will confirm soon Wink

.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

The copy of the original FD 28 I had was mediocre in all regards apart from build quality. I've had two copies of the Hoya and two copies of the Tokina badged version, all four have been excellent.

Maybe my Canon was just a dog copy, it was mint though so hadn't been messed with or abused after leaving the factory so it was mediocre when it left the factory.

fermy · Joined: 17 Feb 2012 Posts: 1974

Well, I've seen conflicting views on FD 28/f2.8 before, both very positive and quite lukewarm. This would point to quality control issues, which seems plausible as 28/f2.8 is a budget lens. Another possibility is that coatings have improved significantly from earlier breech locks to FDn and that could make a huge difference in the lens such as this. Was your lens FDn or breech lock?

Excalibur · Expire: 2014-04-21

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

Mine was original FD with the silver locking ring.

Canon seemed to have a policy of making their consumer level lenses just 'good enough'. The ones I've had - 2.8/28, 1.8/50, 3.5/135, couple of zooms, were all nothing special, same level as third party makers like Kiron and Tokina, and inferior to the equivalents from Minolta, Pentax, Nikon etc. You see the same thing today, the Canon EF 1.8/50 and EF-S 18-55 are like cheap plastic toys and fall apart often, whereas Pentax and Nikon equivalents are better built.

It's the faster, more expensive Canons that were really good - 2/24, 2/28, 2/35 etc. Canon built their reputation on those better class of optics, the consumer grade stuff was cheap mass market where people were much less discerning.

That said, both copies of the 1.4/50 I had were not great and inferior to the Konica, Miranda and Chinon 1.4s I also have, so maybe there is a quality control issue with Canon?

fermy · Joined: 17 Feb 2012 Posts: 1974

Well, I do mostly use their midrange lenses: 24/f2.8, 28/f2, 35/f2, 50/1.4, 85/1.8, 100 f2.8 and these range from very good to fantastic. FD 50/1.4 that I had 4 copies already is IMHO "the best" such lens short of aspherics and maybe Zeiss Planar that I haven't tried yet, but (slightly) ahead of Konica, Minolta, Chinon, and many others. Of course, "the best" is not really a well defined concept, but that's the lens that I would keep if I could keep only one 50/1.4.

I've heard the idea that Canon's cheaper stuff is just average a couple of times, notably from ProfHankD. It doesn't strike true with me as I've yet to see a bad FD lens, and I've had a number of 50/f1.8 and 28/f2.8. I will concede that there is a possibility of lower QC on cheaper FD lenses, since there are contradicting opinions here and there must be some reason behind. On the other hand, Canon has sold millions of AE-1 with 50/1.8, some of these are bound to be lemons, and lemons tend to be reported much more than quality lenses.

Excalibur · Expire: 2014-04-21

Well my experience with SLR Canon lenses (and all SLR lenses) is before AF and all on a film camera.......hey maybe Canon bribed all magazines in the past and later internet sites to not show any crap results for their lenses. Wink

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

There was no comparison between the FD 1.4/50s I had and the Konica 1.4/50 I have, the FDs were a lot less good in sharpness, contrast, colours, all aspects really.

Same with the FD 2.8/28, it's a lot less good than the Hexanon 3.5/28 and Minolta Rokkor-SG 3.5/28, I sold both copies of the FD 28 and doubt I will ever sell either the Konica or the Minolta.

I can only speak for the copies of the FD lenses I have owned, but not one of them was worth keeping due to being inferior to others I also owned.

I do really like the FL 2.5/35 though, it evolved into the FD 2/35 which is also great.

I couldn't care less about brand names, I just buy em, try em and keep the best ones, with Canon the only one worth keeping was that FL 2.5/35.

Excalibur · Expire: 2014-04-21

***with Canon the only one worth keeping was that FL 2.5/35.***

erm someone said:- there is more chance of getting inferior lenses on ebay (or wherever) because all the excellent copies are kept by the owners. Wink

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

None of my FD lenses came from ebay. 'Someone said' is often a good way of passing on false information.

Soulflier · Joined: 16 Aug 2012 Posts: 5

I just bought an M42 mount Hoya HMC 28mm 2.8. It looks like it was never used before. I find it very good at f2.8, seems to be sharper than the Canon 50mm 1.8 when used wide open. At f5.6 and f8 gets as sharp, if not sharper, than the Canon EF-S 18-135 at f8. These are the lenses I can compare the Hoya with.

The only bad thing about the Hoya is that it loses contrast when facing in a bright light, it gets hazy. Flaring is barely noticable and only a few and small flares appear.

I love the close focus, all my other lenses have a minimum focusing distance of about 0.5m which is not enough for me when shooting indoors. The can focus to 0.3m.

These images were not modified:
#1

#2

#3 Bokeh in the highlights

#4 Lens flare

killwilly · Joined: 16 May 2011 Posts: 111 Location: United Kingdom

Whilst on the subject of FD lenses and 28mm in particular. This photograph was taken with my 28mm f2.8 on my 450D. Not a lot of PP, apart from converting from raw. The exif doesn't show the aperture, but I think it was about f8, which I would always use, except for closeup.

I often carry this lens in my pocket and use it reversed for macro. It's not very good at infinity, but at this distance I think it acceptable.

I bought it used in about 1985 for use on my Canon T90.

IMG_0847 by killwilly, on Flickr

estudleon · Joined: 15 May 2008 Posts: 3754 Location: Argentina

I see some question about the wide open and close focus rendering of one WIDE ANGLE lens.

Really, there are a lot of lenses that will do better that job, i guess.

What about the hoya 28 in landscapes, distortion, bokeh in near- far relation, f/11 and 16 rendering, etc

Rino

Soulflier · Joined: 16 Aug 2012 Posts: 5

I use the Hoya 28mm on a 550D so it is not very wide. I cannot really use it for landscape, I didn't buy it for that though. I wanted to get closer to my portrait subjects, the 50mm is too narrow for my taste.

At f16 the Hoya is much less sharp than at f5.6 or f8.

Another thing, since I use this lens on a crop body, the Canon ES-62 lens hood (designed for the Canon 50mm f1.8 ) can be used on this lens without vignetting.