Minolta 17mm f4 - anything substatially better ?

hemeterfilms · Joined: 04 Jul 2012 Posts: 80 Location: Mexico City

I have 2 copies of this lens and both IMHO are disappointing. I can get rid of the smeary corners by cropping ( I use on an A7) but that somehow defeats the point of having one. I am being drawn inexorably to the Heliar III, but I wondered if any of you here know of a decent UWA that might have slipped under my radar.

Because I dont have anything to compare it with, it could be that I am expecting too much, but here is an example of the Rokkor at f11 (which I am guessing might be its best aperture) :

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9097 Location: Houston, Texas

Yep, it remains soft in the corners, doesn't it? The Tokina 17mm f/3.5 is very highly regarded and if you look for images -- do a google image search or search here -- you can find quite a few examples. The Tamron 17mm is almost as highly regarded as the Tokina. I've also heard great things about the Canon 17mm f/4.

I own a copy of the Tokina-built Vivitar 17mm f/3.5 and the Tamron 17mm f/3.5. Unfortunately, I have no digital images to offer because neither my Canon DSLR nor my Sony NEX "likes" this focal length. I guess it's the way the lenses bend the light and the way the rays hit the sensors, is the reason for this. About all I can offer you is a couple of shots I took with the Vivitar 17/3.5 and my Canon F1. The film is Ektar 100.

As you can see, the second shot shows a bit of softening in the bottom corners. The first shot shows some softening in the bottom right corner, but I think it holds up well along the bottom edge. I didn't record the apertures I was working with, but knowing me, I was probably shooting at f/8 or so.

I've read that the Tokina is slightly better than the Tokina-made Vivitar and it's because the Tokina has slightly better coating. Perhaps so, but I've been very satisfied with the Vivitar on my FD cameras.

The Vivitar (and the Tokina too?) also exhibits a fair amount of barrel distortion, as can be seen with the stop sign in the second photo. I don't worry about this much anymore because I can correct it in post. I just didn't for whatever reason in this image.

tb_a · Expire: 2019-08-28

Well, even on film the 17mm lens from Minolta wasn't considered to be their best one....

Furthermore your camera (Sony A7) is already known to struggle with many wide angle lenses up to and inclusive 35mm.

So from this point of view your example picture doesn't look bad at all. Wink

However, from what I have seen so far neither the Minolta 17/4 nor the A7 are the best tools to capture extreme wide angle views which should be sharp from edge to edge. I don't know whether it would considerably improve if you take another lens on the same camera. The A7 uses a very thick filter stack in front of the sensor which leads to the problems with most of the wide angle lenses which have not been designed specifically for the A7. So from my point of view the only way out would be to stick to the well designed wide angles from Sony or to look for another camera.
Some people are also modifying their A7's like that: http://kolarivision.com/product/sony-a7-series-thin-filter-legacy-lens-upgrade/ to improve the corner sharpness of the A7 for wide angle lenses.

My personal solution is the CV 12mm lens on the Ricoh GXR-M which delivers excellent pictures which are sharp from edge to edge in a A7-equivalent of 18mm focal length without visible field curvature.

Just my 2 cents.

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

A good 24mm lens with a good 0.7x screw on converter can work well. I use a Schneider-Kreuznach Xenar 0.7x that was originally very expensive, it has 4 elements in 4 groups and 58mm threads. I use a 58-55mm stepping ring to mount it on my Konica Hexanon 2.8/24 and this combo actually outperforms my Tokina 3.5/17. Another good converter is the Olympus WCON08 but that one is only a 0.8x. I also have a huge and heavy Century Optics 0.65x converter that is superb but a bit cumbersome in use.

I posted a thread with samples but I can't remember what I called it to be able to search for it, sorry.

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

tb_a · Expire: 2019-08-28

Badr12 · Joined: 06 Apr 2014 Posts: 81

I had one last year but I related the results to my skills. Rokkorfiles website describes it as a good lens. That said, it is a keeper because of its value. Extremely rare. I ended up selling mine on the auction website for £360. I was in a rush Smile

hemeterfilms · Joined: 04 Jul 2012 Posts: 80 Location: Mexico City

Thank you all for your thoughtful and helpful replies (as always here).

I do have that Xenar 0.7x and it conveniently sits on my MC W Rokkor 24mm so I thought I would just poke it out of the window.
Followed by the 17mm Rokkor. Both at f11.

First the 24mm with the Xenar :

and this with the 17mm :

Not THAT much in it really.

This has made me think that to get a really good UWA I am going to have to spend some big bucks.............probably best to practice some creative framing and/or cropping !

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9097 Location: Houston, Texas

iangreenhalgh1 · Expire: 2014-01-07

I paid less than 10ukp for both of my schneiders so with patience, you can get them really cheap. There are a few others that are probably good, from Canon, Sony, Nikon etc. Look for 4 element ones and avoid any that say macro on them.

My century was a lucky purchase for less than 20ukp when usually they are over 100. It had a bayonet for the Sony VX1000 camcorder but I removed that and glued on a stepping ring so it now has threads. I forget the diameter, probably 58mm.

I'll make some samples with my Schneider and various lenses on both my NEX and a850 tomorrow.

I need to find where I have put my Century. If I find it, I'll make some samples with that too.

Lightshow · Joined: 04 Nov 2011 Posts: 3669 Location: Calgary

TrueLoveOne · Expire: 2013-12-24

Can't comment on the quality of the Minolta lens, but i am quite happy with the performance of the RMC Tokina 17mm.

Would love to see some results of the Minolta on film though.....

On film:

Kuiperspoort Middelburg by René Maly, on Flickr

On Canon 5D:

Waiting (Doel) by René Maly, on Flickr

On Canon 5D:

Drama in the air by René Maly, on Flickr

aoleg · Joined: 22 Feb 2008 Posts: 1389 Location: Berlin, DE

If you can go for a slightly longer focal length, Nikkor AiS 20/2.8 is a stellar performer. Pretty much every other old UWA lens that I tried suffered from exactly the same corner softness you're seeing with your sample. That said, modern UWA zooms can be sharper and better corrected than old UWA primes. Ultra-wide lenses is where real progress was made throughout the years.

Basilisk · Joined: 21 Mar 2013 Posts: 356 Location: UK

hemeterfilms · Joined: 04 Jul 2012 Posts: 80 Location: Mexico City

There seems to be a consensus that the filter stack on the a7 makes the problem worse - whether I want to spend big money for a modification which makes a slight improvement I dont know. One thing I can do though is put the Minolta on my XE1 and fire a few shots on some B&W film. I might make it a project for my IB students !

Once again thanks to everyone who has followed up - The positive responses in this forum are such a refreshing change from some other sites I visit

pinholecam · Joined: 26 Nov 2012 Posts: 223

I have a Soligor 17/4 (probably same lens as the Tokina) that is better, but still not ideal imo.
Certainly functional though.

Here is a pict where I left a full sized sample on Flickr.

DSC0075620140110ILCE-7-1 by jenkwang, on Flickr

Other 2 samples with size 2400p on flickr

20141122-DSC06860-2400 by jenkwang, on Flickr

DSC0112820140112ILCE-7-1 by jenkwang, on Flickr

A lot of these old UWA have a lot of field curvature that is accentuated by the thick filter stack of the A7.
You might want to try focusing using the off center and a small f-stop (like f11) to see if it helps.

I have a modified A7 (thin filter mod) now, but I've yet to have a change to revisit this 17/4 to see if its improved.
However, on some SLR wides, there has been noticeable improvements.
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1540662

MHO is that the Samyang 14/2.8 performs very well on a stock A7.
Really unbeatable for the price (if you can find a good copy).
The downsides are distortion (correctable in post) and the bulging front element which means expensive filter system (or none).

Samyang 14/2.8

Rise of the new by jenkwang, on Flickr

Sit and enjoy the view by jenkwang, on Flickr

I've tried a friend's CV15v3 on stock A7.
No color cast and good all the way till a bit less sharpness on the last 1/10 of the edges.
Factoring size, its certainly the best option out there.

dnf_spedition · Joined: 18 Apr 2009 Posts: 64 Location: The Netherlands

Hoftoren The Hague by Cliff van der Geugten, on Flickr

I am quite happy with my copy of the RMC Tokina 1:3.5/17mm. This one is taken with an Oympus OM2n. Regards Cliff.

jamaeolus · Expire: 2015-08-20

I am pleased with the Tamron 19-35 3.5-4-5. It is autofocus but works seamlessly on my a7ii. I posted a photo from it on a thread last week?

Lloydy · Expire: 2022-01-01

Tokina 17 / 3.5 on Sony A6000

I was about 2 meters away from the corner of the building. There's no correction of perspective or distortion been done in PP.

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9097 Location: Houston, Texas

I did some checking on the Tamron 19-35 that jamaeolus mentioned and came across another one, the Tamron SP AF 17-35mm f/2.8-4.0 Di LDIF Aspherical. More expensive than the 19-35, but it gets top-notch reviews at Amazon -- all 4 and 5 star reviews. It works on both FF and APS-C crop body digitals as well as 35mm SLRs. So I'm wondering if anyone here has had a chance to try this lens? Specifically, I'm wondering if, because of its Di technology, that cameras that don't like ultra-wides, such as the Sony A7 and my NEX 7 (as well as my EOS XS), will operate properly at this lens's widest setting.

kds315* · Expire: 2021-03-09

Basilisk · Joined: 21 Mar 2013 Posts: 356 Location: UK

cooltouch · Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9097 Location: Houston, Texas

I can assure you that neither of my retrofocus 17s -- a Tokina-made Vivitar 17/3.5 and a Tamron 17/3.5 -- work well with either of my APS-C digicams -- my EOS DSLR or my NEX 7. Quite disappointing. Images are not sharp, even in the center of the field. I haven't yet had my film developed that I shot to test my Tamron 17 on a 35mm Nikon, but I've owned the Vivitar 17mm for about 25 years and it has always worked very well with my 35mm SLRs. But not at all well with my two digitals. And I've read repeatedly that the first-generation A7's, with their thick sensor stacks, do not handle the ultra-wide retrofocus lenses well, either.

TrueLoveOne · Expire: 2013-12-24

Tedat · Joined: 08 Nov 2011 Posts: 800 Location: Berlin/Germany