Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

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

Top Quality Wide Angle Lens Advice 16-21mm range
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 8:24 pm    Post subject: Top Quality Wide Angle Lens Advice 16-21mm range Reply with quote

I've started to get into landscape shooting with my A7 II, and I'm looking for something with good edge sharpness. I already have a Samyang 14/2.8 which I'm very happy with, however I'd rather use older lenses whenever possible. I know that even modern wide angle lenses can struggle with edge sharpness, so I know I have manage my expectations. Currently I'm using 25m(C/Y Distagon)-50mm(whatever is in the bag) lenses and stitching, but there are times where a lens in the 16-21mm range would be ideal.

I've tried the RMC Tokina 17/3.5, which did not do it for me. I had a brief fling with a CZJ 20/2.8 which I sourced for a client, and what little time I had with it was very positive.

I'm not about to go out and get a lens, I just want to know what might be worth being on the lookout for.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 9:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was about to sing the praises of the Tokina RMC 17 / 3.5, which is a firm favourite of mine on my Sony NEX5 and A6000, which of course don't use the edges of the frame, but it is a very good lens. I also have a Noritar 17 / 4, which I don't think is as good as the Tokina, it's not as sharp - but it is still very good, it renders beautifully. I guess it's a lens of it's time, but none the worse for that.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 9:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Voigtlander Super Wide-Heliar 15mm f/4.5 Aspherical III will do it.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 9:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm being a bit unfair to the Tokina. It's a decent lens, but I'm looking for something that is at least one step up from it. I should also have mentioned that an f/2.8 aperture is important to me, as I do hand-held night shooting.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 9:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dan_ wrote:
Voigtlander Super Wide-Heliar 15mm f/4.5 Aspherical III will do it.


I'd prefer something older, otherwise I'd just stick with my Samyang. I'm also aware that my sensor does not play well with wide angle RF lenses in general, so I'm minded to go with SLR lenses.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 06, 2016 11:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

itsfozzy wrote:
dan_ wrote:
Voigtlander Super Wide-Heliar 15mm f/4.5 Aspherical III will do it.


I'd prefer something older, otherwise I'd just stick with my Samyang. I'm also aware that my sensor does not play well with wide angle RF lenses in general, so I'm minded to go with SLR lenses.


There's one simple answer - get the Zeiss Loxia 2.8/21mm.

* It has a nearly perfect performance, even in the corners, even at f2.8, even using the 42MP A7RII
* nearly no CAs (even when CA correction is turned off)
* little distortion (even without electronic distortion correction)
* very smooth and precise manual focusing
* small
* precise manual aperture ring
* EXIF and automatic Steady Shot (no need to dial in the focal length manually)

The 20mm range is my most used focal length, and i have tested many 16 ... 21mm lenses on 24MP and 43MP Full Frame cameras, among them the following (most of these lenses i do own, in fact):

* Canon nFD 4/17mm
* Canon nFD 2.8/20mm
* Canon nFD 2.8/20-35mm L
* Canon TS-E 3.5/17mm L
* Konica Hexanon AR 4/21mm
* Minolta MD 4/17mm
* Minolta MC 2.8/21mm
* Minolta MD-III 2.8/20mm
* Minolta AF 2.8/20mm
* Nikkor AF 2.8/20mm (same optical construction as the AiS 2.8/20mm)
* Nikkor AF 2.8/14-24mm
* Pentax A 2.8/20mm
* Tamron Auto 4.5/21mm
* Topcor RE 4/20mm
* Tokina 2.8/17mm
* Yashica ML 3.5/21mm
* Zeiss ZA 2.8/16-35mm (three samples)
* Zeiss Loxia 2.8/21mm

Even when all electronic lens corrections on the A7II/A7RII are turned off, the Zeiss Loxia 2.8/20mm is visibly better than all other lenses mentioned above, including the Canon TS-E 17mm L in its non-shifted (!) state. And the Canon TS-E 17mm L is known to be a very good wideangle.

Stephan


PostPosted: Mon Nov 07, 2016 6:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

it buyed a vivitar 19-35mm series1. Use it only 3 times because it is not good at all for me.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 07, 2016 7:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevemark wrote:
itsfozzy wrote:
dan_ wrote:
Voigtlander Super Wide-Heliar 15mm f/4.5 Aspherical III will do it.


I'd prefer something older, otherwise I'd just stick with my Samyang. I'm also aware that my sensor does not play well with wide angle RF lenses in general, so I'm minded to go with SLR lenses.


There's one simple answer - get the Zeiss Loxia 2.8/21mm.

* It has a nearly perfect performance, even in the corners, even at f2.8, even using the 42MP A7RII
* nearly no CAs (even when CA correction is turned off)
* little distortion (even without electronic distortion correction)
* very smooth and precise manual focusing
* small
* precise manual aperture ring
* EXIF and automatic Steady Shot (no need to dial in the focal length manually)

The 20mm range is my most used focal length, and i have tested many 16 ... 21mm lenses on 24MP and 43MP Full Frame cameras, among them the following (most of these lenses i do own, in fact):

* Canon nFD 4/17mm
* Canon nFD 2.8/20mm
* Canon nFD 2.8/20-35mm L
* Canon TS-E 3.5/17mm L
* Konica Hexanon AR 4/21mm
* Minolta MD 4/17mm
* Minolta MC 2.8/21mm
* Minolta MD-III 2.8/20mm
* Minolta AF 2.8/20mm
* Nikkor AF 2.8/20mm (same optical construction as the AiS 2.8/20mm)
* Nikkor AF 2.8/14-24mm
* Pentax A 2.8/20mm
* Tamron Auto 4.5/21mm
* Topcor RE 4/20mm
* Tokina 2.8/17mm
* Yashica ML 3.5/21mm
* Zeiss ZA 2.8/16-35mm (three samples)
* Zeiss Loxia 2.8/21mm

Even when all electronic lens corrections on the A7II/A7RII are turned off, the Zeiss Loxia 2.8/20mm is visibly better than all other lenses mentioned above, including the Canon TS-E 17mm L in its non-shifted (!) state. And the Canon TS-E 17mm L is known to be a very good wideangle.

Stephan


Thank you Stephan, and I was worried that the Loxia would get mentioned in such terms. I handled one on a A7II at a show recently, and I did not wish to give it back, it's gorgeous! Your experience with such lenses is confirming a suspicion that I already had, that older wide angle lenses cannot compete in pure edge to edge IQ terms with something like a Loxia, or perhaps the new Samyang 20/1.8.

Going back to my original "needs", I want to use a classic lens, as I wish to brand my photography as such, how does the Nikon 20/2.8 compare in general terms, and which of the older lenses would be your top pick?


PostPosted: Mon Nov 07, 2016 9:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I love, really love, the old Takumar 18/11.

It has great character.

If you can take good pics with it, believe me, you are a very good wide lens fotographer.

In my childhood time, I dreamed with it. I want it.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 07, 2016 9:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

itsfozzy wrote:

Thank you Stephan, and I was worried that the Loxia would get mentioned in such terms. I handled one on a A7II at a show recently, and I did not wish to give it back, it's gorgeous! Your experience with such lenses is confirming a suspicion that I already had, that older wide angle lenses cannot compete in pure edge to edge IQ terms with something like a Loxia, or perhaps the new Samyang 20/1.8.

I don't know neither the Samyeng nor the (AF) Sigma, but have seen some problems with the Samyang 14mm (lenses glued in => sudden and dramatic loss of image quality after 1-2 years). Nothing i would recommend, and i didn't buy it ...


itsfozzy wrote:

Going back to my original "needs", I want to use a classic lens, as I wish to brand my photography as such, how does the Nikon 20/2.8 compare in general terms, and which of the older lenses would be your top pick?



There's one simple answer - get the Zeiss Loxia 2.8/21mm.

* It has a nearly perfect performance, even in the corners, even at f2.8, even using the 42MP A7RII
* nearly no CAs (even when CA correction is turned off)
* little distortion (even without electronic distortion correction)
* very smooth and precise manual focusing
* small
* precise manual aperture ring
* EXIF and automatic Steady Shot (no need to dial in the focal length manually)

The 20mm range is my most used focal length, and i have tested many 16 ... 21mm lenses on 24MP and 43MP Full Frame cameras, among them the following (most of these lenses i do own, in fact):

* Canon nFD 2.8/20mm: Corners quite OK, strong vignetting, quite visible distortion
* Canon nFD 2.8/20-35mm L: maybe slightly better than the nFD 2.8/20mm? I got it only recently => no systematic tests yet
* Canon TS-E 3.5/17mm L: very little CAs, little distortion, strong field curvature (either corners or center is sharp).
* Konica Hexanon AR 4/21mm: well-balanced lens, little distortion, a bit soft over the entire image, no really increasing even at f11
* Minolta MD 4/17mm
* Minolta MC 2.8/21mm: relatively strong CAs and distortion
* Minolta MD-III 2.8/20mm: slightly better than the large MC 2.8/21mm
* Minolta AF 2.8/20mm: low contrast af f2.8, very good at f11 even in the corners (apart from CAs)
* Nikkor AF 2.8/20mm (same optical construction as the AiS 2.8/20mm): similar as Minolta AF 2.8/20mm, maybe a bit less CAs
* Nikkor AF 2.8/14-24mm: very good resolution, but strong distortion at f=14mm
* Pentax A 2.8/20mm: not as good as MinAF 2.8/20mm or Nikkor 2.8/20mm
* Tamron Auto 4.5/21mm: old lens, frankly quite bad at f4.5 and even at f11 not really good
* Topcor RE 4/20mm: surprisingly good, given th fact that is was calculated in the late 1960s
* Tokina RMC 3.5/17mm:
* Yashica ML 3.5/21mm: similar to Konica 4/21mm
* Zeiss ZA 2.8/16-35mm (three samples): best at f=16mm, really good corners at f11 (but still slightly inferior to the Nikkor 14-24 or the MinAF 2.8/20mm)
* Zeiss Loxia 2.8/21mm: very good even at f2.8, apart from strong vignetting. Excellent at f5.6 ... f11 on the A7RII (43MP).

Stephan

EDIT Tokina RMC 3.5/17mm (not 2.8/17mm!)


Last edited by stevemark on Sun Dec 04, 2016 11:25 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Loxia is superb I am sure but the 1000 USD plus price a bit daunting. The Helios is around 500 dollars less. I have used the Canon FD 20mm 2.8 and the CZJ 20 2.8. I feel they are both a little soft in the corners. The Pentax S-M-C 20mm vignettes. I am looking for a really good wide myself, am eyeing the voigtlander. Modern wides are just so much better its hard to use vintage glass unless you are trying for vintage feel.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

itsfozzy wrote:
Going back to my original "needs", I want to use a classic lens, as I wish to brand my photography as such, how does the Nikon 20/2.8 compare in general terms, and which of the older lenses would be your top pick?


I haven't used any of the more "recent" Nikon 20mm's, a couple of which I've heard are quite good, but my enduring favorite is the Nikkor 20mm f/3.5 UD Pre-AI lens. Just something about it, I dunno. It's only a half-stop slower than your requirement, so I think it also bears considering.

I'd suggest you spend some time on flickr, check out the images people have posted using the various lenses that interest you. I think you'll find the UD 20mm compares favorably.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 08, 2016 9:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm quite happy with the IQ from my Nikkor 18/4 and Konica 21/4 and my CV15III
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/tags/konicahexanon214/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/tags/nikkor184ai/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/tags/cv15iii/


PostPosted: Tue Nov 08, 2016 10:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lightshow wrote:
I'm quite happy with the IQ from my Nikkor 18/4 and Konica 21/4 and my CV15III
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/tags/konicahexanon214/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/tags/nikkor184ai/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/tags/cv15iii/


Thank you for sharing your images, they make a strong case for all of those lenses!


PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2016 11:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

itsfozzy wrote:

Thank you Stephan, and I was worried that the Loxia would get mentioned in such terms. I handled one on a A7II at a show recently, and I did not wish to give it back, it's gorgeous! Your experience with such lenses is confirming a suspicion that I already had, that older wide angle lenses cannot compete in pure edge to edge IQ terms with something like a Loxia, or perhaps the new Samyang 20/1.8.

Going back to my original "needs", I want to use a classic lens, as I wish to brand my photography as such, how does the Nikon 20/2.8 compare in general terms, and which of the older lenses would be your top pick?


Obvioulsy I made a bad mistake trying to answer your question - it certainly wasn't my intent to "copy & paste" my own previous writing!
It may come a bit late, but i'll try to answer your question anyhow.

First a few words about what i would consider an "ideal classical lens":

* relatively low contrast and smooth bokeh wide open (undercorrected spherical aberrations)
* good detail resolution over the entire field wide open
* excellent detail resolution / contrast over the entire field between f5.6 ... f11
* well balanced correction of the remaining faults (not too much coma and astigmatism!)
* a bit vignetting wide open
* as little CAs as possible (Carl Zeiss Jena and Oberkochen lenses from the 1950s/1960s often have less CAs than the corresponding Nikkors or Minolta lenses from the 1970s)

There are vintage lenses that fit very well into this definition; other such as the Biotar 1.5/7.5cm have strong astigmatism / coma and a weird bokeh - so i would not recommend them at all for paid work, unless you specifically want to specialize on that.

From my list given above the Nikkor 2.8/20mm fits quite well. It is a bit soft wide open, however the entire correction of the lens is well balanced, and CAs are 1) nott too strong and 2) yellow/blueish (not green/magenta, which usually is more disturbing). Stopped down it becomes very good. The Minolta AF 2.8/20mm gives a similar look, but it's not an MF lens, of course.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2016 10:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevemark wrote:
itsfozzy wrote:

Thank you Stephan, and I was worried that the Loxia would get mentioned in such terms. I handled one on a A7II at a show recently, and I did not wish to give it back, it's gorgeous! Your experience with such lenses is confirming a suspicion that I already had, that older wide angle lenses cannot compete in pure edge to edge IQ terms with something like a Loxia, or perhaps the new Samyang 20/1.8.

Going back to my original "needs", I want to use a classic lens, as I wish to brand my photography as such, how does the Nikon 20/2.8 compare in general terms, and which of the older lenses would be your top pick?


Obvioulsy I made a bad mistake trying to answer your question - it certainly wasn't my intent to "copy & paste" my own previous writing!
It may come a bit late, but i'll try to answer your question anyhow.

First a few words about what i would consider an "ideal classical lens":

* relatively low contrast and smooth bokeh wide open (undercorrected spherical aberrations)
* good detail resolution over the entire field wide open
* excellent detail resolution / contrast over the entire field between f5.6 ... f11
* well balanced correction of the remaining faults (not too much coma and astigmatism!)
* a bit vignetting wide open
* as little CAs as possible (Carl Zeiss Jena and Oberkochen lenses from the 1950s/1960s often have less CAs than the corresponding Nikkors or Minolta lenses from the 1970s)

There are vintage lenses that fit very well into this definition; other such as the Biotar 1.5/7.5cm have strong astigmatism / coma and a weird bokeh - so i would not recommend them at all for paid work, unless you specifically want to specialize on that.

From my list given above the Nikkor 2.8/20mm fits quite well. It is a bit soft wide open, however the entire correction of the lens is well balanced, and CAs are 1) nott too strong and 2) yellow/blueish (not green/magenta, which usually is more disturbing). Stopped down it becomes very good. The Minolta AF 2.8/20mm gives a similar look, but it's not an MF lens, of course.


Thank you Stephan, I did think that response was a little odd!

I keep going backwards and forwards on this subject, as there is no right answer for my needs/wishes. What is quite clear to me is that I am going to have to either make a compromise in IQ or compromise my principles and go modern MF. The Nikkor would be a compromise between compromises, and quite attractive as I have Nikon as a second body/system.

Fortunately I don't have the cash to go out and buy a 20ish mm lens at the moment, so I'll keep debating with myself until I realise I need more than one super wide angle lens. Three or four should shut me up.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 05, 2016 9:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Tokina was (and is) one of my favorite classic wide-angle lenses. Of course, it's corners aren't superb, mine even has a difference in sharpness between left and right side.
After i found that out i bought the Minolta MD 2.8/20, which is excellent imho, and the Tamron SP 3.5/17 (151B model, which is the revised version).

The Tamron 17 is really very nice, funny that nobody has mentioned it yet! I have that 4/21 adapt-a-matic as well, but that is truly a classic lens, it vignettes and has soft corners, here are some samples from it: http://forum.mflenses.com/tamron-adapt-a-matic-21mm-f-4-5-model-pfj-45au-t76032,highlight,%2Btamron+%2B21mm.html

And a sample made with the SP 17mm:
Seissingel Middelburg by René Maly, on Flickr


PostPosted: Mon Dec 05, 2016 10:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

TrueLoveOne wrote:
The Tokina was (and is) one of my favorite classic wide-angle lenses. Of course, it's corners aren't superb, mine even has a difference in sharpness between left and right side.
After i found that out i bought the Minolta MD 2.8/20, which is excellent imho, and the Tamron SP 3.5/17 (151B model, which is the revised version).

The Tamron 17 is really very nice, funny that nobody has mentioned it yet! I have that 4/21 adapt-a-matic as well, but that is truly a classic lens, it vignettes and has soft corners, here are some samples from it: http://forum.mflenses.com/tamron-adapt-a-matic-21mm-f-4-5-model-pfj-45au-t76032,highlight,%2Btamron+%2B21mm.html

And a sample made with the SP 17mm:


Nice!


PostPosted: Mon Dec 05, 2016 6:34 pm    Post subject: Re: Top Quality Wide Angle Lens Advice 16-21mm range Reply with quote

itsfozzy wrote:
I've started to get into landscape shooting with my A7 II, and I'm looking for something with good edge sharpness. I already have a Samyang 14/2.8 which I'm very happy with, however I'd rather use older lenses whenever possible. I know that even modern wide angle lenses can struggle with edge sharpness, so I know I have manage my expectations. Currently I'm using 25m(C/Y Distagon)-50mm(whatever is in the bag) lenses and stitching, but there are times where a lens in the 16-21mm range would be ideal.

I've tried the RMC Tokina 17/3.5, which did not do it for me. I had a brief fling with a CZJ 20/2.8 which I sourced for a client, and what little time I had with it was very positive.

I'm not about to go out and get a lens, I just want to know what might be worth being on the lookout for.


Many older 20mm lenses perform very well on the Sony A7M2.Just stop them down to f11 and you'll get very good sharpness across the frame with no significant corner issues.I can recommend the ones that I currently have:

Nikkor 20/2.8 AIS and 20/2.8 AF
Canon nFD/SSC 20/2.8
Olympus OM Zuiko 21/3.5
SMC Pentax M 20/4
Rolleinar MC 20/4

and my favourite ZE Distagon 21/2.8,which is superb and very similar to Loxia.

My experience with four different copies of Tokina 17/3.5 as well as Flektogons,(20/4 and 20/2.8 ),were nothing to write home about.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 05, 2016 11:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TrueLoveOne wrote:
The Tokina was (and is) one of my favorite classic wide-angle lenses. Of course, it's corners aren't superb, mine even has a difference in sharpness between left and right side.
After i found that out i bought the Minolta MD 2.8/20, which is excellent imho, and the Tamron SP 3.5/17 (151B model, which is the revised version).

The Tamron 17 is really very nice, funny that nobody has mentioned it yet! I have that 4/21 adapt-a-matic as well, but that is truly a classic lens, it vignettes and has soft corners, here are some samples from it: http://forum.mflenses.com/tamron-adapt-a-matic-21mm-f-4-5-model-pfj-45au-t76032,highlight,%2Btamron+%2B21mm.html


I own both the Tokina 17mm and revised Tamron 17mm as well. My Tokina is actually a Tokina-made Vivitar, but it's' the same basic lens. I've owned the Vivitar for over 25 years. It is in Canon FD mount, so the only way I've used it was with film. It works very well in that regard. Corners are a bit soft and there's a fair amount of barrel distortion, but livable amounts.

The Tamron is a much more recent purchase. I've owned it for little over a year. Now, I don't own an FF digital, so I find scant reason at all to use them with my APS-C cameras. Besides, I've discovered that neither lens works very well with my digitals. I have kit lenses for both cameras that reach down to 18mm, and both are quite good, so I haven't felt much of a need for the 17s on my digitals. I bought the Tarnron because I was anticipating buying a FF digital, but it never happened and now I don't know when it ever will. So, I've been making do exploiting these lenses on my film cameras instead.

Canon F-1, Vivitar 17mm f/3.5, Kodak Ektar:



PostPosted: Tue Dec 06, 2016 8:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm happy with my 18mm Nikkor and 17mm Tokina (have 2x of them)


PostPosted: Tue Dec 06, 2016 8:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I do not have lenses with wide angle. so I can't say anything. I can only ask - what do you think about Russian Zenitar16/2,8?


PostPosted: Wed Dec 07, 2016 2:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm liking what I'm hearing about the newly announced Tokina Firin 20mm f/2: designed for FE mirrorless and with the necessary electrical contacts.


PostPosted: Fri Dec 09, 2016 9:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I tested recently my small set of 20 something lenses: Contax 18/4, Canon FD 20/2.8 and Leica R 20/4. Resolution-wise, the Canon was much better in the corners and close to perfect at f/8. The Contax was quite good but dropped completely in extreme corners, the Leica was the worse.
I would recommand the Canon if 20mm is wide enough.