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

Closest focusing wide-angle lens
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 12:16 am    Post subject: Closest focusing wide-angle lens Reply with quote

I'm mainly talking about the 24-28mm focal lenght, thanks.

Bill


PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 12:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't know what's closest..... 12 inches seems to be standard, I've seen some I think to 8 inches. How close were you thinking?


PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 1:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Somewhere in the 6-8" range would be nice. The Flektogon 35/2.4 has
a close focusing range of roughly 7.5"

Bill


PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 1:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Take a look on Nikkor 28mm f2.8 AIS it has a ~ 20 cm variation , that is superb sharp lens one of the best Nikkor , but I am afraid it would be costly.
Don't mix with Nikkor 28mm f2.8 AI it has ~30 cm closest focusing distance and quality is much worst.

http://www.naturfotograf.com/lens_wide.html

What about a below set ? You can get closer with that if I remember as well.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 6:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

My lenses:

Distagon 25mm (Contax version) focuses down to 25 cms which should be 9.75 inches.
And this is the only lens I am left with in this focal range (I sold my Nikkor 24mm to Carsten and I can't remember now how close does it focus)

MIR-10A 28mm f/3.5 = 20 cms (7.8 inches) The MIR is my CF Champ for 28mm

the others:
Distagon 28mm f/2 = 24 cms (9.36 inches)
Distagon 28mm f/2.8 = 25 cms (9.75 inches)
Tamron 28mm f/2.5 = 25 cms (9.75 inches)
Pentacon 29mm f/2.8 = 25 cms (9.75 inches)


PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 6:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is there a reason why the focal length and minimum focus distance is important, Bill? The real yardstick for close focussing is the amount of magnification, and many longer lenses have better figures.

For example, the Flek 2.4/35 has a min. focus distance of 190mm from the film plane and gives 1:2 magnification. For your Tamron SP 35-80 it's 270mm and 1:2.5 magnification. But in macro mode the Tamron SP 60-300 will focus as close as 300mm from the film plane (about 2 inches from the front of the lens) and give a magnification of about 1:1.5.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Peter: thanks another Tammie SP to look for. Wink I have a 2x cam
where it would be nice to have that extra width sometimes in macro
shots. Yeah, seeing Orio's distagon flower pic more than enhanced this
quest! Laughing

Orio, that distagon of yours is a dream lens! I still haven't bought a
C/Y adapter for that 28/2.8 Yashica ML lens, wonder what the minimum
focusing distance is for that lens...

Bill


PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

peterqd wrote:
Is there a reason why the focal length and minimum focus distance is important, Bill? The real yardstick for close focussing is the amount of magnification, and many longer lenses have better figures.


Well, I speak for myself, I love close focusing with wideangle lenses, because it helps with a kind of composition I often favour, that is, to put a foreground object close-up in a landscape shot.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Katastrofo wrote:

Orio, that distagon of yours is a dream lens!


It is, and I am very glad I bought it (my wallet is less happy Sad ), although with the hindsight I would have probably done better buying the new version which is currently sold in the shop with the Nikon, Pentax and M42 mounts.

Quote:
I still haven't bought a
C/Y adapter for that 28/2.8 Yashica ML lens, wonder what the minimum
focusing distance is for that lens...


I think it should be the same as the Distagon 2.8/28


PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio wrote:
I think it should be the same as the Distagon 2.8/28


Do you remember how close the above could focus?


PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attila wrote:
Take a look on Nikkor 28mm f2.8 AIS it has a ~ 20 cm variation , that is superb sharp lens one of the best Nikkor , but I am afraid it would be costly.


Of course it will be costly, just about everything I want is costly! Laughing
I'll look for it, maybe I'll catch a sleeper somewhere.

Bill


PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Katastrofo wrote:
Orio wrote:
I think it should be the same as the Distagon 2.8/28


Do you remember how close the above could focus?


Yes, look at my list above Smile 9.75 inches


PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio wrote:
Katastrofo wrote:
Orio wrote:
I think it should be the same as the Distagon 2.8/28


Do you remember how close the above could focus?


Yes, look at my list above Smile 9.75 inches


Oops, sorry, maybe I should go to bed, it's after 2:30 in the morning. Wink

I'll be ordering that C/Y adapter tout de suite!


PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Katastrofo wrote:


I'll be ordering that C/Y adapter tout de suite!


Check your lens first, as I'm not 100 % sure.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

katzer wrote:
Just as a side note, you can always add a short extension tube.


For proper macro, yes, but if you want to combine close focusing with a landscape shot, the extension tube or bellows will not allow to extend the DOF to the background.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio wrote:
peterqd wrote:
Is there a reason why the focal length and minimum focus distance is important, Bill? The real yardstick for close focussing is the amount of magnification, and many longer lenses have better figures.


Well, I speak for myself, I love close focusing with wideangle lenses, because it helps with a kind of composition I often favour, that is, to put a foreground object close-up in a landscape shot.


Oh yes, I totally agree Orio, but the question was about how close a lens will focus and that's not a consideration with this type of composition, unless you deliberately want the landscape to be a blur. I am assuming that as Bill wants to use the shortest focus distances, his aim is to fill as much of the fame with the subject as possible, but maybe I'm wrong.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

peterqd wrote:
I am assuming that as Bill wants to use the shortest focus distances, his aim is to fill as much of the fame with the subject as possible, but maybe I'm wrong.


Correct Peter, that was my goal, and to be used for fish tank shots
where you want to be in close but have the wide angle to include the
whole tank. Perhaps my aim/goal is off...


PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 5:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

katzer wrote:

good point, what aperture did you have in mind for focusing on a close subject and getting the background within the dof?


Most people sets the focusing distance to 3 mt and the aperture to f/8 or f/11 but I often find myself preferring to get closer to foreground objects, less than 1 mt., and the aperture fully closed to f/22 or even f/32 when available. Some of my wide angle lenses, like the Flek 4/20 or the Distagon 2.8/25, have this feature, that the image quality does not get much worse with the iris fully closed, so I can make this kind of composition and still obtain a high quality image. This is important for me. I like much to frame landsdcapes, especially city landscapes, with foreground objects. That is part of my way of seeing things, of my "style" (should I dare to say I have one)


PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 5:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio wrote:
I like much to frame landsdcapes, especially city landscapes, with foreground objects. That is part of my way of seeing things, of my "style" (should I dare to say I have one)


No, Icarus, I don't think you're flying too close to the sun on that one! Wink Of course wearing goggles, tights,and a cape when shooting
would really add to the style... Laughing

Seriously, I've always liked your 'scapes pictures, and now perhaps,
it is because of style, which factors on the comps.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The very small apertures become a serious problem on digital - the resolution drops precipitously. Coupled with the multiplier on most digitals this really puts a damper on that style of shooting with a digital.

patrick


PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Katastrofo wrote:
peterqd wrote:
I am assuming that as Bill wants to use the shortest focus distances, his aim is to fill as much of the fame with the subject as possible, but maybe I'm wrong.


Correct Peter, that was my goal, and to be used for fish tank shots
where you want to be in close but have the wide angle to include the
whole tank. Perhaps my aim/goal is off...


Well, now I'm out of my depth in fish tanks! Rolling Eyes But one thing to think about is that you can get the same picture contents using quite different length lenses just by altering the taking distance. Using a slightly longer lens from a longer distance gives greater depth of field.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:24 pm    Post subject: Re: Closest focusing wide-angle lens Reply with quote

Katastrofo wrote:
I'm mainly talking about the 24-28mm focal lenght, thanks.

Bill


Cheap solution, but not bad: Revuenon 24mm F 1:4 Macro
Focuses down to 18 cm (7 inches)
Probably rare beyond Western Europe (German made)


PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 9:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi, Bill,
Interesting topic. I believe most 24-35 have closest focus at 30 cm or 1 ft. 28 mm lens may be the easiest focal range that you will find a closer lens. Those lens are sometimes marked by the magnification. Most close 28 mm lens are f2.8, I had a Makinon lens earlier. That brand normally shares products with ten others. Vivitar should have another 28/2.8 goes closer or marked 'close focus'. For faster lenses, Vivitar has a 28mm f2 marked close focus also and probably takes 49mm filter. Soligor 28/2 C/D also goes to ~20cm, if I remember correct. At 24mm, at least there is a Starbliz goes to 1:4, which is ~14-15cm or 5.5-6 inches listed at a Japanese site http://homepage3.nifty.com/3rdpartylens-om/starblitz24.htm. The only lens of such kind that I know for sure has a floating element design to correct near field curvature is Nikon 28/2.8 AIS which goes to 0.2 m, ~1:5.
If you go even shorter, Sigma 18mm f3.2 XQ is very close, probably at ~ 15cm. Also Vivvitar 20mm f3.8 is as close as less than 6 inch. Considering the size of those lenses, you almost need put front element on the object to get focused there. Both are pretty good lens if not against the light.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 11, 2007 10:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Many digicams will give you a wide-angle with close to 3cm close focusing... Might be worth considering?


PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 5:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gentlemen, thanks for all your comments. I just won on ebay, this:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=220147212654&ssPageName=STRK:MEWN:IT&ih=012

This auction is a study in how not to feature an auction! Laughing

Bill


Last edited by Katastrofo on Wed Sep 12, 2007 5:48 pm; edited 1 time in total