Which 24mm lens (sub $1000 budget)?

[jjphoto]

Thing is that I really like the sharpness you get with the Contax 28/2.8 and Leica R 28/2.8 E55 and I'm looking for a lens like that in 24mm, maybe wider, but preferably in the sub $1000 price range. Needs to work on Canon FF body. Any ideas?

JJ

[Orio]

Distagon 2.8/25, in my opinion the best choice (make sure it's MM version)
or Yashica ML 2.8/24, if you can find one (not easy to find lens).

[ManualFocus-G]

Nikkor 24/2.8 ais is very Sharp and well within budget.

[jjphoto]

I have the Yashica ML 24 (my second one, they performed the same) and Leica R 24 (Liveview ONLY on 5d2) and both are only OK IMHO. The Leica R is my best 24 compared to the Yashica ML 24, and my Canon 17-40 and 24-70 zooms.

I also had a Contax 25/2.8 for a little while and a Nikkor 24/2.8 Ais more than 15 years ago. I didn't think the Contax was very impressive and didn't keep it although I had the Nikkor for many years, and it is a nice lens.

This is my dilema. Those are all OK lenses but surely there's something better, and still costs less than $1K. Maybe there isn't.

I've been considering getting the olympus 24/2.8 or maybe 24/2 but I'm not convinced it's worth spending the extra money on the f2 lens. I have the Olympus 28/2.8 and it's a very good lens, but it's not quite in the same bracket as the Contax and Leica R 28's which are the level of performance I would like to find.

JJ

[LucisPictor]

[Attila]

Nikon get my vote too, Yashica almost good as Nikon , but lot more rare. If you have money more Distagon 25mm is also a great deal. I doubt any 24mm lens is significantly better than Nikon no matter how expensive it is.
Olympus OM 24m f2 and f2.8 also a great lens.

[ManualFocus-G]

Hmm, what is it you really want from the lens, that you can't get from existing models you've owned? I think the only reason I would swap my Nikon out would be for something with 3D characteristics like the Distagon. But even then I'm not sure how much a difference it would make with a lens that wide on FF, where most shots are likely (for me) to be at or near to infinity. Of course you could be after an APO lens or something.

[jjphoto]

[Orio]

Something in support of the Distagon 25:



no lens hood used for the above photo.

See original comments:
http://forum.mflenses.com/distagon-25-torrent-stirone-t22291,highlight,%2Bdistagon+%2B2+%2B8+%2B25.html

Flare control for super wide lenses is very important. That is why I would choose Distagon 25 over the other contenders.
I have had and used the Nikkor. It is a very good lens, but the coating is not as good as the Distagon's - at least not in the version that I used.
_

[rbelyell]

ive had a few 24s, and i really like the yashica ml, and i honestly see quite a few on ebay. in fact im sure there are at least 4 going right now. having said that, wow! orio, that distagon shot looked awfully good!

[Cistron]

[Bruce]

My vote goes to the 25 Distagon

I also have the Nikkor 24/2.8 and the Olympus 24/2.8
but my Distagon is very sharp!

[berraneck]

[uhoh7]

[Cistron]

[NikonD]

My vote goes for Nikkor 24/2.8 AI-S

[jjphoto]

[walter g]

I'd also say the Nikkor 24/2.8 AI-S I've seen very nice results from this lens.
That's my second choice. First choice would be the Minolta MD W Rokkor X 24 f2.8. Less then $200 bucks, but it won't fit your camera. I don't know if anyone is converting these yet.

[iangreenhalgh1]

Years ago I had a 24mm for my Minolta 7000 that was badged Carl Zeiss but made in Japan, I think by Sigma.

It was a great lens, almost no distortion and very contrasty for a wide angle, all metal and glass and built like a tank, no plastic in it at all.

Anyways, if you see one of those, (they have a red ring round the very front end) then they are well worth buying, they were available in all kinds of mounts and the mount ring was held on by four screws so would be really easy to adapt.

[cooltouch]

I agree that the Nikkor 24mm f/2.8 AI-S is a very nice lens. I have one and I like mine a lot. It does a great job.

Nikon F2, 24mm f/2.8 AI-s, Ektar 100


But about a year and a half ago, I bought a Tamron Adaptall-2 24mm f/2.5 off eBay, mostly so I could use it with my Canon FD and Pentax K cameras. But I was curious how well it held up against my "mighty" Nikkor 24mm, so I performed a series of tests, and I posted the results here at the forum. Scroll about halfway down in the thread to get to the beginning of the tests.

http://forum.mflenses.com/tamron-24mm-f-2-5-t22049,highlight,%2Btamron+%2B24mm.html

Canon F-1, Tamron 24mm f/2.5, Velvia 50


So, you can potentially save yourself a bundle and still wind up with a fine lens if you go with the Tamron.

[Attila]

My Tamron was quite crappy.

[james]

[iangreenhalgh1]

I'd be keen to hear people's suggestions for a good 24mm that won't break the bank. 24s seem to not be so common secondhand, 28s are much more common, maybe people hold onto their 24s?

I still miss that Japanese Zeiss one I had, might not have been upto Flektogon standards but it took a lovely pic.

I'm using a EOS 10D with the smaller sensor, will a 24 work alright on this cam or will I see some vignetting?

[aoleg]

I tried a lot of 24mm lenses. My favorite is AI-S Nikkor 24/2.8, followed closely by Olympus OM Zuiko 24/2.8 (must say just "Zuiko" and not "MC Zuiko" or "H.Zuiko" on the front ring). Yashica ML 24/2.8 is also nice, but, IMO, overrated. Too bad the Russians didn't make a 24mm lens - that could be a winner.

[f6cvalkyrie]