| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Eriksen
Joined: 15 Nov 2016
Posts: 153
|
 Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:28 am Post subject: Canon 28mm 2.8 vs. Hexanon 28mm 3.5? |
 |
|
Eriksen wrote:
I know the Hexanon is a very good lens, but I have bought a very cheap Canon 28mm and need to know if Hexanon is so much better that it would be worth the extra cost to buy it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Oldhand
Joined: 01 Apr 2013
Posts: 6009
Location: Mid North Coast NSW - Australia
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 2:33 am Post subject: Re: Canon 28mm 2.8 vs. Hexanon 28mm 3.5? |
|
|
Oldhand wrote:
| Eriksen wrote: |
| I know the Hexanon is a very good lens, but I have bought a very cheap Canon 28mm and need to know if Hexanon is so much better that it would be worth the extra cost to buy it? |
No, I don't think so.
The Canon is also very good.
T |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hoanpham
Joined: 31 Jan 2011
Posts: 2575
Expire: 2015-01-18
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 27, 2017 12:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hoanpham wrote:
The Canon is good, but Hexanon 28/3.5 is not bad unless you need f2.8.
Save for the Hexanon 28mm 1.8. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stevemark
Joined: 29 Apr 2011
Posts: 3754
Location: Switzerland
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2017 9:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
stevemark wrote:
The Hexanon 3.5/28mm (7 lens) is dirt cheap (here in Switzerland often available for <10.-- CHF/EUR/USD), so you can easily get one in addition to your Canon. I have both lenses, but i never made a side-by-side comparison. I think the Hexanon has less distortion; so for architecture you might consider getting one. Otherwise i don't think it's better than the Canon nFD 2.8/28mm.
| hoanpham wrote: |
The Canon is good, but Hexanon 28/3.5 is not bad unless you need f2.8.
Save for the Hexanon 28mm 1.8. |
I have compared the Hexanon AR 1.8/28mm with the Hexanon 3.5/28mm (7 lens version), and at any given aperture the fast f1.8 version is visibly worse than the slow f3.5 version! Definately no need to buy it unless you are a collector ...
Stephan
_________________
www.artaphot.ch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eriksen
Joined: 15 Nov 2016
Posts: 153
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2017 4:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Eriksen wrote:
I got the lens in my mailbox today and the Canon was in nearly mint condition. But can it be used as a reverse macro lens, or will I get any problems regarding the aperture blades which can´t be moved except when the lens is attached to the camera?
And I also need a canon to nex adapter in order to use it, but I see on ebay that there are some with steel mounts on both sides and some without (only one piece of material). Which of these will be the best choice? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hoanpham
Joined: 31 Jan 2011
Posts: 2575
Expire: 2015-01-18
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 01, 2017 8:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
hoanpham wrote:
| stevemark wrote: |
I have compared the Hexanon AR 1.8/28mm with the Hexanon 3.5/28mm (7 lens version), and at any given aperture the fast f1.8 version is visibly worse than the slow f3.5 version! Definately no need to buy it unless you are a collector ...
Stephan |
Mine is slightly worse at brighter aperture, but still very sharp at focus point. If used to take landscape, the 28/3.5 is winner. It is the same for other manufacturer as well: pentax 28/3.5, nikon ais 28/3.5. Seems like smaller aperture lenses are designed to be sharper/better solution. They are for different purposes. I like the 28/1.8 for it's close range. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
