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

Which 24 and 35mm for A7
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2014 3:58 pm    Post subject: Which 24 and 35mm for A7 Reply with quote

Hi everybody, I'm looking for, perhaps, buying an A7 to fit with my 24x36 lenses that I use everyday (Zuiko OM) and time to time when I want a "characteristic" lens (Jupiter-3 and an early Helios 44).
Usually I like wide angles. I've got a Zuiko OM 24mm f/2.8, I really like it with my Olympus E-P5 and a speedbooster and I liked it when I got a Fuji X-E1 but it seems it is not so great with an A7.
So the question, which 24 and 35mm would you by for a Sony A7 ?
I want it :
-Not too expensive (max 500)
-Compact (I won't by a Leitz R, they are excellent but too big and heavy for me)
-Pretty fast, at least f/2.8


Last edited by caribou on Sun Oct 26, 2014 4:13 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2014 4:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sigma 24mm f2.8 is cheap but superb:
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/24mmcup/pentax/24mm_groupc1.html


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2014 4:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A friend of mine has used a Canon FD 2.8/24 for a while on his A7R and was pretty OK with it.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2014 4:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The best 24mm lens I had so far is the nikkor ais 2.8/24.
I still have to find any weakness to it.
As for 35, I bought a nikkor 2.5/35 for rangefinder cameras that is truly superb: sharp, great colors, wild bokeh with a bit of swirl wide open, much cleaner and more modern feel stopped down.
And it's tiny, which can be a nice feature on a7.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2014 4:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for your suggestions, I'll look for each.
Aanything wrote:

As for 35, I bought a nikkor 2.5/35 for rangefinder cameras that is truly superb: sharp, great colors, wild bokeh with a bit of swirl wide open, much cleaner and more modern feel stopped down.
And it's tiny, which can be a nice feature on a7.
Mmm, that sound great, compactness is a great quality for me. But I read that rangefinder lenses under 40-50mm aren't so good with A7, do you have some samples already posted here ?


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2014 4:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

caribou wrote:
Thanks for your suggestions, I'll look for each.
Aanything wrote:

As for 35, I bought a nikkor 2.5/35 for rangefinder cameras that is truly superb: sharp, great colors, wild bokeh with a bit of swirl wide open, much cleaner and more modern feel stopped down.
And it's tiny, which can be a nice feature on a7.
Mmm, that sound great, compactness is a great quality for me. But I read that rangefinder lenses under 40-50mm aren't so good with A7, do you have some samples already posted here ?


No, actually I never used it on digital full frame, I only use it on my nex-5r and on a kiev rangefinder, so I wasn't considering the possible corner smearing and color shift on a7.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2014 4:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

But, I found a thread by member nordentro with some samples from this lens with the a7r.
Quite impressive results, if you ask me.

http://forum.mflenses.com/nippon-kogaku-w-nikkor-3-5cm-f-2-5-ltm-and-a7r-t63967.html


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2014 5:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Nikkor 35mm ltm is a nice gem for sure. Corners are not fully sharp wide open, but comes nicely in when stopping down. The Canon ltm 35mm f/2.8 is another gem and have better corners wide open but are less sharp in the middle compared to the Nikkor. Both are great really, and very compact Wink


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2014 6:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Distagon 35/2.8 are pretty cheap (under 200)


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2014 7:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, if I buy an A7 this Nikkor seems to be a good choice for me...


PostPosted: Mon Oct 27, 2014 3:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

best 24 tried so far, the pentax FA*24/2, not so good at manual focusing but great lens

for the 35mm the 35/1.8 HH or MD from minolta


PostPosted: Fri Dec 12, 2014 3:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The best of my 24mm lenses on the A7.Compact and under 500Euro:

Minolta MD/MC/MC SI Rokkor 24/2.8
Distagon C/Y 25/2.8
Canon nFD 24/2.8 and 24/2.0
Oly Zuiko 24/2.8 and 24/2.0

The best of my 35mm lenses on the A7.Compact and under 500Euro:

Zeiss Distagon C/Y 35/2.8 MM
Canon FDn 35/2.0
Minolta MD Rokkor 35/2.8 with 49mm and 55mm filters,plain Minolta MD 35/2.8 - probably the best bang for the bucks

And a tad behind:
Oly Zuiko 35/2.0 and 35/2.8
Pentax M 35/2.8
Yashica ML 35/2.8
Flektogon 35/2.4 CZJ

There are more good 35mm and 24mm options among Konica Hexanons/Canon FD SSC/Zeiss ZF/ZE/Minolta MC/MD,but bigger,heavier and more expensive (Zeiss).


PostPosted: Fri Jul 10, 2015 4:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

shapencolour wrote:
The best of my 24mm lenses on the A7.Compact and under 500Euro:

Minolta MD/MC/MC SI Rokkor 24/2.8
...


On the A7, the plain MD (akaMD-III) 8-lens 2.8/24mm is visibly better than the older (and much better known) MC/MD 2.8/24 (9-lens).
The latter is on par with the Canon new FD 2.8/24mm.

Stephan


PostPosted: Sat Feb 27, 2016 6:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If f/2.8 is fast enough for you, the Minolta MD35/2.8 looks like a good choice, even on the A7RII, it's quite impressive.

If you want a faster lens, the MD35/1.8 might be worth a look too:





[source: artaphot.ch)

If size & weight are a factor, the MDII versions tend to be the smallest:


source: rokkorfiles.com


PostPosted: Mon Feb 29, 2016 10:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

in 35mm

- Jupiter-12 is a must have
- Flektogon 35/2.4
- Minolta Rokkor HH 35/1.8 (if you are interested i'm planning to sell mine Very Happy)


PostPosted: Mon Feb 29, 2016 4:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm surprised your Oly 24mm is not so good on your A7. Zuiko lenses are usually superb.

As for 24mm lenses, I own a Canon 24mm f/2.8 SSC, a Nikkor 24mm f/2.8 AIs, and a Tamron 24mm f/2.5. A few years ago, I did a comparison test with the Tamron and Nikkor using a Canon EOS XS DSLR (10.1mp) and found that they were roughly equivalent. The Tamron exhibited a bit of flare wide open, but stopped down to about f/8, it was noticeably sharper than the Nikkor, especially on the corners of a 1.6x crop sensor. I was a little surprised by that. I also tested the Canon FD against the Nikkor and found the Canon to have a slight edge. All three of these lenses can be had for way less than 500 euros.

As for 35mm lenses, I have a few of them too: a Canon FL 35mm f/2.5, a Canon FD 35mm f/2.8, an old 35mm f/2 pre-AI Nikkor with an AI conversion done, and a Vivitar 35mm f/1.9. I love that Nikkor, but my favorite 35mm is the Canon FL. I've shot with the FL 35mm going all the way back to 1984. On a 35mm frame, it's quite sharp all the way to the corners. And one of the nice things about it is, since it is an FL lens, it tends to sell for less than an FD 35/2.8. I bought mine on eBay for $40US. The one I bought in 1984, I sold during the early 90s and found that I missed it, so a few years ago, I bought another one. The Vivitar deserves a comment too. I bought mine on eBay probably four or five years ago, but hadn't used it much -- and then only with film cameras because it is in Canon FD mount. Last year I bought a NEX 7, so I was able to use the Canon FL/FD mount lenses on it. When I mounted it to my NEX 7 and took some test shots with it, I was amazed at how sharp it is. That lens has been discovered by folks like us, who like to mount old lenses to digital cameras. As a result of this discovery, the Vivitar 35/1.9 now sells for big bucks on eBay, typically between $150 and $250. When I bought mine, it hadn't been discovered yet and I paid about $40US for it too.


PostPosted: Mon Jul 25, 2016 2:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Minolta MD 35/2.8 (last version) is very sharp, very light (albeit not all-metal) and compact, very smooth-pulling focus. For character, there is also a 35/1.8 MD version.

The Canon FDn 35/2.8 and FDn 35/2 lenses are similarly good and probably easier to find.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 23, 2016 1:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

my faves (among many I use and I used, and considering quality/price):

- 24 Olympus OM (not amazing sharpness.....but excellent and light-weight).

-35 ....Schneider Curtagon or, better (here we enter in the "legend" zone, as I call special lenses) leitz-R summicron.
microcontrast, detail, leica colours......IMHO very better than the zeiss, canon, nikon, olympus 35 I used.

Not so wonderful the Leica elmarit 24, another thing the (again legendary and IMHO better than distagon od japanese) 28 elmarit.


Sandro


PostPosted: Tue Nov 01, 2016 4:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've been in the same dilema when I upgraded to A7R2 - what wide lenses to get/use?

I have chosen to save a little and sell most of my older wide lenses to go for the best I could afford.
I ended up with 3 new wide lenses: Sonnar T* FE 35mm f/2.8 ZA, Batis 25mm f/2 and the Super Wide Heliar III 15mm f/4.5.
It was quite an expensive option and all my average, good and very good older wide lenses got sold (only few of the very best of them remained).
That's a decision I don't regret a second.

For a 35mm my advice is to add 50-100$ to your max. budget and get a Sony Sonnar T* FE 35mm f/2.8 ZA - very small and light, really excellent on FF and it has AF (for street photography), too.

As for a ~24mm lens - the 25mm Batis can't be beaten, but it's quite expensive. A Samyang 24mm f/1.4 is a very good option till you can get a Batis - you can sell it later and recover most of the investment (that's what I did before getting my Batis).

sarrasani wrote:
... leitz-R summicron.
microcontrast, detail, leica colours......IMHO very better than the zeiss, canon, nikon, olympus 35 I used. ...

I agree, the 35mm Summicron-R is one of the very few older wides I'm keeping. Smile