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

which 28 mm to have?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Nov 09, 2020 9:51 pm    Post subject: which 28 mm to have? Reply with quote
The FL 28 mm never was my favorite. But in trips should be useful with 50/60 mm standart lens.

A lot of options at the market

K-M 28/3,5
K-M 28/2,8
Hex. AR 28/3,5 (V.2)
Canon FL 28/3,5
Canon nFD 28/2,8
OM 28/2,8
OM 28/3,5

I know there are very similar lenses with almost the same rendering, but perhaos one of this has differential characters

Any suggestion?


PostPosted: Mon Nov 09, 2020 10:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Well, I use my 28mm almost exclusively for landscapes and have found the SMC Pentax K 28mm f3.5 to be excellent.
The AI-S Nikkor also has a great reputation
Tom


PostPosted: Mon Nov 09, 2020 11:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oldhand wrote:
Well, I use my 28mm almost exclusively for landscapes and have found the SMC Pentax K 28mm f3.5 to be excellent.
The AI-S Nikkor also has a great reputation
Tom


Thank you Oldhand. I had the Ais, but as I didn´t use it, so sold the lens. Never tried the IQ.


PostPosted: Mon Nov 09, 2020 11:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Very important question.

I am glad with my MDIII 28 3,5 but I must recognize that infinite is not perfect.

My MC 28 2,5 is excellent but suffers from field curvature on angles and edges.

My MD 24 35 is excellent but suffers in the extreme edges and corners.

My FD 28 2,8 is superlatively sharp but has a slight wavy field so this is also a problem in some cases.

I acknowledge that I am buying the simplest cheapest lenses these days on account that the manufacturers had less problems to solve and may have achieved a better result.

Does someone knows how behaves the Fd Fl 28 3,5 compared to the 28 2,8?


PostPosted: Tue Nov 10, 2020 8:05 am    Post subject: Re: which 28 mm to have? Reply with quote
papasito wrote:

OM 28/3,5


this one is really small and lighweight


PostPosted: Tue Nov 10, 2020 8:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oldhand wrote:
Well, I use my 28mm almost exclusively for landscapes and have found the SMC Pentax K 28mm f3.5 to be excellent.
The AI-S Nikkor also has a great reputation
Tom


I second this. I tested the SMC Pentax K 28mm f/3.5 against the Nikkor Ai-s 28mm f2.8, and the Pentax is a bit better, both at infinity and close objects. I will never part with the Pentax, it's truy excellent.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 10, 2020 8:59 am    Post subject: Re: which 28 mm to have? Reply with quote
kansalliskala wrote:
papasito wrote:

OM 28/3,5


this one is really small and lighweight

Like 1


PostPosted: Tue Nov 10, 2020 9:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The SMC Pentax-m 28mm 3.5 is almost as good as the earlier K. But cheaper, lighter and smaller. On APS-C I don't think there is much difference between the two. On full frame there's corners.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 10, 2020 11:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
An application for a particular version:

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=4879&p=29118

The application:

http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4864


PostPosted: Tue Nov 10, 2020 12:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Did you try RMC Tokina? So cheap and can compete with the above.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 10, 2020 12:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I've been testing many vintage 28mm lenses. There are very few lousy ones (e. g. the Edixar). I would discriminate between earlier (1960s) and later (from about 1975 on) constructions.

1) The earlier retrofocus 28mm lenses usually have a distinct "vintage" look with lower contrast wide open and a nice "glow". Detail resolution in the corners clears up only af f8 or f11. These lenses usually have a pretty large front lens, and the optical construction consists of a master lens and a wide-angle converter in front of it.

2) The later lenses have a more "integrated" construction, and often a reduced number of lenses (five instead of seven for 28mm f3.5). Compared to the early retrofocus constructions, their front lens diameter usually is much smaller.

Most of the later 2.8/28mm and 3.5/28mm lenses were good budget lenses (similiarly to the ubiquituos 2.8/135mm tele lenses). The differences between those lenses are not that obvious:

Canon nFD 2.8/28mm
Konica AR 3.5/35mm [7L]
Konica AR 3.5/35mm [5L]
Minolta MC/MD 2.8/28mm [7L]
Minolta MD-III 2.8/28mm [5L]
Minolta MD 3.5/28mm [5L]
Nikkor Ai 2.8/28mm
Nikkor AiS 3.5/28mm
Olympus Zuiko 3.5/28mm
Pentax M 2.8/28mm
Tokina RMC 2.8/28mm (there may be several versions - I don't recall exactly which one I have tested)
Yashica ML 2.8/28mm [6L]
Carl Zeiss CY 2.8/28mm

On 24MP FF all these lenses have visible lateral CAs, all have some visible distortion, and usually they are pretty good at f5.6 and really good at f11 (apart from lateral CAs and distortion, of course). To give you an idea - back in 2018 I've been shooting side-by-side with the Zeiss APO Distagon 1.4/28mm and the Zeiss CY Distagon 2.8/28mm, mainly some architecture in Rome: Lots of details, lots of very fine structures and patterns. At f8, after correcting the lateral CAs of the CY 2.8/28mm, there was not much difference between the two lenses. At f2.8, the APO Distagon was a good as at f8 (the CY wasn't, of course). And at f1.4, well, the APO Distagon was still nearly perfect. Slightly reduced contrast, and a shallow depth-of field of course, but completely useable both on 24MP as well as 43 MP FF.

To make it short - i don't know a really stellar vintage 28mm lens. The one I like most is the Minolta MD-III 2/28mm (same optics as the later AF 2/28mm). It is soft wide open, but really sharp stopped down, and it has sligtly less lateral CAs than the "average" 2.8/28mm. And it is small! Other slightly above average lenses are e. g. the Minolta MC 2.5/28mm (thorium lens, often yellowish tint) and the nFD 2/28mm (which ususally has problems with the internal slide bearings). Both the MC 2/28mm and the FD 2/28mm are really nice to work with (haptics!!), but performance isn't outstanding.

CAVEAT: I've never used the Pentax K 3.5/28mm, the Leica R 2.8/28mm variants, the Nikkor Ai/AiS 2/28mm or the Zeiss CY 2/28mm.

S


PostPosted: Tue Nov 10, 2020 4:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
Oldhand wrote:
Well, I use my 28mm almost exclusively for landscapes and have found the SMC Pentax K 28mm f3.5 to be excellent.
The AI-S Nikkor also has a great reputation
Tom


I second this. I tested the SMC Pentax K 28mm f/3.5 against the Nikkor Ai-s 28mm f2.8, and the Pentax is a bit better, both at infinity and close objects. I will never part with the Pentax, it's truy excellent.


I have read your post and test.
Really good.
The Pentax that you are talking about is the K, not the M, isn't it?


PostPosted: Tue Nov 10, 2020 4:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:
I've been testing many vintage 28mm lenses. There are very few lousy ones (e. g. the Edixar). I would discriminate between earlier (1960s) and later (from about 1975 on) constructions.

1) The earlier retrofocus 28mm lenses usually have a distinct "vintage" look with lower contrast wide open and a nice "glow". Detail resolution in the corners clears up only af f8 or f11. These lenses usually have a pretty large front lens, and the optical construction consists of a master lens and a wide-angle converter in front of it.

2) The later lenses have a more "integrated" construction, and often a reduced number of lenses (five instead of seven for 28mm f3.5). Compared to the early retrofocus constructions, their front lens diameter usually is much smaller.

Most of the later 2.8/28mm and 3.5/28mm lenses were good budget lenses (similiarly to the ubiquituos 2.8/135mm tele lenses). The differences between those lenses are not that obvious:

Canon nFD 2.8/28mm
Konica AR 3.5/35mm [7L]
Konica AR 3.5/35mm [5L]
Minolta MC/MD 2.8/28mm [7L]
Minolta MD-III 2.8/28mm [5L]
Minolta MD 3.5/28mm [5L]
Nikkor Ai 2.8/28mm
Nikkor AiS 3.5/28mm
Olympus Zuiko 3.5/28mm
Pentax M 2.8/28mm
Tokina RMC 2.8/28mm (there may be several versions - I don't recall exactly which one I have tested)
Yashica ML 2.8/28mm [6L]
Carl Zeiss CY 2.8/28mm

On 24MP FF all these lenses have visible lateral CAs, all have some visible distortion, and usually they are pretty good at f5.6 and really good at f11 (apart from lateral CAs and distortion, of course). To give you an idea - back in 2018 I've been shooting side-by-side with the Zeiss APO Distagon 1.4/28mm and the Zeiss CY Distagon 2.8/28mm, mainly some architecture in Rome: Lots of details, lots of very fine structures and patterns. At f8, after correcting the lateral CAs of the CY 2.8/28mm, there was not much difference between the two lenses. At f2.8, the APO Distagon was a good as at f8 (the CY wasn't, of course). And at f1.4, well, the APO Distagon was still nearly perfect. Slightly reduced contrast, and a shallow depth-of field of course, but completely useable both on 24MP as well as 43 MP FF.

To make it short - i don't know a really stellar vintage 28mm lens. The one I like most is the Minolta MD-III 2/28mm (same optics as the later AF 2/28mm). It is soft wide open, but really sharp stopped down, and it has sligtly less lateral CAs than the "average" 2.8/28mm. And it is small! Other slightly above average lenses are e. g. the Minolta MC 2.5/28mm (thorium lens, often yellowish tint) and the nFD 2/28mm (which ususally has problems with the internal slide bearings). Both the MC 2/28mm and the FD 2/28mm are really nice to work with (haptics!!), but performance isn't outstanding.

CAVEAT: I've never used the Pentax K 3.5/28mm, the Leica R 2.8/28mm variants, the Nikkor Ai/AiS 2/28mm or the Zeiss CY 2/28mm.

S


Many thx.
About the Hollywood Zeiss 2/28 (same as Pentax?), Orio have written a lot of good things and showed very good pics.
Not cheap at all.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 10, 2020 4:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I sold most of my 28s except a scarce one after I got my FE 28.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 10, 2020 6:45 pm    Post subject: Re: which 28 mm to have? Reply with quote
papasito wrote:
The FL 28 mm never was my favorite. But in trips should be useful with 50/60 mm standart lens.

A lot of options at the market

K-M 28/3,5
K-M 28/2,8
Hex. AR 28/3,5 (V.2)
Canon FL 28/3,5
Canon nFD 28/2,8
OM 28/2,8
OM 28/3,5

I know there are very similar lenses with almost the same rendering, but perhaos one of this has differential characters

Any suggestion?


My lens with Leica mount.
#1


PostPosted: Tue Nov 10, 2020 7:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
papasito wrote:
caspert79 wrote:
Oldhand wrote:
Well, I use my 28mm almost exclusively for landscapes and have found the SMC Pentax K 28mm f3.5 to be excellent.
The AI-S Nikkor also has a great reputation
Tom


I second this. I tested the SMC Pentax K 28mm f/3.5 against the Nikkor Ai-s 28mm f2.8, and the Pentax is a bit better, both at infinity and close objects. I will never part with the Pentax, it's truy excellent.


I have read your post and test.
Really good.
The Pentax that you are talking about is the K, not the M, isn't it?


Indeed, the K.


PostPosted: Tue Nov 10, 2020 9:42 pm    Post subject: Re: which 28 mm to have? Reply with quote
LLB! wrote:
papasito wrote:
The FL 28 mm never was my favorite. But in trips should be useful with 50/60 mm standart lens.

A lot of options at the market

K-M 28/3,5
K-M 28/2,8
Hex. AR 28/3,5 (V.2)
Canon FL 28/3,5
Canon nFD 28/2,8
OM 28/2,8
OM 28/3,5

I know there are very similar lenses with almost the same rendering, but perhaos one of this has differential characters

Any suggestion?


My lens with Leica mount.
#1


Many thanks. I never used it. Only know that has a similar scheme than angulon of schneider classic 90/6,8 lens, I guess


PostPosted: Tue Nov 10, 2020 10:16 pm    Post subject: Re: which 28 mm to have? Reply with quote
papasito wrote:
LLB! wrote:
papasito wrote:
The FL 28 mm never was my favorite. But in trips should be useful with 50/60 mm standart lens.

A lot of options at the market

K-M 28/3,5
K-M 28/2,8
Hex. AR 28/3,5 (V.2)
Canon FL 28/3,5
Canon nFD 28/2,8
OM 28/2,8
OM 28/3,5

I know there are very similar lenses with almost the same rendering, but perhaos one of this has differential characters

Any suggestion?


My lens with Leica mount.
#1


Many thanks. I never used it. Only know that has a similar scheme than angulon of schneider classic 90/6,8 lens, I guess


I dare to assure you a good lens. However, the full frame shows some purple in the corners. I also see on eBay where I bought a jump in prices for it.


PostPosted: Wed Nov 11, 2020 12:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
IT seems not wrong to think that with an old zoom like the vivitar 28-48/3,9 or MDIII 24-35/3,5 I have two or three wide Angle lenses and don't lose a lot of IQ.

Am I wrong?


PostPosted: Wed Nov 11, 2020 2:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Vivitar 28 f2.5 in Nikon F mount. Haven't used it much yet so no opinion at this time.


PostPosted: Wed Nov 11, 2020 10:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
papasito wrote:
IT seems not wrong to think that with an old zoom like the vivitar 28-48/3,9 or MDIII 24-35/3,5 I have two or three wide Angle lenses and don't lose a lot of IQ.

Am I wrong?


Do not know about the vivitar but can speak about the 24 35.

It is an excellent lens on full frame if you are able to neglect extreme edges and corners. For a long time I was not able to admit that but I am getting older and maybe wiser. What would be of interest in the extreme corners and edges? Only a wrongly composed photo would be a problem.

Of course if you plan to stitch you might prefer a lesser quality more homogeneous lens since edges and corners will belong to the central part of your picture and the end result will probably be pixel reduced and sharpened. But what is the percentage of pictures we stitch?

So all in all I do favour a lens providing excellent sharpness and microcontrast on 90 % of the frame rather than pixel peeping the corners.

But that is just me and if you are willing to think the same a good copy of the 24 35 will reward you with very good prime like results. On APSC no reservation applies.

On the 90 % of the frame I am discussing the field flatness is excellent and better than a few primes I have.

I would not be surprised that on a kolari modded body corners would improve evidencing the quality of the lens that was designed in the film ages. If someone could test that I would happily read the outcome.

I bought a MD 24 50 sometime ago and was not more impressed but my copy was defective with a wobbling body. So no conclusion here.


PostPosted: Wed Nov 11, 2020 10:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
papasito wrote:
IT seems not wrong to think that with an old zoom like the vivitar 28-48/3,9 or MDIII 24-35/3,5 I have two or three wide Angle lenses and don't lose a lot of IQ.

Am I wrong?

I'm not sure - I think a similar quality prime like a Minolta 24 2.8 might be sharper at 24mm and therefor a crop of it might equal the zoom at it's 35mm end. And it's smaller, lighter and faster.

I had a MD 24-35 on my A7 and was always pleased by it's rendering and sharpness (not prime-like but still very good). I sold it after I got a cheap Tokina 24 2.8. Stopped down the Tokina was about the same IQ level as the Minolta zoom (perhaps a tad softer), but I prefered the compactness of the prime.

PS: No MF, but the already mentioned Sony FE 28 is also a very good lens, especially considering it's used price.


PostPosted: Wed Nov 11, 2020 7:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Pancolart wrote:
Did you try RMC Tokina? So cheap and can compete with the above.


Yes, I did. Uses the hexanon 28/3,5 v.2, made by tokina, isn't it?
Very good, so I listed it.


PostPosted: Wed Nov 11, 2020 7:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Big R wrote:
papasito wrote:
IT seems not wrong to think that with an old zoom like the vivitar 28-48/3,9 or MDIII 24-35/3,5 I have two or three wide Angle lenses and don't lose a lot of IQ.

Am I wrong?

I'm not sure - I think a similar quality prime like a Minolta 24 2.8 might be sharper at 24mm and therefor a crop of it might equal the zoom at it's 35mm end. And it's smaller, lighter and faster.

I had a MD 24-35 on my A7 and was always pleased by it's rendering and sharpness (not prime-like but still very good). I sold it after I got a cheap Tokina 24 2.8. Stopped down the Tokina was about the same IQ level as the Minolta zoom (perhaps a tad softer), but I prefered the compactness of the prime.

PS: No MF, but the already mentioned Sony FE 28 is also a very good lens, especially considering it's used price.


Thx very much. So, with this very good idea I can buy the cheap and good AF Minolta 24/2,8. Not bad at all.
To think about it!!!


PostPosted: Fri Nov 13, 2020 4:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
caspert79 wrote:
Oldhand wrote:
Well, I use my 28mm almost exclusively for landscapes and have found the SMC Pentax K 28mm f3.5 to be excellent.
The AI-S Nikkor also has a great reputation
Tom


I second this. I tested the SMC Pentax K 28mm f/3.5 against the Nikkor Ai-s 28mm f2.8, and the Pentax is a bit better, both at infinity and close objects. I will never part with the Pentax, it's truy excellent.


I support this, for landscapes but for sunsets... the Nikkor 28 3.5? not the 2.8 and I do like floating element close focus lenses...but outdoors I love one that won't ghost or flare and that's the 3.5. The Konica 28 3.5 7-7 is often pushed for my genre outdoors, but for distance details Nikkor 28 3.5 (it was designed to outperform the close focus 2.8 at infinity) and the Takumar are even until sunsets outdoors, Nikon's coatings win. The 28 is the cheapest wide-angle to make and make them they did.

Then it becomes taste, what out of 800 choices in a 28 do you like? is a better question - you can't go wrong

Rendering appeal, there is no such thing as best in 28's and that's an established fact well documented beyond comprehension for 28's

I have a Yashikor 28 2.8 in M42 that has it's own rendering in select situations that's very eye appealing, great isolation focus and Zeiss appeal .. sometimes in some situations

So here's what you do, carry about a dozen with you and in about a month open the bag up and put the dusty ones on the shelf?

If I like the way a lens feels and handles I tend to use it more regardless of what I have or know and because I'm comfortable I am confident and more apt to Zone. If the best lens doesn't feel right in your hand then what? It's not your best lens is it?

(I really like Minolta MC-X lenses and Minolta has more of their own 28's than about anyone ever - once the most popular lens among consumers "period" the MD 28 )

Last edited by Mr. Disjointed on Fri Nov 13, 2020 4:24 am; edited 1 time in total
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2