| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Keyser
Joined: 30 Jan 2012
Posts: 21
Location: Ireland
|
 Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:36 am Post subject: Super Wide Angle Russian Lenses |
 |
|
Keyser wrote:
I'm looking for a Wide angle Russian lens, but not fisheye.
So far I've come across,
Mir-47 20mm F2.5
Mir-20 20mm F3.5
Arsat 20mm F2.8
Does anyone have any experience with any of these lenses?
Can you recommend any of them? Or have some alternatives?
It will be used on an APS-C sensor for video work. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57865
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 12:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
I had MIR-20 once, that copy wasn't in pair with any lens from good brands, like Nikon, Zeiss , Konica etc.
Many people report same seems quality control wasn't strongest part on them, due some other people report positive experience.
Why Russians ? Due low budget ? For a little more you can buy Carl Zeiss Jena 20mm f4 lens with Exakta mount if lens a little abused, scratches etc price can be low really and perfect lens for any usage including video.
_________________
-------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ForenSeil
Joined: 15 Apr 2011
Posts: 2726
Location: Kiel, Germany.
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 12:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ForenSeil wrote:
I don't know these lenses but googled for some pics by them.
Arsat 20mm 2.8 seems to be quite good. Not perfect but good.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/malcsp76/sets/72157622481994302/with/3995855157/
Mir 47 seems to have a bad flare control for a wide angle but looks also good with a nice character.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157620334141135/with/6162181106/
Mir 20 seems to be the worst... the uglyest bokeh I've ever seen and sharpness seems to be under average 
http://www.flickr.com/photos/atheist_lenses/sets/72157623971177569/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mr_wood/sets/72157611163522554/with/3110505779/
If you wan't to spend a little more... Tokina RMC 17mm F3.5 is great.
_________________
I'm not a collector, I'm a tester 
My camera: Sony A7+Zeiss Sonnar 55/1.8
Current favourite lenses (I have many more):
A few macro-Tominons, Samyang 12/2.8, Noritsu 50.7/9.5, Rodagon 105/5.6 on bellows, Samyang 135/2, Nikon ED 180/2.8, Leitz Elmar-R 250/4, Celestron C8 2000mm F10
Most wanted: Samyang 24/1.4, Samyang 35/1.4, Nikon 200/2 ED
My Blog: http://picturechemistry.own-blog.com/
(German language) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sichko
Joined: 20 Jun 2008
Posts: 2475
Location: South West UK
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 12:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
sichko wrote:
I had the Arsat 20 mm f/2.8. I liked it a lot. Apparently it shows quite pronounced complex (moustache) distortion on Full Frame. The corners are cut off on APS-C and the residual barrel distortion, although significant, is easily corrected. The lens is very sharp at f/8 - f/11 although there is quite a lot of CA at high contrast borders.
If you search the forum using "Arsat 20mm" you will find several threads. Some of my own pictures are not too great - I had only just started shooting RAW and I never got the best out of the ACR converter.
_________________
John |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keyser
Joined: 30 Jan 2012
Posts: 21
Location: Ireland
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 12:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Keyser wrote:
| Attila wrote: |
| Why Russians ? Due low budget ? For a little more you can buy Carl Zeiss Jena 20mm f4 lens with Exakta mount if lens a little abused, scratches etc price can be low really and perfect lens for any usage including video. |
I'm building up a set of Russians because I think they look great, The ones that I have so far anyway.
And f4 is too slow for my needs, I need it to be a wide angle on my Canon 7D for shooting interiors.
_________________
Helios 44-2, Mir-24H, Jupiter-9, Industar 50-2,
Olympus Zuiko OM 50mm f1.4, 135mm f3.5, 35mm f2.8, 28mm f2.8.
Super Takumar 55mm f2, Super Multicoated Takumar 35mm f3.5, SMC Takumar 135mm f3.5 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57865
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
| Keyser wrote: |
| Attila wrote: |
| Why Russians ? Due low budget ? For a little more you can buy Carl Zeiss Jena 20mm f4 lens with Exakta mount if lens a little abused, scratches etc price can be low really and perfect lens for any usage including video. |
I'm building up a set of Russians because I think they look great, The ones that I have so far anyway.
And f4 is too slow for my needs, I need it to be a wide angle on my Canon 7D for shooting interiors. |
All cheap super wide rarer crap wide open than good one, may John suggestion Arsat is acceptable at wide open give it a try.
_________________
-------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sichko
Joined: 20 Jun 2008
Posts: 2475
Location: South West UK
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
sichko wrote:
I wouldn't use the Arsat 20 mm wide open. IIRC it was not very good.
_________________
John |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
themoleman342
Joined: 21 Oct 2007
Posts: 2190
Location: East Coast (CT), U.S.A.
Expire: 2013-01-24
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 2:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
themoleman342 wrote:
I have both the older (huge dished front) and newer (smaller, petaled, MC) versions of the Mir 20M 3.5/20mm. Maybe I've been lucky with the quality control issues but my copies are both quite sharp and capture some great color. The bokeh is indeed nervous in some circumstances but like any lens quality you just need to learn to use it effectively.
I actually just posted some samples in the gallery with mine: http://forum.mflenses.com/mc-mir-20m-and-sony-a850-florida-with-stasia-t47431.html
Here is a sample from that post along with the center crop of her necklace:
 
I think the detail holds up fairly well for an older super-wide. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Seeing as you want them for video work, take a look at the Russian 35mm movie lenses, they are both fast and ultrawide. Adapters are available from Poland but not particularly cheap.
I picked up a nice 2/18 lens from a Konvas camera for 13ukp last week, it is missing the mount but I am going to remount it for NEX.
_________________
I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DSG
Joined: 04 Mar 2007
Posts: 544
Location: London, UK.
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DSG wrote:
Or better still, the Tamron SP 17mm f3.5  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 3:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
The Tokina 3.5/17 is another option, on some cameras it performs better than the Tamron.
_________________
I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57865
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 3:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
both are excellent idea tamron sp and tokina 17 , especially tokina that is trully a gem.
_________________
-------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keyser
Joined: 30 Jan 2012
Posts: 21
Location: Ireland
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Keyser wrote:
Been looking around, and the Arsat seems to be sharp enough wide open.
Hoping someone is going to come along and tell me that the Mir 47 is perfect 
_________________
Helios 44-2, Mir-24H, Jupiter-9, Industar 50-2,
Olympus Zuiko OM 50mm f1.4, 135mm f3.5, 35mm f2.8, 28mm f2.8.
Super Takumar 55mm f2, Super Multicoated Takumar 35mm f3.5, SMC Takumar 135mm f3.5 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
potard
Joined: 04 May 2011
Posts: 7
Location: France
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 3:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
potard wrote:
Hi, I know. Here is the manual focus lens forum...
But... Why don't you use a 18-55mm IS kit lens (F3.5) ?
Probably better than these oldies, cheapest and with IS. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keyser
Joined: 30 Jan 2012
Posts: 21
Location: Ireland
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 3:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Keyser wrote:
| potard wrote: |
Hi, I know. Here is the manual focus lens forum...
But... Why don't you use a 18-55mm IS kit lens (F3.5) ?
Probably better than these oldies, cheapest and with IS. |
The kit lens is horrible. I have no need for IS. But for my video work I like to be able to offer a unique look.
Especially for narrative film making, It's something that can and does set me apart from other cinematographers.
I love the look that the helios 44 lens produces, it looks great, it looks like how great movies look (With a well done color grade of course).
Modern Canon lenses really are no comparison.
_________________
Helios 44-2, Mir-24H, Jupiter-9, Industar 50-2,
Olympus Zuiko OM 50mm f1.4, 135mm f3.5, 35mm f2.8, 28mm f2.8.
Super Takumar 55mm f2, Super Multicoated Takumar 35mm f3.5, SMC Takumar 135mm f3.5 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DSG
Joined: 04 Mar 2007
Posts: 544
Location: London, UK.
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 4:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DSG wrote:
| Attila wrote: |
| both are excellent idea tamron sp and tokina 17 , especially tokina that is trully a gem. |
Not wide open it is'nt! I have both and the Tokina is terrible wide open (soft and lots of CA), but the Tamron is great wide open. So you can really only use the Tokina from f5.6 onwards, whereas the Tamron can be used at any aperture without worry.
The Tokinas only plus is its built in filter thread...I had to remove the glass from an old UV filter and epoxy it to the front of my Tamron to give it a filter thread.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kukhuvud
Joined: 01 Sep 2011
Posts: 96
Location: Los Angeles, California
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 10:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
kukhuvud wrote:
I <3 my Mir-20... it's sharpness is good enough for landscapes IMHO, but rubbish for portraits
_________________
DSLR: Canon 5D MKIII
SLR: Voigtl�nder Bessaflex (Black), Pentax Spotmatic SP
Rangefinder: FED-2
Meyer: Oreston 50/1.8, Lydith 30/3.5, Orestegon 28/2.8
EOS: 24-70/2.8L, 85/1.2L II, 50/1.2L II, 100/2.8L Macro, 135/2.0L
Russians: Helios-40/1.5 (Silver), Mir 20M/3.5, Industar-26m 50/2.8
Takumar: S-M-C Takumar 50/1.4
Flickr: [url=http://www.envision.la[/url]
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Keyser
Joined: 30 Jan 2012
Posts: 21
Location: Ireland
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 10:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Keyser wrote:
| kukhuvud wrote: |
| I <3 my Mir-20... it's sharpness is good enough for landscapes IMHO, but rubbish for portraits |
Can you show me some samples of the portraits wide open?
_________________
Helios 44-2, Mir-24H, Jupiter-9, Industar 50-2,
Olympus Zuiko OM 50mm f1.4, 135mm f3.5, 35mm f2.8, 28mm f2.8.
Super Takumar 55mm f2, Super Multicoated Takumar 35mm f3.5, SMC Takumar 135mm f3.5 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57865
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 10:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
| DSG wrote: |
| Attila wrote: |
| both are excellent idea tamron sp and tokina 17 , especially tokina that is trully a gem. |
Not wide open it is'nt! I have both and the Tokina is terrible wide open (soft and lots of CA), but the Tamron is great wide open. So you can really only use the Tokina from f5.6 onwards, whereas the Tamron can be used at any aperture without worry.
The Tokinas only plus is its built in filter thread...I had to remove the glass from an old UV filter and epoxy it to the front of my Tamron to give it a filter thread. |
YES  I did never try it any of them wide open
_________________
-------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 10:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
I don't think the Tokina is very soft wide open, I'll have to dig around my images from it, see what I can find.
_________________
I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lightshow
Joined: 04 Nov 2011
Posts: 3666
Location: Calgary
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lightshow wrote:
My MIR 20 is ok, lots of CA wide open, but is better when stopped down, also the iris is not that great, one blade lags behind the others when stopping down, the color is nice though.
The only real good shot I have before lending it to a friend.
_________________
A Manual Focus Junky...
One photographers junk lens is an artists favorite tool.
My lens list
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aoleg
Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Posts: 1387
Location: Berlin, DE
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 5:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
aoleg wrote:
I have both the Arsat and Mir-20. They are two very different lenses from handling to image quality to build quality.
My review of the Arsat is posted here: http://www.prime35.com/arsat-h-20mm-f-2-8/ (lots of sample pictures).
Sarpness: Arsat - very soft wide open, sft at f/4. Reasonable by f/8, best at f/11 (but far corners still soft on full-frame). Mir-20 - sharp from wide open, corner to corner; by f/8 it's about perfect.
Colors: very good colors from both lenses!
Contrast: Mir-20 is a more contrasty lens, but there's enough contrast with Arsat, too.
Flare: both lenses flare, but in different ways. The Mir has the worst situation here because of its huge protruding front element: if there's a light source in or just outside the frame, the corners of the image (on full-frame body) may be filled with really bad flare.
Build quality: Arsat is quite terrible, Mir-20 has great construction and build quality. The Arsat is lighter though, but my sample has uneven and rather rough focusing feel. (I bought both lenses new by the way).
_________________
List of lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tedat
Joined: 08 Nov 2011
Posts: 800
Location: Berlin/Germany
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 11:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Tedat wrote:
| DSG wrote: |
| Attila wrote: |
| both are excellent idea tamron sp and tokina 17 , especially tokina that is trully a gem. |
Not wide open it is'nt! I have both and the Tokina is terrible wide open (soft and lots of CA), but the Tamron is great wide open. So you can really only use the Tokina from f5.6 onwards, whereas the Tamron can be used at any aperture without worry. |
wide open it's absolut ok on a NEX and in my eyes equal to the Tamron.. stopped down it beats the Tamron. Maybe it has a bit more problems with CA, but nothing which couldn't be removed per software. I had both.. keept the Tokina and sold the Tamron..
_________________
Regards
Jan
flickr
Sony A7RM2
Contax T*: Distagon 4/18, Distagon 2/28, Distagon 1.4/35, PC-Distagon 2.8/35, Planar 1.4/50, Planar 1.4/85, Planar 2/100, Planar 2/135, S-Planar 2.8/60, Tessar 2.8/45, Mirotar 8/500, Vario Sonnar 3.4/35-70, Vario Sonnar 4.5-5.6/100-300
Carl Zeiss for Rollei QBM: F-Distagon 2.8/16 HFT, Distagon 2.8/25, Planar 1.4/50 HFT, Sonnar 2.8/85
Konica Hexanon AR: 2.8/21, 1.2/57
Other: Minolta F2.8 [T4.5] 135mm STF, Meopta Meostigmat 1.4/70, Tokina AT-X 2.5/90.. and lots of early M42 Yashinon, Rikenon and Mamiya lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DSG
Joined: 04 Mar 2007
Posts: 544
Location: London, UK.
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 1:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DSG wrote:
| Tedat wrote: |
| DSG wrote: |
| Attila wrote: |
| both are excellent idea tamron sp and tokina 17 , especially tokina that is trully a gem. |
Not wide open it is'nt! I have both and the Tokina is terrible wide open (soft and lots of CA), but the Tamron is great wide open. So you can really only use the Tokina from f5.6 onwards, whereas the Tamron can be used at any aperture without worry. |
wide open it's absolut ok on a NEX and in my eyes equal to the Tamron.. stopped down it beats the Tamron. Maybe it has a bit more problems with CA, but nothing which couldn't be removed per software. I had both.. keept the Tokina and sold the Tamron.. |
Well perhaps you simply have an exceptional copy of the Tokina, but mine definitely sucks WO. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tedat
Joined: 08 Nov 2011
Posts: 800
Location: Berlin/Germany
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 29, 2012 1:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Tedat wrote:
or you got a really bad copy and your Tamron was much better than mine.. you never know
_________________
Regards
Jan
flickr
Sony A7RM2
Contax T*: Distagon 4/18, Distagon 2/28, Distagon 1.4/35, PC-Distagon 2.8/35, Planar 1.4/50, Planar 1.4/85, Planar 2/100, Planar 2/135, S-Planar 2.8/60, Tessar 2.8/45, Mirotar 8/500, Vario Sonnar 3.4/35-70, Vario Sonnar 4.5-5.6/100-300
Carl Zeiss for Rollei QBM: F-Distagon 2.8/16 HFT, Distagon 2.8/25, Planar 1.4/50 HFT, Sonnar 2.8/85
Konica Hexanon AR: 2.8/21, 1.2/57
Other: Minolta F2.8 [T4.5] 135mm STF, Meopta Meostigmat 1.4/70, Tokina AT-X 2.5/90.. and lots of early M42 Yashinon, Rikenon and Mamiya lenses |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
