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

Wide lens recommendations, please
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:58 am    Post subject: Wide lens recommendations, please Reply with quote
During the outing at the abandoned psychiatric hospital, I borrowed a
Canon 10-22mm wide-angle USM for a couple of shots from a friend
during the shoot. It's represented in the 10th picture of the first set,
and is at full-wide at 10mm.

What I'd like to learn about, is what sort of MF lenses will offer the same
sort of WA view as that 10-22, and do it without the hideous barrel
distortion I get with my 400D's kit lens at 18mm.

I do understand that there's a difference between full-frame film and
digital bodies for these things, but I'd like to find something that comes
close to the 10mm view of that lovely 10-22 USM Canon lens for my own
crop-body camera.

Also: I am on a budget, so I really can't even consider Zeiss or Leica
lenses for this particular mission, unless I happen to find one of those
legendary lenses for a song.

Given the translation from full-frame to crop-frame, would anybody care
to recommend an inexpensive lens for my 400D that will offer the same
field of view that my friend's 10-22 gave me at the 10mm setting?


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 3:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
That is a common desire, but its a bit out of reach. It also depends on what you consider expensive.

Old MF lenses didn't usually get down to 10mm, unless they were very exotic (expensive). 20mm was considered superwide in those days.

Even good brands of sub-24mm MF lenses are expensive - $300+
Even the Russian stuff - 16mm and the 8mm fisheye - are over $200.

Someone on a budget can get down to perhaps 17mm - 19mm with a third party brand, there were several cheaper lenses from Vivitar and Sigma. I have a Vivitar 19/3.8 which is probably a Cosina that works rather well, I think you can find this for about $50-100.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 3:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Aw, nuts!

Does this mean that I have to look for exotic lenses?

I really like the wide that the Canon 10-22 USM provided,
but I was hoping to find something similar in a MF lens.

As for budget, I'm looking into the cheapest I can find.
US $20 or so.

Mostly, I want to go wider than my 18-55 kit lens.
I'll consider most prices under US $100, but the barrel distortion
is what I'm trying to get away from.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 3:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Well, I'm in the same boat pretty much.

What we are looking for just isn't there, not for $20.

Even the old add-on Kenko fisheye adapters are getting $50-100.

The only chance for a deal is to find a bargain - someone selling something he doesn't understand. Not impossible, but it takes some looking.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 5:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
You'll be hard pressed to find a WIDE for 20.00 US. I was lucky, about 2 years ago I found a Vivitar M42 24mm 2.8 for 45.00 US and last year I was able to pick-up a Tamron adaptall F mount for Nikon 24mm BBAR 2.5 for 50.00 US. If your looking for wider, such as a 20mm your going to pay a higher price. I just watched a Nikon 20mm sell in the mid 200's on ebay.

Last edited by spiralcity on Mon Oct 27, 2008 1:19 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have that same Tamron and it's really very decent. The nikkor 20's are pretty good, but you are right they do command a premium price nowadays. Seems everything under 28 is quite pricey these days.


patrickh


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 9:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
right, impossible to get 16mm equivalent (which is what 10mm on aps-c is) with old lenses.

me i got a 16-45 (equiv to 25-70 or so). not truly wide, but good enough for my purposes.

pentax has a 10-17 fish eye but it's far from $20. even the zenitar fisheye is $200 plus. you can use a fisheye and correct it in photoshop or similar.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 9:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
* Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 4/20 (this will save you some money compared to the 2.8/20).
* Vivitar 3.5/17 (similar to the Tokina 3.5/17 and very close in performance to the Tamron 3.5/17, but much cheaper).
* Cosina 3.8/20 (or several other noname 3.8/19, 3.8/20 or 3.8/21 lenses, they are basically the same design and not too bad).
* Hanimex 3.5/23 (not that wide, but much better than its reputation.)


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Patience is your key to finding any of these lenses for a reasonable price. If your in need of one cheap, wide, and fast than I vote for the wide angle adapter. The quality is probably no so great but unfortunately with a budget of under $100 most anything you get will not be the best.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
themoleman342 wrote:
Patience is your key to finding any of these lenses for a reasonable price. If your in need of one cheap, wide, and fast than I vote for the wide angle adapter. The quality is probably no so great but unfortunately with a budget of under $100 most anything you get will not be the best.


Well, his budget sounds like it's under 30.00 US. Shocked Very Happy


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Well, for 30$ you can invest in a pano soft with great result


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 7:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Quote:
Well, his budget sounds like it's under 30.00 US


I only said this because he said he would consider anything under $100. I think the reality of the situational will bring this maximum up another 100.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 8:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
LucisPictor wrote:
* Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 4/20 (this will save you some money compared to the 2.8/20).
* Vivitar 3.5/17 (similar to the Tokina 3.5/17 and very close in performance to the Tamron 3.5/17, but much cheaper).
* Cosina 3.8/20 (or several other noname 3.8/19, 3.8/20 or 3.8/21 lenses, they are basically the same design and not too bad).
* Hanimex 3.5/23 (not that wide, but much better than its reputation.)

Each of these lenses I have found for under $100,-.

themoleman342 wrote:
Patience is your key ...

That's it!


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 8:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Canon 10-22 has minimal barrel distosion. What you were seeing was perspective distorsion which is not a lens fault.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
patrickh wrote:
I have that same Tamron and it's really very decent. The nikkor 20's are pretty good, but you are right they do command a premium price nowadays. Seems everything under 28 is quite pricey these days.


patrickh


Patrickh,
I like the Tamron quite a bit. It's truly a nice wide for what I do.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 29, 2008 5:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
martinsmith99 wrote:
The Canon 10-22 has minimal barrel distosion. What you were seeing was perspective distorsion which is not a lens fault.

Well, my 18-55 kit lens suffers from outrageous barrel distortion, which is what I'd like to avoid. The 10-22 USM was nothing like the kit lens, for obvious reasons. Are you suggesting that I am confusing barrel distortion with perspective distortion? If I have confused the terms, I'd like to be educated on the difference. I'm certainly a newbie.
But the 10-22 produced none of the distorted straight lines found at the scene, leading me to believe that my 18-55 is plagued with barrel distortion at it's widest. It's rather evident in some of the pics I posted.

spiralcity wrote:
Well, his budget sounds like it's under 30.00 US.

My IDEAL budget. Sure, I'd like to spend nothing, but I have to be realistic, don't I? Confused

LucisPictor wrote:
* Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 4/20 (this will save you some money compared to the 2.8/20).
* Vivitar 3.5/17 (similar to the Tokina 3.5/17 and very close in performance to the Tamron 3.5/17, but much cheaper).
* Cosina 3.8/20 (or several other noname 3.8/19, 3.8/20 or 3.8/21 lenses, they are basically the same design and not too bad).
* Hanimex 3.5/23 (not that wide, but much better than its reputation.)

Each of these lenses I have found for under $100,-.

Many thanks for this list. Extremely useful.

themoleman342 wrote:
Patience is your key

Agreed. I know, but it's difficult sometimes.

I'm really not after a traditional "fish-eye" lens, as those produce hugely warped & distorted images. What I seek is a lens that can get me close to the 10mm from that lovely 10-22 USM lens, while keeping the distortion down to a minimum. My kit lens does a crappy job of keeping distortion out of the image at it's widest, so something that even looks better at the 18mm range would be an improvement.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1