| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
wuxiekeji
Joined: 15 Aug 2012
Posts: 213
|
 Posted: Sun Aug 18, 2013 10:18 pm Post subject: Alternatives to F-Distagon 2.8/16? |
 |
|
wuxiekeji wrote:
Are there any vintage lenses that perform similarly to the C-Y Zeiss F-Distagon 2.8/16 but cheaper? Anything in the M42 world?
In particular here are the qualities I'm looking for:
1. Full-frame capable. Should not smack 6D mirror or should be conveniently moddable.
2. Slight fisheye effect, but should not be overly pronounced; keeping the horizon level at the centre should result in no distortion of the horizon line.
3. Sharp at preferably f/4 upwards.
4. Solid build and metal construction.
However as I anticipate I'll use it only occasionally, I don't particularly want to shell out for an F-Distagon. Zenitar is too fishy (and soft), Canon isn't MF (and expensive), Samyang is plastic. Let me know if there are others. Thanks!
_________________
Canon EOS 6D | Canon EOS 60D | Canon EOS-M | Voigtlander Nokton 1.4/35 | Zeiss Distagon C-Y 4/18 | Zeiss Distagon ZF 2/28 | Samyang 1.4/35 | Zeiss Planar C-Y 1.4/50 | Zeiss Planar C-Y 1.4/85 | Zeiss Makro-Planar C-Y 2.8/100 | Zeiss Sonnar C-Y 2.8/135 | Nikkor ED Ai-S 2.8/180 | Canon FD SSC Fluorite 2.8/300 | Tair-3S 4.5/300
Last edited by wuxiekeji on Sun Aug 18, 2013 10:34 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Räbenfluch
Joined: 18 Mar 2013
Posts: 112
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 18, 2013 10:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Räbenfluch wrote:
i´m throwing the Samyang 14mm into the ring...It fulfils most of your wants, maybe the build could be a problem...but hey, it´s only like 300 bucks, so give it a ...shot (sorry for the pun  )
Cheers,
Timo
_________________
Canon 6D with 24-105, Olympus Zuiko 35 2.8, 50 1.4, 50 3.5 Macro, 85 2.0, Takumar 28 3.5,
Helios 44m4 and some more m42 glass
Check out my Flickr: https://secure.flickr.com/photos/timo_johannes |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wuxiekeji
Joined: 15 Aug 2012
Posts: 213
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 18, 2013 10:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
wuxiekeji wrote:
| Räbenfluch wrote: |
i´m throwing the Samyang 14mm into the ring...It fulfils most of your wants, maybe the build could be a problem...but hey, it´s only like 300 bucks, so give it a ...shot (sorry for the pun )
Cheers,
Timo |
14mm is rectilinear with moustache distortion, right? I'm looking for something that fishes a little bit, just not too much. This gives the impression of being super super wide, but without being unnatural. Sometimes I find ultrawide rectilinear lenses feel unnatural in the corners because of the way they need to be stretched, but super fishy fisheyes look unnatural also. I've seen many photos of the F-Distagon 2.8/16 online and find it fishes just the right amount for my taste
Here are some links to (not mine) photos illustrating what I mean:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/fernandito_brown/8450919442/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kiddiuk/6952421159/
_________________
Canon EOS 6D | Canon EOS 60D | Canon EOS-M | Voigtlander Nokton 1.4/35 | Zeiss Distagon C-Y 4/18 | Zeiss Distagon ZF 2/28 | Samyang 1.4/35 | Zeiss Planar C-Y 1.4/50 | Zeiss Planar C-Y 1.4/85 | Zeiss Makro-Planar C-Y 2.8/100 | Zeiss Sonnar C-Y 2.8/135 | Nikkor ED Ai-S 2.8/180 | Canon FD SSC Fluorite 2.8/300 | Tair-3S 4.5/300
Last edited by wuxiekeji on Sun Aug 18, 2013 10:42 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 15679
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 18, 2013 10:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Something with the same performance as the Distagon but cheaper?
Doesn't exist imho.
_________________
I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andrew G.
Joined: 18 Jul 2010
Posts: 159
Location: Pennsylvania, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 18, 2013 11:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Andrew G. wrote:
There are the Nikon 16mm f2.8 and f/3.5 fisheyes, but I'm unsure as to how they compare to the Distagon.
_________________
DSLR: Nikon D40x
SLR: Nikon N2000, Nikomat FTn
Glass:
Nikon:28mm f/2.8 Ai, 28mm f/2.8 Ai-S, 2.8cm f/3.5 F, 28mm f/3.5 Ai-S, 50mm f/1.8 Ai, (2) 50mm f/1.8 Series E, 55mm f/3.5 Micro K, 55mm f/3.5 Micro Ai, 100mm f/2.8 Series E, 105mm f/2.5 F, 105mm f/2.5 Ai, 105mm f/2.5 Ai-S, 200mm f/4 Ai-S, Process-Nikkor 260mm f/10, TC-200
Third-Party: Vivitar 28mm f/2.5 preset, Vivitar 28mm f/2.5 TX, Tamron 28mm f/2.8 Adapt-A-Matic (v. 1), Vivitar 35mm f/1.9 (Canon FD), Vivitar 35mm f/2.8 T4, Tamron 135mm f/2.8 Adapt-A-Matic, Vivitar 135mm f/3.5 preset, Vivitar 200mm f/3.5, Soligor 200mm f/3.5 T4, Star-D 500mm f/8 Mirror, Sigma 15-30mm f/3.5-4.5 AF, Tamron 28-70mm f/3.5-4.5 Adaptall-2 (44A), Hanimex 35-70mm f/2.8-3.8, [x2] Tamron SP 35-80mm f/2.8-3.8 Adaptall-2 (01A), Tokina AT-X 50-250mm f/4-5.6, Soligor 55-135mm f/3.5 T4, Vivitar 70-150mm f/3.8 (one-touch), Vivitar 75-205mm f/3.8 (one-touch), Soligor C/D 78-210mm f/3.5, Soligor C/D 100-300mm f/5
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
themoleman342
Joined: 21 Oct 2007
Posts: 2190
Location: East Coast (CT), U.S.A.
Expire: 2013-01-24
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 18, 2013 11:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
themoleman342 wrote:
The Peleng 17mm is a darn good lens if you can live with the vignetting at the corners on full frame:
http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=52631
http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=43357
It's probably too fishy but it meets your other criteria. I'd rate it as sharper than the Zenitar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 57865
Location: Hungary
Expire: 2025-11-18
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 12:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
Zenitar can be stunning too , problem they have very mixed quality. I have Konica 15mm UC, easily catch Distagon, but no full frame digital body to use it.
_________________
-------------------------------
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 |
|
|
wuxiekeji
Joined: 15 Aug 2012
Posts: 213
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 2:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
wuxiekeji wrote:
Thanks for the replies!
I looked around a bit and the Peleng seems a bit too fishy for my tastes, it suddenly becomes super fishy near the edges. Looking around for more info about Konica, it seems rare ...
I did however run into the Takumar 17/4 and pictures seem nice, has a gradual transition to the curvy part and feels natural. Are there any gotchas about this lens? Is it sharp at f/4?
_________________
Canon EOS 6D | Canon EOS 60D | Canon EOS-M | Voigtlander Nokton 1.4/35 | Zeiss Distagon C-Y 4/18 | Zeiss Distagon ZF 2/28 | Samyang 1.4/35 | Zeiss Planar C-Y 1.4/50 | Zeiss Planar C-Y 1.4/85 | Zeiss Makro-Planar C-Y 2.8/100 | Zeiss Sonnar C-Y 2.8/135 | Nikkor ED Ai-S 2.8/180 | Canon FD SSC Fluorite 2.8/300 | Tair-3S 4.5/300 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rbelyell
Joined: 13 Oct 2009
Posts: 4269
Location: somewhere in the mountains of central NY
Expire: 2014-01-31
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 12:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
rbelyell wrote:
another vote for the zenitar. of course its not in the zeiss class, not many are for less than $1000. but it can be beautifully sharp, great color, very mild fish eye, and not big like the tak. i used it on my 2x ep2 and really loved it.
tony
_________________
Epson RD1 + Elmarit 21/2.8; Summarit 50/1.5; Summarit 75/2.5; Elmar-c 90/4; Sankyo Komura 135/2.8, Hektor 135/4.5; Braun Paxina 29 6x6; Photax Boyer Paris; Holga 120 Pano
GREAT STUFF FOR SALE:
Contax T
Hasselblad XPan + 45/4, 90/4
Kodak Retina Reflex IV + full set of Schneider Krueznach lenses
Mercury 2 half frame 35mm
Kodak Pro slr/n
Fuji GM670+100/3.5+65/8!
Praktisix 6x6 medium format + ZeissBiometar 120/2.8
Bessa T 101 Anniversary Edition in Navy Blue
Mamiya Six Folder with Zuiko 75/3.5
Adaptall: Tamron SP 28-85 macro
Cameras: Canon IX
PM for more complete descriptions/pix. All in great shape!
_________________________
'buy me a drink, sing me a song,
take me as i come 'cause i can't stay long' |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SonicScot
Joined: 01 Dec 2011
Posts: 2697
Location: Scottish Highlands
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 12:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
SonicScot wrote:
Another vote for the Zenitar.
Surely the amount of fisheye effect is linked to the subject being shot, and keeping the horizon central, as mentioned.
I use mine on a 5D2 and for landscapes most people have no idea a fisheye was used. Plus in post processing you can use lens correction tools to your taste.
_________________
Gary
Currently active gear....
Sony a7
E-M1 Mkll
Rubinar 1000/10 + 2x matched extender
Tamron 500/8 55BB
Sigma 100-300/4
Vivitar Series 1.... 200/3, 70-210/3.5 (V1 by Kiron), 135/2.3, 105/2.5 macro, 90/2.5 macro (Bokina), 90-180/4.5 Flat Field Macro, 28-90mm f/2.8-3.5
Carl Zeiss.... 180/2.8, 135/3.5, 85/1.4, 35/2.4 Flektagon, 21/2.8 Distagon
Nikon.... 55/3.5 micro, 50/1.2
Elicar 90/2.5 V-HQ Macro
Zhongyi Speedmaster 85/1.2
Jupiter-9 85/2
Helios.... 58/2 44-3
Hartblei 45/3.5 Super-Rotator TS-PC
Zenitar 16/2.8 fisheye
Samyang 8/3.5 fisheye
Nodal Ninja 4, Neewer leveling tripod base
Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/gazsus/ Website http://garianphotography.co.uk/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hoanpham
Joined: 31 Jan 2011
Posts: 2575
Expire: 2015-01-18
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 19, 2013 12:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hoanpham wrote:
zenitar too  |
|
| 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
