Wide Angle Lens - Flektogon, MIR or other ...Need suggestion

[versanteest]

HI!

I did sell my Wide Angle Tokina 17 RMC 3,5. In my mind, this is a honest lens but nothing of special. This has some problems about distortion and It isn't sharp.

I did plan to buy a MF wide angle.

I'd like to have a 20 mm lens that have few distortion and at the same time sharpness results.

I spoke via chat with our admin Attila about Jena chances so, I'm considering these:

- Flektogon 20 f4
- Flektogon 20 2,8

And from this morning I'm also thinking at MIR 47.

I'll use this lens with mirrorless for some months, next year I'll buy a used Canon 5D MII (I'm filling a piggy with only 2€ )))

So, suggest me in FF way. Infact, I'd like to know if I'll buy a lens with exakta bayonett I'll have or not some problems with infinity, like to tell, I must to buy only M42 version.

My budget about 300 €

Regards

Pasquale

[Rick1779]

There is also the Canon FD 20mm f/2.8 that shouldn't be bad

[Aanything]

I have the flektogon 4/20, and its distortion control is remarkable. Also, you should find one easily that fits your budget.
The only problem with it is that I read sometimes that it's not extremely sharp on the borders. I never noticed that, but I have always used it on aps-c cameras, so I don't know how actual borders look.
But if you are looking for lack of distortion, this must be a candidate.

[padam]

Vivitar 20/3.8 is also an option.

[wuxiekeji]

For wide angles I'd avoid going too far back in time personally. Wide angle optical formulas have evolved recently and are still evolving. Standard and short teles were nearly perfected a long time ago so old lenses tend to perform well in that range (50s, 85s, 135s for example have been essentially the same optical formula for 50+ years).

But for wide angles, even cheap kit zooms of today outperform a lot of the legacy wide angle primes in IQ because their formulas are different and vastly improved.

Flektogons are okay but IMHO they are way too overvalued. If you want good budget wide angles I'd look at Nikkors (you can get 2-3 decent primes for your budget) or Contax (28/2.8, 35/2.8 should be well under your budget -- you could probably get both!). 18/4 might be a hair above your budget but not by much if you look hard for a deal.

Samyang also has some nice offerings. I haven't used their wide-angles except for the 35/1.4, but except for mustache distortion (which you may or may not care about depending on your use) they are reputed to be quite decent. These will also be easily in your budget.

But these are all SLR lenses. You mention using mirrorless. There are actually a LOT more options available to you in mirrorless land including rangefinder lenses. Many of them outperform SLR lenses because they most of them don't need to cover a FF sensor, and can be made a lot simpler (and they will be 1/5th the size of the same aperture/focal length SLR lens). SLR wide angle lenses need to employ a retrofocus design in order to clear the mirror; mirrorless cameras don't. You could for example make a compact, 35/1.4 double-Gauss lens that fits a mirrorless or rangefinder camera but this is physically impossible for an SLR. I'm not too knowledgeable about good mirrorless lenses but I suggest you do some research there too.

[Orio]

Both 20mm Flektogons are still to this day the better quality/price ratio in the 20/21 mm category.

[calvin83]

A used COLOR-SKOPAR 20mm F3.5 SLII in Nikon mount should be a good choice for about 300 €. Good CA, distortion control and resist to flare. The extreme corner is not so good until F11 or F16 when used on FF.

[timballic]

Stefan Rohloff's 20mm tests show that all the lenses tested have fairly marked "moustache" type distortion.

http://www.stefanrohloff.de/20_distortion.php?en=1

Surprisingly the zooms come out better than primes for distortion.

I think the F4 Flektogon was the one renowned for low distortion, but only the 2.8 is tested here. Sadly the Nikon 20/2.8 AiS wasn't in the set either.

My experience with the Color Skopar SLII would be to avoid it unless small size is essential, and even then the Zuiko 21/3.5 betters it. After much searching I still haven't tracked down a very good 20/21 mm that comes a worthy 2nd place to the estimable Zeiss Distagon 21/2.8.

[calvin83]

The Zuiko 21/3.5 is a better lens in a light and small package but it is not marked as a 20mm lens. It makes me wonder why Cosina do not make a better UWA in a slightly bigger size.