Topic: good, cheap wide angle lenses?

[LT]

I'm looking for recommendations (from experience) for good quality but often overlooked wide angle lenses  in old manual 35mm camera mounts.  The standard SLR mounts (Canon FD, Pentax K, olympus OM, Nikon SLR), LTM or Leica M mount would all be fine. 28mm or wider .... I'm not looking for quirkiness or imperfections though - a nice crisp-sharp lens is what I am after.

thanks in advance.

[Diane Peterson]

Leon..I recently saw the popular lensbaby wide angle lens mentioned on the internet..but it cost around $80.00 (i could be wrong about the exact price) but I then looked on ebay and found 1 for under $20.00  the exact lens! and it worked perfectly..I will try to find a link or a name to give you..I think it was made in Florida...so not sure what the shipping would be..oh, and this was the price new! I will try to remember to get back to you on this!

[LT]

HI Diane - thanks for the thought, but I'm after a good sharp lens.  Something that was a great performer in it's day. I have my toy cameras for when I'm feeling blurry.

[Diane Peterson]

Leon..totally understand..this wide angle was something to use in addition to the Lensbaby..it is not a blurry lens..The lensbaby makes it blurry..the wide angle just goes over it!..maybe it wouldn't work but thought you might investigate when I find the link...

[Francois]

I think you can't go wrong with a Tamron SP 17mm.
http://filmwasters.com/forum/index.php?topic=2840.0

I know I just love the fact that it's fully corrected against barrel distortion. Yes, you do see sometimes a fit of color fringing towards the edges but it's very minimal (you really have to look hard to really see it). Comes in the Adaptall universal mount so this is no problem. Comes with built-in filters (you rotate the front ring) for color correction and a yellow filter for B&W.

Sigma also made a pretty neat 14mm lens years ago... though I've absolutely no experience with it.

Here is a sample taken with the 17mm.

[Sorry, image deleted during forum software upgrade. Please re-upload if so inclined.]

[choppert]

Leon - I bought a 35mm (yes, I know you want <28mm!) Canon LTM 1.8 lens from the 70s.
And it's bloody outstanding.  Cost me about a hundred quid and caused me to sell my Hexanon 28mm because I wasn't using it!
Best hundred quid I think I've ever spent.  Literally!

Looks jolly groovy on the M6 too 

[calbisu]

I have been using a Panagor (which I believe is a Vivitar) 28mm, 2.5F, FD mount with good results. I have posted some images in Filmwasters, as the one is now in Filmwasters web homepage  I bought it in ebay, mint condition for 50 dollars. Canon Fd 28 2.8 might also be a good option, I have not used it though.

[LT]

Thanks for the suggestions guys. The lens is for a (sort of) half frame camera that has loads of adaptors available for most of the popular old lens mounts. The wider the better for this purpose as the format size effectively doubles the focal length of the lens. Francois's 17 mm definintely sounds promising - can you tell me more about this universal mount? I guess that will mean I'll need 2 adaptors - one to a popular mountthen another for my camera?

Diane - as farad I can tell, the lensbabysuperwide  i. Just a supplementary element that fits into the end of a lesbaby snd doesn't have it's own fittings etc. Good thought though. 

[Urban Hafner]

You want to use it for your GF1, don't you?

[LT]

I have no idea what you are talking about. Ahem (cough).

[choppert]

Leon, you might like to read this:

http://www.filmwasters.com/about.html

[Francois]

Francois's 17 mm definintely sounds promising - can you tell me more about this universal mount?

Actually pretty simple. The guys at Tamron were really smart when they invented this lens adapter system.
All their lenses have a longer lens to film registration distance than the maximum camera flange to film distance of all manufacturers (simply to say that they're set further up front than normal). And all the lenses have a special bayonet mount. The company made a set of adapters (essentially spacers with a different bayonet on both ends). You mount these permanently on the lens (you just need to press a small lever to release them) and the other end is a regular mount (Nikon F for mine). They have mechanical synchronization for the aperture and all mechanical parts are interlinked. You'd swear it was a dedicated lens when you use the lens. The camera doesn't tell the difference.
Just look for the name Adaptall2...
And here is a picture of what they look like

[Sorry, image deleted during forum software upgrade. Please re-upload if so inclined.]

[LT]

Leon, you might like to read this:

http://www.filmwasters.com/about.html

no need to matt - I wrote it.

[Ed Wenn]

Busted.

[LT]

Ok - hands up, this is for me to use on a digital camera, but we've no need to even mention that for the purposes of this thread. The lenses we're discussing are all for film cameras so entiry relevant to this forum. 

Either way - a person is at liberty to wear their own clothes in anyway they like. So there. 

[Pete_R]

I can vouch for the Tamron 17mm. I've had two of them. There are two versions. The earlier one had built in filters which could be dialed in - can't remember which filters they were though. The later version didn't have the filters. Both very highly corrected. They still tend to fetch good money. I think I sold my last one for about 150 UKP.

[choppert]

Busted.

That was kind of my point.

After all that waffle a couple of months ago after I dared link to some photos which may have been digital .....

[LT]

Matt - this thread isn't about digital content, capture or even cameras. 

Thanks for the tips everyone. Lots of food for thought there. I've always avoided 3rd party lenses but maybe I need to reconsider that attitude. 

[choppert]

Matt - this thread isn't about digital content, capture or even cameras. 

Thanks for the tips everyone. Lots of food for thought there. I've always avoided 3rd party lenses but maybe I need to reconsider that attitude. 

Just lenses for a digital camera?
My mistake 

[LT]

Not at all matt - good quality wide angle  lenses for film cameras. What they end up being used for is neither here nor there.

Opening a thread asking for people's lens recommendations is an entirely different thing to starting one about the quality of digital photography.  Any film photographer can take the advice from this thread and apply it directly to their own methods. Mount adaptors are available across the board so it is entirely Within the boundaries of this forum. 

If I'd said 'please recommend the best 'legacy-lens' for my digital camera', I'd be a comlete fcukwit who deserved moderation.

   

[Francois]

I've always avoided 3rd party lenses but maybe I need to reconsider that attitude. 

Not that I have a lot of experience with brands other than Tamron (Which I can definitely vouch for). But I think that if you stick to the Sigma/Tamron/Tokina combo, you're pretty much assured to get top quality that at least matches the original manufacturer's quality specs.
There's also Vivitar which has some pretty good lenses. My dad has one and he loves it a lot.

As a side note, I was reading in a magazine that Tamron is celebrating their 60 years of lens production... they also happened to be the ones who made Bronica cameras until they pulled the plug on the brand.

[LT]

]As a side note, I was reading in a magazine that Tamron is celebrating their 60 years of lens production... they also happened to be the ones who made Bronica cameras until they pulled the plug on the brand.

very good point Francois. I'd fogotten Tamron's link to Zenzabronica.

[UK Roger]

Back in the `70`s I got good results with a Vivitar Series 1 28mm f1.9 on my Olympus OM1 & 2. Mostly on Kodachrome 25 / 64. Tho haven`t seen one advertised for many years. There has been an on running review of this lens on www.oldlenses.blogspot.com for some time.