1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

24-25mm?

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by tino84, Sep 30, 2014.

  1. tino84

    tino84 Mu-43 Veteran

    217
    Dec 29, 2013
    Hi,

    I'm searching for something "in the middle" between my olympus 17 and 45 1.8.

    25mm both pana or olympus are out of my pocket, so I'm searching for something to adapt to m42, or at least m39 and c-mount.

    So far, I founded only a vivitar 24mm 2.8, and a c-mount 25mm 1.4, with 1" sensor coverage.

    Any alternatives? Maximum price around 60-80€, better to stay on 50€ (yes I know it's not a great budget)
     
  2. svenkarma

    svenkarma Mu-43 Top Veteran

    566
    Feb 5, 2013
    mark evans
    There's a Sigma 24/2.8 which comes in various mounts and gets a :thumbsup: from me.
     
  3. HarryS

    HarryS Mu-43 Top Veteran

    918
    Jun 23, 2012
    Midwest, USA
    By modern standards, I think many of the old wide angles do not perform well on m43, and that it's not smart to spend 60-80€ on them.

    I once had the same motives, thinking that a Vivitar 28mm f2 might be similar to a fast 25mm M43 lens, but it was very soft. My other old 28mm and 35mm primes are at best, about the same as my Olympus 14-42mm in terms of sharpness. I think these lenses are fun to use, but they are not worth much money, with the exception of your high quality brands.
     
  4. m43happy

    m43happy Mu-43 Veteran

    432
    Feb 18, 2012
    Sigma 30mm f/2.8
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Cruzan80

    Cruzan80 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 23, 2012
    Denver, Co
    Sean Rastsmith
    Funny, I have a Vivitar 28/2 that is quite sharp. Any reason you are looking at 24mm vs 28mm? I know it is closer to the native 25's, but from what I understand, 28 was common, whereas 24 was more exotic, therefore more expensive.
     
  6. tjdean01

    tjdean01 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    842
    Feb 20, 2013
    My Vivitar 28mm f2 (Komine make) is extremely sharp and beats my m43s kit zoom. The f2.8 version is just as sharp and only $50. Similarly they make 24mm but they cost a bit more. I have a canon FD mount komine 28/2.8 just sitting around that I got free. I decided to keep it for when i get an a7 cuz its smaller than the f2 version.
     
  7. speedandstyle

    speedandstyle Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    If you can accept 28mm, there is the Nikon E series 28mm f2.8. It works great on m4/3 and it isn't too large or heavy once adapted.

    C-mounts can be fun but even 24mm ones can vignette and may have odd bokeh. If you do go c-mount make sure the lens was designed for a 4/3 inch sensor or maybe a 1 inch, anything smaller will surely vignette.

    The other option is to save up and start watching the sales on the native 25mms. I am waiting and hoping that there will be a great sale on the Olympus 25mm as we get close to Christmas.
     
  8. pellicle

    pellicle Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 10, 2010
    Southport, OzTrailEYa
    pellicle
    Hi

    I've had a similar question on my mind for some years, back in 2010 I wrote this up (to clarify it to myself and perhaps others) here on my blog
    http://cjeastwd.blogspot.com/2010/01/panasonic-20mm.html

    in that post I examine the 28mm vs the 20mm ... I think its fair to say that a 24mm will sit in the middle of that in every way. I bought a 28mm based on price (they're heaps cheaper than 24's). I've now added an OM 28mm to my set and find that the OM28mm is better by a fair margin than the FD is (yes, new FD) .

    Eventually (recently) I bought a 20mm f1.7 and so I've done a few more comparisons.

    http://cjeastwd.blogspot.com/2014/07/the-panasonic-20mm-f17-now-i-own-one.html

    I paid about $200 for my copy of the 20mm, its well worth that if you ask me.

    However on a budget I'd suggest away from the Cmount stuff (which I've dabbled in quite a bit) as it seldom has full sensor coverage. Meaning you're going to get vignetting or cropped in post (to remove it) and thus you won't get the same angle of view that a 24mm would give.

    This can be effective in places, but do you want it for every shot?

    3712918693_f72481d1a1.

    11463499716_b1d0db9282.

    Those are 12mm, but the coverage issue will be similar...

    If you consider that 28mm is worth the savings in cost (over a 24mm), then you must then wonder about the Sigma 30mm lens (which is a native) I've put some general thoughts on prices and stuff of these two (an OM28mm and the Sigma 30mm) on my blog here:
    http://cjeastwd.blogspot.com/2013/12/sigma-30mm-f28-ex-dn-review-and-thoughts.html

    best wishes
     
  9. tino84

    tino84 Mu-43 Veteran

    217
    Dec 29, 2013
    maybe would also be better a 12-50? but f2 would be a good thing, as I shoot at concerts..

    yet owned, good lens, but didn't catched me..

    yes, I'm searching for a 24 because I yet owned adapted 28mm, no one was very good to my tastes, very soft @2.8 and 3.5, and for a little more, you can take the sigma 30mm instead of an old and not-so-good 28, but neither two works for me..

    I "hate" this forum when I see thread on cut-off prices from olympus in US, because here in EU, prices are always higher, and so no discounts :p I don't think something will happen for Christmas here :p
    the c-mount I saw seems to cover m4/3 sensor (it should be 1")

    I know today's stuff would be better ( I own oly 17mm, very beautiful lens, as 45mm, sure I cannot find a similar adapted 50mm), but no way to afford 450€/500€ to buy 25mm 1.8 or 25mm 1.4
    as told above, 28-30mm aren't for me, and searching for something good and cheap is an adventure :p
    Maybe I'll try to find a vivitar f2, but even c-mount could be an option for me (I have 35mm fujian, it's not perfect as it is for 2/3", but wondering what could be if it is 1"), as it comes for around 40€ and would work good in live concerts
     
  10. dougjgreen

    dougjgreen Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 5, 2013
    San Diego
    Doug Green
    If you want a lens in the 24-28mm range that has an F2 or faster aperture, and will be sharp wide open, I'd get a native lens, not bother with anything adapted. The Olympus and the PanaLeica 25mm lenses can both be found for $350-375 in pristine used shape. Most adapted lenses will not be all that sharp unless you stop them down 1 f-stop. If money is really a pinch, I'd get a 28mm f2.8 lens - there are numerous good ones - one of the least expensive would be the Minolta Rokkor-x.

    But actually, for a tight budget, the best choice would be the native Sigma 30mm f2.8 lens.

    C-mount lenses are interesting for special effects, and can be fun, but you won't find one that's anything close to sharp wide open at the edges of the Micro 4/3 frame.

    If you can live with a lens that you really can ONLY use wide open, one possibility is the Pentax 110 24mm f2.8 lens. It's also the smallest, lightest lens you can find that will cover the Micro 4/3 sensor with decent performance. And it's pretty cheap nowadays - you can get them for something like $25-40 on ebay presently. If I was looking for something cheap, this would be the first one I'd try. But don't expect it to match the performance of the native Olympus 25mm f1.8 lens, which will be substantially better than anything manual that you can adapt.
     
  11. Droogie

    Droogie Mu-43 Veteran

    297
    Feb 23, 2013
    Washington State
    I agree on the Sigma 30. Great lens , very sharp. and dirt cheap.
     
  12. gryphon1911

    gryphon1911 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 13, 2014
    Central Ohio, USA
    Andrew
  13. pellicle

    pellicle Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 10, 2010
    Southport, OzTrailEYa
    pellicle
    I did not suggest such, instead I suggested a Panasonic 20mm f.17 ... your reply makes me wonder if you actually read what I wrote.

    A basic CCTV 25mm lens with a C-mount adapter will set you back about 30 bucks, and look like crap. I mentioned my C-mount lens to demonstrate why.

    So you can spend $30 and still not have what you want, so its wasted money (or part of the adventue). A Panasonic 20mm lens will cost about $250 and while you stated a specific range I wonder if you know what that means? The differences between your 17mm (which one do you have? the 2.8??) and the 20mm are significant, not just because of the f-number.

    Enjoy your adventure, I've been on the same one for about 5 years now
     
  14. tino84

    tino84 Mu-43 Veteran

    217
    Dec 29, 2013
    No way to buy sigma 30mm once again, just sold it some months ago.
    Sadly here in EU 25mm oly/pana are set to about 400€. 28mm is just a bit "more" for what I'm looking for, so maybe it's better to wait and get moneyin the pocket to buy native lens..

    I actually read what you wrote, even your blog posts, thanks for your advices, but maybe you missed reading what I wrote about prices I can afford..
    I asked for a lens on a price range between 50-80€. (sadly I know is a very tight budget :-( )
    The panasonic 20mm 1.7 you suggests is waaaaaay more expensive than I can afford. :-(
    If I could save about 200€ -more than double of the actual budget- (actual change from $), I would save some more money and buy directly a native 25mm, that would fit perfectly what I'm looking for, and not something "around" as 20mm 1.7
    I own 17mm f1.8 and don't think would have so many differences between 17 and 20 to stay "in the middle" between 17 and 45, as I wrote in the first post: this is also the reason because I'm searching for a 24-25mm
     
  15. RnR

    RnR Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 25, 2011
    Brisbane, Australia
    Hasse
    I have a feeling that all the known good wide angles are well over your budget these days. If you watch ebay for long enough, you may get lucky and have someone post one with a low BIN price. But its unlikely given the mirrorless revolution and its boost to all old lens prices these days.

    Not sure what your usage for the lens is, but maybe you should look into getting one of the cheaper versions of a focal reducer for m43. Then with a nice 28mm f2.8, which is much easier to find, you have a 20mm f2, or find a nice 35mm f2.8 and get 25mm f2. But then you would be getting close to your 200€ anyways.
     
  16. pellicle

    pellicle Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 10, 2010
    Southport, OzTrailEYa
    pellicle
    Hi

    I just rechecked your first post and see that its me that's guilty of not reading properly ... and indeed I missed your specification on prices. So my mistake there sorry for that.

    I wouldn't have replied if I'd have seen that as I know you won't get anything other than "lomography" sorts of rubbish lenses (and adapter) for that money.


    my advice is that with the 17mm f1.8 you'll get far far better results with cropping. I'd still suggest a 28mm focal length OM series lens and an adapter, because then you'll get something a bit more differentiated from the 17 you have. You should be able to get one of them for <40 euro. The 24mm focal length in 35mm flm is always going to be more expensive, particularly as they work well on full frame digitals.


    PS: you can probably pick up a Panasonic 20mm f1.7 off ebay from an Australian seller for AU$250 (that's what I paid for mine), but then there is the issue of taxes into the EU. I lived in Finland for some years and know that pain.

    Also, in my playing with things, the zoom lenses like the 14-42 do very well at 25mm when compared to anything else in the price range. The only thing which they don't offer is larger aperture (smaller f-numbers), but if you stop your 25mm fixed focal length down to f4 I seriously doubt anyone can pick the difference.

    Its for this reason that I've only been interested in "fast" lenses when I step away from zooms.

    A thought from the far-side is the Pentax 110 24mm f2.8

    http://cjeastwd.blogspot.com.au/2011/05/alternative-normal.html

    as you can see in these images:
    Zooom@24
    5679407114_fbce3ded48.

    pentax 24
    5679407118_4021773547.

    its softer at 100% and not really bringing much to the picture ...

    Depending on what you're doing though the little 24mm can be nice, for instance:

    P1030712a.

    blog post http://cjeastwd.blogspot.com.au/2013/09/autumn-lenses.html

    dunno ... I paid about $25 for my 24mm and about $30 for the adapter (which I then use for my 70mm and 50mm which I really do like)

    I think this shot too is from the 24mm
    10018371755_22bd6550b9.
     
  17. pellicle

    pellicle Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 10, 2010
    Southport, OzTrailEYa
    pellicle
  18. HarryS

    HarryS Mu-43 Top Veteran

    918
    Jun 23, 2012
    Midwest, USA
    While there is a clear difference between 24mm and 28mm on film and FF digital, the angle of view after a 2X crop factor is less distinct. It's just a matter of stepping back a little more when considering an effective 48mm against 58mm.

    It's my bias that most older 24mm lenses were just wider and hence more expensive than the old 28mm's, but they were not better. I think the OP should consider an inexpensive 28mm if one turns up. My old wide angles work best for close-up shots. Where mine disappoint is for faraway things where they cannot resolve as well as an old 50mm. The best of my 28mm's is a Tamron 28 f2.8 with the BBAR coating , and it's decent at infinity, far better than that crummy Vivitar I mentioned. The Tamron cost me the equivalent of 16 euros ($20 USD) six years ago.
     
  19. svenkarma

    svenkarma Mu-43 Top Veteran

    566
    Feb 5, 2013
    mark evans
    I'm guessing the OP sold the Sigma 30 because he didn't like the focal length, which is why he specified 24/25.

    The other solution is to get an m42 speedbooster adapter and look around for a 35mm lens.
     
  20. tino84

    tino84 Mu-43 Veteran

    217
    Dec 29, 2013
    little misunderstanding due to forum's nature, no problem :)

    anyway, I'm just cropping from 17mm (that I have to say, gives good results), but I'm not so easy with crops, I have to "see" pic when I shoot it.
    A fast lens would be better, but also a zoom as 12-50 would be a good option, considering IQ. It seems to me that this FL is a "no way choice", 25mm 1.8/1.4, or anything else would be a compromise (in IQ with adapted 24mm lens, in slowness with native zoom lens)

    Yes, these is the reason :) :)
    I don't think to use so many other adapted lenses, so I think SB wouldn't be an option for me.