Good 28mm (or 24) to Adapt?

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by tjdean01, Aug 17, 2013.

  1. tjdean01

    tjdean01 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Feb 20, 2013
    I have a CPC Phase 2 28mm f2.8 macro. I paid $20 and I looove the FL and colors on m4/3s but I want something with better corners and better contrast wide open

    I guess I'm leaning towards the Pentax M 28/2.8 (version 2 is better than 1, apparently). I prefer the look/feel of Pentax but I won't rule out the Konica Hexanons if they have an advantage. A couple people have said the Pentax 28/3.5 is sharper than the 2.8 but I haven't seen any comparisons.

    I see some Sigmas (both in 24 and 28mm) that look good in samples, have macro, and are cheap to boot, but can they compete with the lenses mentioned above? I'm confused by them because they come in various mounts.

    I'm open to suggestions. The better the lens the more I'm willing to spend but I will not spend $900 for the Pentax 31/1.8! :) 

    I've been looking through these 24mm and these 28mm samples. I think I actually prefer 28mm because 24 is getting close to the Pany 20/1.7 which beats them all (I guess the m4/3s Sigma 30/2.8 probably beats most of these 28mm too but there's just something satisfying about manual focus!).

    UPDATE: Looking through the threads Kiron/Vivitar is actually impressive. I wonder why some say "close focus" and some don't. Also, the f2 is the obvious choice over the f2.8, but if the 50mm's are any example, the 2.8 is sharper (with most 50s I've seen you're better off getting the 1.8 than the 1.4).
  2. dougjgreen

    dougjgreen Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 5, 2013
    San Diego
    Doug Green
    Well, the Leica 28mm f2.8 Elmarit R is better, but whether it's $450 better is a different question.

    Some of the other lenses that have the best reputations are the Nikon 28mm f2.8 AiS (and ONLY the AiS version), and the Minolta 24mm f2.8 MC and MD Rokkor X. Those lenses tend to sell for around $175-200 or so.

    For something under $100, you might try the Konica Hexanon 28mm f3.5 or the Olympus OM Zuiko, either the f3.5 or the f2.8 versions.
  3. mr_botak

    mr_botak Mu-43 Veteran

    Dec 4, 2011
    Reading, UK
    Either the OM 28/2.8 or better still the 28/2 would be great choices.

    Honestly, if wide open is the priority then native glass will always win by a long way.
  4. wlewisiii

    wlewisiii Mu-43 Veteran

    Dec 16, 2011
    Hayward, WI
    William B. Lewis
    I use the Nikkor Pre-AI 24/2.8. I find that it does very well and is significantly cheaper than many of the alternatives.
  5. Cruzan80

    Cruzan80 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 23, 2012
    Denver, Co
    Sean Rastsmith
    Have a Kiron built Viviyar that performs nicely for me. A 28/2 model in MD mount. The 1:5 close focus makes it my go to for botanical gardens.

    Sent from my LG-P769 using Mu-43 mobile app
  6. dougjgreen

    dougjgreen Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 5, 2013
    San Diego
    Doug Green
    I HATE the bokeh of that Kiron 28mm f2 lens - I sold mine because of it.

    I am also not a fan of the resolution of the old Nikon 24mm f2.8 - another one I got rid of. OTOH, the cheap Konica 28mm f3.5 is pretty good.
  7. Cruzan80

    Cruzan80 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 23, 2012
    Denver, Co
    Sean Rastsmith
    I haven't noticed any particular issues with the bokeh, but it is not high on my list of criteria when choosing a lens. YMMV.
  8. dadadude

    dadadude Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 12, 2013
    San Carlos, CA
    I have quite a few 28's but I really like my Vivitar 24mm 2.8. Very natural colors and good contrast. Fairly cheap.
  9. tjdean01

    tjdean01 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Feb 20, 2013
    What other lenses do you have? I ask because because if the Vivitar is the one you mention it will help rule out the others. Is it usuable at 2.8?

    If they don't say "close focus" does it mean they're not? I've seen both on Ebay and something about the "close focus" one made me think it wasn't original (plus it was the cheapest). You have a different version than the guy above. I know f2 isn't going to be stunning, but how it the quality at 2.8?

    Thanks for your opinion. I'd like to see this bokeh you mention. Maybe I'll like it and someone who doesn't like it will sell me theirs cheap! :)  Since you had it, however, how was sharpness at say, f2.8? I've tried several Hexanons and even the 3.5s need to be stopped down a bit IMO (though I haven't tried the 28). The thing that sucks is that on some of those lenses the next stop is 5.6! :( 
  10. Cruzan80

    Cruzan80 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 23, 2012
    Denver, Co
    Sean Rastsmith
    There is a huge list of Vivitar 24 and 28's out there. Great Vivitar 28mm Bestiary. The one I have is the same as the K01 model (but MD mount). The two reviews there seem to like it. It also has the benefit of being easy to both disassemble and adjust for infinity focus. I have never found the sharpness lacking, but I don't pixel peep. Ball bearing stops at 2->2.8 then half stops to 11, then one full stop to 16.
  11. dougjgreen

    dougjgreen Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 5, 2013
    San Diego
    Doug Green
    Unfortunately, I don't have any shots that I kept from the Kiron 28mm f2, and I got rid of the lens. It was pretty sharp, even at f2.8 but the best way I can describe the bokeh is that it was harsh - nothing soft and smooth about any out-of-focus highlights - they kind of pulled your attention to them, which is the opposite of what you want the OOF portion of the image to do.
  12. Cruzan80

    Cruzan80 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 23, 2012
    Denver, Co
    Sean Rastsmith
    Correction: mine is a Komine, not Kiron built. Sorry.
  13. MarylandUSA

    MarylandUSA Mu-43 Veteran

    Jul 3, 2013
    Poolesville, Maryland
    Paul Franklin Stregevsky
    In my film days, I shot with K-mount bodies and lenses. At various times, I owned three different 28s:
    - Kiron 28/2K (55mm filter)
    - Vivitar 28/1.9K Series One (58mm filter, multicoated)
    - Pentax SMC 28/2K

    The Kiron was well-built, small, and sharp enough but colors were lackluster and biased toward green.

    The Vivitar Series One was one of my workhorse lenses. Colors were rich and saturated (though warm), and the glass delivered high resolution. The lens had a floating element to deliver a sharp image at close focus. You can probably find it at a low cost in one of the orphaned mounts like Konica or Miranda.

    The Pentax SMC was a Zeiss/Pentax joint design that, like the Vivitar 28/1.9, used a rear floating element. It was flawless but I felt it belonged with someone who would use it more.

    If you can live with a maximum aperture of f/3.5, you probably won't find a sharper, more accurate, less distorting 28 than the Pentax SMC 28/3.5K or its late screwmount precursor (the Takumar SMC 28/3.5 or Takumar Super Multi-Coated 28/3.5).
  14. spatulaboy

    spatulaboy I'm not really here Subscribing Member

    Jul 13, 2011
    North Carolina
    You really should look at the Sigma 30mm f2.8 mft. It's really good.

    I also have the Minolta 28mm f2.8, focus smooth as butter. Nice and sharp too.
    <a href="" title="Minolta MD W. Rokkor 28mm f2.8 by Vincent-F-Tsai, on Flickr"> 9289187636_c92e3b243a_z. "640" height="480" alt="Minolta MD W. Rokkor 28mm f2.8"></a>

    In the end though when you factor in the price for lens and adapter, you might as well buy the Sigma.
  15. RnR

    RnR Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 25, 2011
    Brisbane, Australia
    I'd chime in and add my voice to the Konica 28mm f.3.5 - try to see if you can find the 7 element version. Apparently its a little sharper than the 5 element.

    I've also found the Nikon 28mm f3.5 H.C to be good. Bjørn Rørslett has good things to say about it - Wide-Angle Lenses For Nikon 'F' Mount
  16. tjdean01

    tjdean01 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Feb 20, 2013
    Wow, there sure are a lot of lenses to choose from! As far as size vs price vs quality goes, I think I'm going to rule out the Zeiss and OM lenses. The best bang for the buck looks to be the Sigmas, lower priced Pentax, and Hexanons, actually, but I might want to go a little higher on the quality scale...

    Just to add a note to this, I've learned that the Kiron lenses are not the same as the "Close Focus, Vivitar" ones made by Konime, so you guys might be talking about different lenses with very similar specs (although I see that most people [see dougjgreen's post above] feel the bokeh on any of these 28s is not too desirable).

    Thanks. Love this kind of detailed info :) 

    ...anyway, I've decided the one I want is the Vivitar 28/f2. The Pentax K 28/3.5 seems to be one of the best lenses ever created at that FL but it seems incredibly hard to find. I've seen the Vivitar f2's but I pay "full price" for it I'm going to want it a Pentax mount. I thought I could snipe a cheap Konica mount so we'll see. The Konime-made Vivitar Close Focus lenses also come in a 2.8 version, and if I can snipe one of those for $20 maybe I'll do that for the time being :tongue:
  17. burdickjp

    burdickjp Mu-43 Veteran

    Feb 25, 2013
  18. dougjgreen

    dougjgreen Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 5, 2013
    San Diego
    Doug Green
    My bad bokeh comment was entirely specific to the Kiron 28mm f2. If there is an identical Vivitar version out there, I probably would avoid that as well, but many of the Vivitars are from Komine, or Tokina as well. I have used LOTS of legacy 28mm lenses and the Kiron 28mm f2 is the only one I have ever had that was plenty sharp but I dumped it because of the bokeh. I've had others that I wasn't enamored with the sharpness - but the Kiron was sharp enough, it was just really harsh on the out of focus highlights.

    BTW, nothing wrong with the OM 28s. The 28mm f2.8 should be obtainable for ~$75-80 US and the 28mm f3.5 for well under $50. I find the OM 24mm lenses much more costly than the 28mm ones for similar quality.
  19. agentlossing

    agentlossing Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Jun 26, 2013
    Andrew Lossing
    I have the Konica Hexanon, and while I'm still new to the lens, let me say that my copy does need to be stopped down. f5.6 is the next stop on the aperture ring, but you can leave it between the two stops and mechanically it's the same as if you had an f4 or f4.5.

    The good news is that, while this isn't a fast lens, stopped down it will cut your eyes, the images are so sharp.

    Attached Files:

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.