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

Looking for a Superwide Angle Lens

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by Remnest, Jul 7, 2015.

  1. Remnest

    Remnest New to Mu-43

    8
    Dec 24, 2013
    Hello everyone,

    As the title states, i am currently looking for an UWA lens. The main uses will be landscape as well as astrophotography. I have been scouring the web for images and info on these three lenses to see if they fit the bill: The Kowa 8.5mm f3.8, the Voigtlander 10.5mm f.95, and the new OLY 7-14mm f2.8. Other have suggested the Samyang 10mm f2.8 as a viable option.

    Now, ideally i need as little distortion for landscapes as well as little to no coma for astrophotography. Do any of you own any of these lenses and can provide information regarding the performance of these lenses for the purpose i've outlined? Any comment or links would be much appreciated. Thanks!
     
  2. phigmov

    phigmov Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Apr 4, 2010
    What is your budget ?

    Have you checked out the native lens image showcase forum ?

    Oly 9-18mm
    https://www.mu-43.com/threads/2537/

    Pana 7-14mm
    https://www.mu-43.com/threads/295/

    7.5mm Fisheye - Bower/Rokinon/Samyang etc - lots of distortion but can be straightened in post . . .
    https://www.mu-43.com/threads/16458/

    Oly 12mm
    https://www.mu-43.com/threads/14333/

    12mm - Rokinon/Samyang etc
    https://www.mu-43.com/threads/63060/

    I've got the 7.5 fisheye - works nicely for ultra-wide on the cheap. Otherwise I tend to use the 14mm Pana. Just got the 12-32mm - keen to try it out at the wide end and see how much more I can cram in :)
     
  3. RAH

    RAH Mu-43 Veteran

    270
    Dec 1, 2013
    New Hampshire
    Rich
    I agree with phigmov that you should include the Samyang 12mm f2 lens. There is an interesting article about astrophotography here:

    http://www.lonelyspeck.com/lenses-for-milky-way-photography/

    To quote it briefly: "One of the primary benefits of the Samyang/Rokinon/Bower lenses is that they are well corrected for coma and astigmatism aberrations." Sounds like what you want. There is a chart here:

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AomVJ2lbrwb1dDRGeHJOaVZfYnlFR2ZDTFNlSnk2emc&usp=sharing

    which shows very specific numbers concerning different lenses. The Samyang 12mm f2 in m43 lens has a very high number.

    Myself, I have a Samyang 16mm f2 in Canon mount, which should work like the 12mm f2 for m43. I have yet to try it for star photography, but it is very sharp for the other types of photography I have used it for, mostly for photographing documents shooting straight down. I plan to try it out for star shots when I am in Utah later this year.
     
  4. EarthQuake

    EarthQuake Mu-43 Top Veteran

    833
    Sep 30, 2013
    The Samyang 10mm 2.8 is a relatively large APS-C lens that is designed for APS-C DSLRs, that will need to be used with an adapter or the M43rds version which is 2cm or so longer due to coming with essentially a built in adapter. I wouldn't recommend it unless size/weight are not a concern or you plan to get the Nikon mount version and use a tilt/shift adapter (then it would be quite unique).

    I really like the Panasonic 7-14/4 myself. I've tried the Olympus 9-18mm too, but it wasn't wide enough for me, decent lens for the price/size though.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. RAH

    RAH Mu-43 Veteran

    270
    Dec 1, 2013
    New Hampshire
    Rich
    I agree. The 10mm is much like my APS-C 16mm in size, whereas the Samyang 12mm f2 in MTF mount is specially made mft and is very small.
     
  6. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    In theory you could put the 10mm/f2.8 on a focal reducer and end up with a rectilinear 7mm/f2 lens (albeit a giant one). How cool would that be?
     
  7. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    There just isn't a really good answer for this one. I'd like a solution, too. Lately I've been pondering adding a discounted Sony or Fujifilm body and buying a 12mm f2.0 in that mount. That gives 18mm f2.0 equivalent and would be like a 9mm in m4/3. The lens is $300 and you can find used/refurb/clearance bodies in the $200-300 range quite easily. For example KEH has LN Fujifilm XA-1 bodies for $240 right now. They have a Sony 20MP A3000 for $170 or an A5000 for $200. So maybe for $500-550 you get something along the lines of the Kowa 8.5mm, but smaller, half the price, and a stop faster. Only penalty is carrying a second camera. Although as much as the 7-14mm f2.8 and Kowa 8.5mm weigh, even that's probably a wash.

    I doubt I will do that, I'm just throwing out some thoughts I had.
     
  8. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Not as wide, but you could do the same with the 16mm f2.0 and have a 11mm f1.4 on m43. 11mm f1.4 vs 7mm f2.0 I guess. You could probably do both for the cost of a Kowa...

    You'd want one of the more expensive focal reducers if you were using it for Astro, though, I would think.
     
  9. Remnest

    Remnest New to Mu-43

    8
    Dec 24, 2013
    Thank you all for the replies thus far. The reason i have not considered either the Oly or Pana ultra-wide zooms is because they are too slow for astrophotography in general. The are however, great lenses for landscapes in my experience. I owned the Oly 12mm f2 but for some reason i keep wanting something wider than a 24mm equivalent. I ended up selling it because despite its incredible capabilities my bread and butter lens is the 12-40mm f2.8 so i hardly used the prime. I do own the Rokinon 7.5mm fisheye but the f3.5 aperture can be troublesome in some places for milky way shots or star trails, although i have used it with decent results.

    I should mention that my kit is mainly used for travel photography which is why i rely heavily on the 12-40 zoom. Its weather sealed and covers most of the focal ranges i need when i travel. But no matter what, i always find myself wanting something wider and preferably rectilinear. Hence my interest on the lenses i posted. Truth be told the weight and size do not bother me as all things being equal a FF kit would be significantly heavier.