Wide legacy lense

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by Superstriker#8, Nov 19, 2013.

  1. Superstriker#8

    Superstriker#8 Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 24, 2013
    What is the best legacy lens from 24-35mm?

    Sent from my iPod touch using Mu-43 mobile app
  2. agentlossing

    agentlossing Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jun 26, 2013
    Andrew Lossing
    You're talking wide in 35mm terms, right? Those are basically standard in m4/3...

    I know there are some good 24mm and thereabouts that tend to be expensive, if you're looking for good performance at a lower price point, there are some sharp (slow-ish) 28mm's out there. I own the Olympus OM and Konica Hexanon 28mm f3.5's, and both are good and sharp stopped down to f5.6, really quite decent lenses. And cheap.
  3. mr_botak

    mr_botak Mu-43 Veteran

    Dec 4, 2011
    Reading, UK
  4. speedandstyle

    speedandstyle Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I love my Nikon E series 28mm f2.8. For one thing it is very light and compact even with the adaptor fitted. It is very affordable too.

    My Nikkor 35mm f2 is even more impressive in IQ but also heavier. It also sells for 2-3 times as much.
  5. Superstriker#8

    Superstriker#8 Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 24, 2013
    Yes, I mean 24-35mm (48-70mm equiv.), preferably under $125.

    Sent from my iPod touch using Mu-43 mobile app
  6. dbuckle

    dbuckle Mu-43 Hall of Famer

  7. photo_owl

    photo_owl Mu-43 Regular

    Nov 8, 2013
    if it's any good it won't be at that price - and it only really commands price for use on FF bodies. you can see the range of OM 24/2.8 lenses on ebay from $150 to $350.

    if you are looking for 'OK' performance from a pretty fast lens then you have things like the Vivitar 28/2 and a whole range of Hexanons etc Tamron Adaptall 24/2.5 etc etc

    you get what you pay for, but with m43 you really won't benefit from what you have to pay for lenses in this range.
  8. HarryS

    HarryS Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jun 23, 2012
    Midwest, USA
    I've not found any of my inexpensive 28's and 35's to be any better than my 14-42mm zoom. My Tamron28 and OM35 are as good, but the Vivitars are worse. However, I deal only with $25 lenses, and in this focal length range I don't think you get any better quality until you pay bigger money for Nikon or RF lenses. At that point, consider the Sigma 19 or 20 at $199. The original versions of these two Sigmas were $99 a year ago,
  9. agentlossing

    agentlossing Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jun 26, 2013
    Andrew Lossing
    I disagree. While not fast, I'd say my Hexanon performs much better than the kit 14-42mm at f5.6, the colors are better and overall sharper.

    For $125, I'd definitely go for one of the sigmas, though. Usable f2.8 and autofocus are definitely worth the upgrade price over a ~$50 legacy lens.
  10. speedandstyle

    speedandstyle Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    My 28mm Nikon E is sharper than the kit lens at the same settings and has an extra stop if needed{and my example has a tiny bit of fungus on an inner element}. The kit lens handles CA a little better because of the more modern coatings and glass types but just barely. Good examples of this lens range from $50-$150 on ebay. Hell I just looked and found one in near perfect condition with both caps and in the original box with a 90 day warranty!

    The cheapest and smallest and lightest option in this range would be the Pentax 110 24mm f2.8. It is tiny but has no iris so you have to shoot wide open all the time. Still it is a respectable lens with very good IQ. It does have some vignetting however.