manual focus alternative to 28mm 2.8

[steve_young9]

<p>Ok, I have had the 28 mm auto focus lens for several months now, and I am not happy with it at all. It is just not s

harp enough (even on a hefty tripod and good head) and the vignetting is not satisfactory at all.</p>

<p

>I am looking for suggestions for an older manual focus 28 mm lens that I can attach to my Elan 7. Have folks had

good results from Nikon, Olympus or Pentax (or zeiss). One of these companies must make a good 28mm len

s.</p>����

[sam_zaydel1]

<p>I had an opportunity to test out a number of older Pentax lenses with a M42 mount and found them to be extremely sharp. I shoot with a Pentax Takumar 50mm f/1.8 and am extremely happy with it.</p>

[John Crowe]

<p>Consider the Nikon 28/2 AIS and Nikon 28/2.8 AIS. Zeiss would be my second option but I do not know their lenses well enough to make specific recommendations.</p>

[scrivyscriv]

<p>...Good to know I'm not the only one who doesn't like the 28 all that much for those reasons.</p>

[hal_b]

<p>How about a modern zoom? As lens technology has increased, more R&D has gone into zooms than primes, hence it's not uncommon for a new zoom to be much better than a 30-year-old prime. I really enjoy my Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. You might try the Canon 24-70 f/2.8 for even better quality, albeit at a higher price.</p>

[mwtphoto]

<p>the Zeiss 28/2.8 in CY mount is my favourite lens for landscapes. out of all of my older contax lenses this one gets the most use.</p>

[bobatkins]

<p>All lenses vignette wide open. You're not going to find any that don't (especially on a full frame camera). The only way you might be able to get rid of it would be to mount a 28mm medium format lens via an adapter. Otherwise expect a couple of stops of vignetting in the corners when shooting wide open.</p>

<p>Vignetting is best dealt with in the digital darkroom!</p>

[Robin Smith]

<p>Why not try the 24mm f2.8? It is a better lens than the 28/2.8. In fact it is not bad at all, although it suffers from distortion (like many). Otherwise I would suggest the Zeiss 28/2.8, or a nice 28mm Leica Elmarit-R (first version).</p>

[arie_vandervelden1]

<p>Sigma makes a 28/1.8. People complain about its crappy AF, and people praise this lens for its bokeh. Might be worth checking out if you intend on focusing manually. The fast max aperture and 77 mm front element may alleviate some of your vignetting concerns. Plus you get EX build quality.</p>

<p>http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/217758-USA/Sigma_440101_W_A_28mm_f_1_8_EX.html</p>

[oscar_van_der_velde]

<p>If you just bought it maybe a Canon service center can tune it under warranty?<br>

I'm always surprised when I read somebody finds the EF 28mm f/2.8 not sharp enough. Apparently one needs luck to get a good one. Maybe the ones sold now do not get much quality control anymore? I bought one in 2000 (slide film era) and the many reviews on Photographyreview, as well as Photodo at that time raved about its sharpness. <br /> I tend to agree about the vignetting, but it has its charms. DPP can correct it. I can't imagine the L zooms will do any better in that respect though. Sigma states it designed its F1.8 wide angles for low vignetting. I have the 20mm and it's not bad in that respect, and razor sharp by f/2.8 with careful focusing.</p>

[matthijs]

Stopping down might help.

 

Otherwise I support sending it in. It should be pretty sharp.

[paul_martin4]

<p>Steve,<br>

I too once owned the EF 28/2.8, and like you I was generally not thrilled with the results. I have since discovered that there are tons of great options in the realm of alternative glass. As far as pure resolution goes, the 2 I liked best were the Contax Zeiss Distagon 2.8/28mm and Olympus OM Zuiko 3.5/28mm. The Zeiss was better wide open, and very sharp. Stopping that lens down a couple stops gave better perfomance in the corners, though for landscapes I usually stopped dowm to f/8+. The Zuiko is a better value, but only for landscape usage, it really peaks in those ranges and has a more even look throughout the frame. Both lenses require adapters that are easily found on "the auction site" and for the lenses the Zeiss should range from 200-300 or so, with the Olympus the value champ at less than 100. For what its worth, my Tamron 28-75 was better than the Canon 28 -- its worth a look as well. Keep in mind with the MF lenses you will need to focus wide open then manually stop the lens down via the aperture ring to your desired aperture. Not difficult, but an extra step. There is a wealth of info available on the fredmiranda website, tons of people using alt lenses, albeit on digital bodies.<br>

Paul</p>

[bill_boshoven]

<p>Although I've never used the canon 28mm, I've read several comments in the past form people who were unhappy with it. So it would seem you are not alone. You might look at the Canon 24mm, which I've read is very good and better than the 28mm. You may want to check the archives.<br>

<br /> I use a Nikon 28mm 2.8 AIS on my canon body. I've been happy with it. When considering possible options, I came across <a href="http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/28mm_3.html">this comparison</a> of Zeiss, Nikon, and Olympus 28mm lenses that I found useful.</p>

<p> </p>

[steve_young9]

<p>Thank you, one and all, for your advise. It looks like I have a few alternatives to investigate.</p>