Best 20(21),24,28mm primes for SLR

[teos]

<p>Hello!<br />Recently I became interested again in film slr ,because of the wide angle lenses.I don't want something very obvious , so the primes suit me better than a zoom.So, between the20,24 and 28 Rokkor, Zuiko, Canon FD,Konica,Nikon ,Pentax,wich are better?</p>

[zane1664879013]

<p>You'll have to define "best". People are going to have difficulty providing anything more than opinion on a few lenses. You're asking us to rank three lenses in six mounts -- who out there will have tried all 18 combinations?</p>

<p>If money is no object, the Zeiss 21mm Distagon is supposed to be breathtaking. I haven't used it, it's around US$1700.</p>

[teos]

<p>Well,Zane, thanks for answering.<br>

I am interested in SH manual Wide angle primes .I didn't mentioned Zeiss and Leica not even Contax because of the price.<br>

"Best" means to me sharpness,no distorsions,contrast,bokeh.<br>

I am interested in a 20mm, a 24mm and a 28mm.</p>

[CosteaM]

<p>20mm is harder to get in any mount due to high price. I have used 24mm in Canon FD and Pentax screwmount. They are both very good. Hard to tell a difference unless you run optical tests (who bothers with that...). I also own and have used a 20mm Zeiss Flektogon in Exakta mount - outstanding. You can get them in screwmount as well - not cheap but affordable.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Older 28mm MF lenses are not too costly, but at the time, 20mm and 24mm were way wide and tend to be both rare and fairly expensive when you do find them.<br>

Some of the Spiratone lenses in these focal lengths are pretty good-- the earlier ones in T-mounts, and later with YS automatic mounts where I, any way, have found it hard to find interchangeable replacement mounts. Thus for the later ones, it's best to find it in a mount that is itself easy to adapt to others.</p>

[gerry b.]

<p>Hmm, I don't entirely understand the intent here, but if I were trying to settle on one wide angle 35mm film lens with a body for a dedicated walk around camera, I would tend to think of 20s and 24s as quite wide to have as your only 35mm lens. My choice would be a Nikon 28mm 2.8 AIS lens - which is generally considered to be very good - and an autofocus body with the features that are most important to you (and that could include a lot of choices in Nikon bodies).</p>

[luke_kaven]

<p>Things I like to use:<br>

Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8g -- large image circle and it beats most every prime ever made<br>

Nikkor 28 f/2 AI -- lovely and fast<br>

Nikkor 35 f/2.8 PC -- very sharp unshifted, just don't forget to set the diaphragm<br>

Things I would like to use (available for many cameras):<br>

Voigtlander 20mm f/3.5 SL-II Color Skopar<br>

Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 Distagon<br>

Zeiss 25mm f/2.8 Distagon<br>

Zeiss 28mm f/2 Distagon</p>

[jeff_guthrie]

<p>A great 20mm lens is the Canon FD 20/2.8. It's relatively inexpensive ($200 or so), but it's excellent. I have the Canon 24/2.8, the Nikon AIS 24/2.8, and the Olympus Zuiko 24/2.8. Of the 3, the OM Zuiko is my favorite. It's small, light, and quite sharp. 28s are a little tougher because everyone makes several, but the OM Zuiko 28/2 is the best I have used (out of Canon, Nikon, Minolta, and Pentax).</p>

[teos]

<p>Jeff ,you mean Zuiko 2 or 2.8 for the 28?</p>

[rustys pics]

<p>Over the years I have come to prefer the focal lengths from 28-17mm for most of my shooting in 35mm so I've owned a few from different manufacturers. The two most outstanding are:<br>

Nikon 20mm 2.8 AF lens. The Manual Focus is just as good. It's tack sharp and focuses close.<br>

Olympus Zuko 24mm f2.8, in any version it's super sharp edge to edge and has little barrel distortion. Wish I still had it!<br>

Another good one is the Nikon 28mm f/2 AIS lens. Fantastic Bokeh and sharp when it needs to be.<br>

A real dog was the Nikon 24mm f/2 AIS. Just not sharp and awful distortion.<br>

The older Olympus Zuiko 28mm f3.5 lens is Ultra Sharp too, and cheaper than the later f2.8 lens.<br>

Tokina made a 17mm f3.5 wide angle lens in many mounts that was good stopped down to f5.6 or so.</p><div></div>

[tony_lockerbie]

<p>28's from all the manufactures you mentioned are excellent and would be the cheapest option. The 24's are usually well priced too, because these and the 28's are very plentiful.<br>

If your budget can stretch, and you need to go wider, then the too best super wides in my opinion are the Nikkor 18mm 3.5 and the Canon FD 20mm 2.8</p>

[k5083]

<p>I agree with Tony, in fact I would go farther and say that it's hardly even worth answering the question as to 24s and especially 28s, because there's an OEM lens and several third-party options for any major system that are more than adequate. <br>

I have two Flektogon 20s (Exakta and M42) and love them; I think they give you the most bang for buck in that range. I use the M42 one on M42, Minolta, and Contax/Yashica cameras with adapters. Very versatile.<br>

I have heard great things about the 20 Nikkor and if I ever got a good price on one, I'd buy a Nikon body just to put behind it.</p>

 

[teos]

<p>Did somebody used the Konica 21mm f/4 ?</p>

[Robert_Lai]

<p>Like Les, I have the 20mm f/3.5 AIS Nikkor. It has some barrel distortion, good sharpness, especially up close. It's major claim to fame has been its resistance to flare. Mine cost about $250 used, in near mint condition (around 2004). It is a very tiny little lens.</p>

<p>I also have the 24mm f/2.8 AI Nikkor. It has less barrel distortion than the 20mm, and it is also nice and sharp. Its main flaw is that it will flare easily if point sources of light are in the picture, or close to the edge. I bought mine for about $175 used, 9/10 condition (2004). This is a bit bigger than the 20mm lens, but still small and easy to carry.</p>

<p>I have the 28mm shift Nikkor, which is just great for architectural images. It is time consuming for general use, as the aperture is a manual pre-set, so you need to manually close the aperture before shooting. For most cameras (Nikon F3 is the exception), you need to meter first before shifting the lens. You may find these to be costly, as they are uncommon (i.e. low production volume) lenses. The shift mounting makes this a bulky beast.</p>

<p>I have never really taken a shine to the 28mm prime lenses, as I have the 35mm f/1.4, and I find that I'd rather get the bright, slightly tighter image that the 35mm gives me. This is all a matter of personal preference, of course.</p>

[teos]

<p>Well , meantime , I have a Rokkor 28mm f/2.8 (MD) , the Rokkor 24mm f/2.8 (MC) ,Hexanon 24mm f/2.8 and the CZJ Flektogon 20mm f/2.8 , the last two are still on their way .<br>

I can't wait the good weather , and the last 2 lenses !!!</p>