[torontoem4o]

I own some cheap Pentax film-era lenses with so-so image quality. I also have the digital era Sigma 10-20 f3.5, and Tamron 28-75.

None of these come even close to comparing in image quality (at least in my view) to the series 1 vivitar 70-210, which is my favourite lens, and looks amazing for video too (I use my camera for "indie filmmaking" just as often as for photography).

Are there any comparable but wider older lenses? I need something much wider than 70mm. I am shopping around for a Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 so I should have that soon, but I want something even wider in addition to it. Any recommendations?

Thanks!

[vonBaloney]

There are a million good old lenses as wide as 28mm -- wider than that they are much more scarce and the really ultra-wides don't really compete with modern equivalents for IQ, they just make those much better now. But curious which Pentax film-era lenses you have already that you consider so-so? (Are they actually Pentax-branded or third-party?)

[ramseybuckeye]

I had a Kiron 28/2 which was the sharpest lens that I have owned at f8. It wasn't that great wide open, but I usually only used it at night on a tripod for nightscapes. Kiron also made a 24/2 that is supposed to be good also. The lens obviously has a good rep, lots of Vivitar 28/2s get listed on ebay claiming they are Kiron made, even though some look nothing like the Kiron.

[GibbyTheMole]

This Ricoh Rikenon XR 2.8/28mm is an excellent old 80s wide angle lens. But 1) it's all manual, and 2) on an APS-C sensor, it's equivalent to 45mm, which ain't very wide.

FWIW, there are PLENTY of superb film-era lenses out there, many of which are pretty cheap.

[torontoem4o]

This Ricoh Rikenon XR 2.8/28mm is an excellent old 80s wide angle lens. But 1) it's all manual, and 2) on an APS-C sensor, it's equivalent to 45mm, which ain't very wide.

FWIW, there are PLENTY of superb film-era lenses out there, many of which are pretty cheap.

It's safe to assume that all old lenses would be equivalent to a longer focal length due to the crop factor, right? But since my vivitar only has a lower effective focal length of 105mm, even a 45 mm would be a major improvement.

I guess I can't really get below 30-40mm with lenses made for film cameras, can I? I'll have to stick to my Sigma (which I don't really like much).

[Vern]

The Pentax Super Takumar and SMC 28mm lenses are fairly common and great lenses. The work out to about 42mm on a digital camera, so not too wide unfortunately. The Pentax 24mm is another fine lens, but much harder to find and more expensive if you do. I'm still looking for a 20mm.

[vonBaloney]

The Tokina 17mm f/3.5 is a pretty good lens -- from the 80s I think. Still goes for about $180. Anything wider than 28mm that is any good won't be terribly cheap -- there are some old non-Pentax branded 20s and 19s, but they aren't that great.

[stevebrot]

I am shopping around for a Super Takumar 50mm f1.4 so I should have that soon, but I want something even wider in addition to it. Any recommendations?

I am not surprised. 50mm on APS-C is not a wide-angle lens by any definition. As for good vintage lenses that render wide on APS-C, that is a fairly rare item. The standard wide angle for 35mm film is 28mm with 24mm and shorter being considered ultra-wide. Back in the day, anything shorter than 28mm was used primarily as a special effect lens. Pentax made both 24mm and 20mm manual focus lenses but they are hard to come by and very expensive. There are third-party 24mm that are good (Tamron for one), but again they are fairly rare and not cheap.


Steve

[savoche]

It's safe to assume that all old lenses would be equivalent to a longer focal length due to the crop factor, right? But since my vivitar only has a lower effective focal length of 105mm, even a 45 mm would be a major improvement.

I guess I can't really get below 30-40mm with lenses made for film cameras, can I? I'll have to stick to my Sigma (which I don't really like much).

Yes, any lens will, no matter the age and era. A modern 50mm is the same focal length as a vintage 50mm. Just in case there was any doubt

There are several good film era 28mm lenses to be found at reasonable prices, but - as others have said - wider than that they will be either rather costly or not very good. I would consider 28mm on APS to be "normal" rather than wide, but I find it to be a very nice focal length nonetheless.

[dadipentak]

A 20/2.8

[jimr-pdx]

I really like my SMC 17mm f/4 Fish-Eye (yes it's so old it has a hyphen ). Distortion is lessened on aps-c cameras but the horizontal FOV is between 14 and 15mm. It has four built-in filters too, yellow orange UV and skylight. Color and contrast are great, and it can focus very close as well.

Here's a sample from our house-hunting -

[Na Horuk]

It's safe to assume that all old lenses would be equivalent to a longer focal length due to the crop factor, right?

Uh, lets be clear here. No, they won't be. The field of view will be equivalent to a longer focal length. So a 50mm lens from 1950s and the brand new DA 50mm f1.8 have the same focal length and field of view on your camera. The thing is, if you put these lenses on an old film camera, the field of view will change - become wider. The DA 50mm already looks like a longer focal length on your camera. Just forget about equivalence - if you are using only one camera it doesn't exist. Equivalence is so that people who know what a 35mm lens, for example, looks like on film cameras, can visualize how it would look on a crop sensor camera. So, focal length of the lens doesn't change, but the field of view depends on the size of the film/sensor, so it can be "cropped" and made to look equivalent to a longer lens on a bigger film/sensor. All lenses are already cropped on a crop sensor camera.

The other thing is, 35mm was considered wide angle. These days, on crop sensor cameras, its not really wide angle anymore. 28mm was really wide, and 24mm was ultra. On crop sensor cameras, even 28mm isn't very wide. You can find many legacy 28mm and 24mm lenses, though. But wide angle lenses are very complicated and modern computer-aided lens designs with modern machining and lens coatings have come a long way. I suggest you look for lenses in your local area, and when you find some, check them in the lens review database on this website:
Pentax Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database
You an also scroll down and look at film era Pentax lenses and start from there. I suggest you try finding a lens with A mode on the aperture ring, it will be much easier to handle.

[Kendigitize]

I love my smc-28 2.8 but am looking for the "right priced" 20 or 24mm to go wider.
At $299, a brand new Samyang/Rokinon 14mm 2.8 is looking pretty good to me right now.

[lmd91343]

The film era Pentax mount lenses I own and have used for digital include:
o Vivitar 24mm f3.8 T4 it is ok for prints to 5x7 and maybe to 8x10. Stoping down is a must. The current production Samyang 24/1.4 and DA 21 are much better. The used cost is less than $100.

o Vivitar 24mm f3.8 Cosina made is also ok for prints to 5x7 and maybe to 8x10. Stoping down is a must. It is smaller than the previous and marginally better. The current production Samyang 24/1.4 and DA 21 are much better. The used cost is close to $120.

o SMC Tak 24mm is better than the previous two, but not as good as the Samyang or DA21. It is about the same size as the Cosina made. The current KEH price is about $245. The lens hood is BIG.

I have the SMC Tak 28, but have not tried it with digital. I will report back after I do. I should get to that by the middle of next week. It is great for film.

I have the Tak 35/2.0 and 35/3.5. You don't want to hear about these?

On a Pentax film user group list I was on years ago in the film days the Tak 20mm was nicknamed and referred to as the "bow-wow" lens. That was a fun way of calling it a dog. I have never used one. At KEH, they sell for about $235. That is less than the 24mm!

I have the Tak 17mm fish eye. It seems a bit wider than the DA15. I think it is about 100*. You cannot use the 1.5 crop factor multiplier to find equivalent FOV because of its fisheye projection. It has no filter threads on the front, however you can use the Tak 24mm clamp on hood. The lens is expensive and hard to find.

Overall the new wide angle lenses for digital are much better than the older ones. I am sorry that I bought the two Vivitar lenses. That is about $220 that I could have used for my eventual DA21 purchase. I thought I'd save money using the older WA lenses, but I was disappointed. I now use the DA15, DA21, DA 10-17 and Samyang 24/1.4 to the exclusion of the old film WA lenses.

BTW, I have found that the good older longer lenses work great with digital, just not tha WA.

[marcusBMG]

This thread on mflenses offers a range of opinions on a range of 28mm lenses.

Your best 28..and how you got there :)

Sigma Miniwide II (28mm) and Superwide II (24mm) merit their reputation IMO.