Tim Gray
Well-known
Just got mine this morning. Man is this thing tiny. Especially compared to my 17-40 f/4 Canon lens...
I think I'm going to have a lot of fun using this guy.
I think I'm going to have a lot of fun using this guy.
Avotius
Some guy
Congrats, I would like to see some results when you get some, I have the 17-40 too and it is one of the reasons behind my hate of DSLR's.
Tim Gray
Well-known
The one thing I do like about the 17-40 is the crazy close focus ability which is fun with a wide angle. So I'll probably keep it. Otherwise, I think this new guy is going to be my go to super wide - it can sit in the bag until I want to use it, as opposed to lugging around a huge lens all day that I might not use because its too slow.
There was a minute where I considered going from the 17-40 to the 16-35. Then I realized there's a million other things I'd rather have.
There was a minute where I considered going from the 17-40 to the 16-35. Then I realized there's a million other things I'd rather have.
Avotius
Some guy
hah...I agree that close focus thing is kind of nice on the 17-40 and I too thought about going for that 16-35 II then I went and bought a M6 and Zeiss 28, a little lost on that line eh?
drewbarb
picnic like it's 1999
The minimum focus mark on the 15mm Heliar is .3 meters. Stop down to f8 or more and you can get sharp much closer than that; it takes a little practice, but it's not that hard to get good shots with subjects as close as 12 inches from that little thing- it's surprising.
sojournerphoto
Veteran
mmm, I still don't have anything really wide for my dslrs. Distagon 35 or 24-105. I've also toyed with the 17-40, whcih I quite like the handling of, and the sigma 12-24 that seems in some samples to be excellent, but I find really unpleasant to use.
I've been thinking about an 18 distagon, but the heliar on the ikon looks more fun and affordable in comparison.
uhligfd
Well-known
Hm ... drewbarb: 12 inches (= 1 foot) come out to be exactly 30.5 cm or .305 m. Check on your metrics, please.
Last edited:
drewbarb
picnic like it's 1999
Well- there you go. I guess Jimmy Carter's efforts to get the U.S. public schools to "Go Metric!" only got me so far. Anyway, my point is that you can get surprisingly close with the 15mm. I haven't measured what the D.O.F. will get closer than those 30 centimeters, but I'm sure it's significant. For RF shooting, even that's pretty close- though I admit that (especially given parallax error) really close up- even wide- is one area where SLR's are easier.
Argenticien
Dave
Well, if DOFmaster.com is to be believed, then if you take this thing all the way down to f/22 and focus at the minimum 0.3 m (1 ft) then the everything between 0.16 m and 2.14 m (about 0.5 ft to 8 ft) is in focus. So you would indeed be able to have in focus (if not "focus on") some outrageously close (@ 6 inches) objects. Is it really that simple?
luketrash
Trying to find my range
The 15mm lens is wide enough that even if you forget to focus it, it's usually making fairly sharp photos of everything it sees.
Set it at f8 and 1.5 meters and it'll take in everything.
It's a really fun lens sometimes, and frustrating at others. Somewhat tricky to meter light with if you're using a Bessa RxA camera with AE due to the sky throwing it off usually.
However, you can wrangle up nearly everything you can see with your own eyes into the scene and distortion is straight line, so it is great for architecture.
I know 1000s of photos have been posted on here, but here are some of my favorites of my own:
It caught me in frame:
Set it at f8 and 1.5 meters and it'll take in everything.
It's a really fun lens sometimes, and frustrating at others. Somewhat tricky to meter light with if you're using a Bessa RxA camera with AE due to the sky throwing it off usually.
However, you can wrangle up nearly everything you can see with your own eyes into the scene and distortion is straight line, so it is great for architecture.
I know 1000s of photos have been posted on here, but here are some of my favorites of my own:
It caught me in frame:
Last edited:
drewbarb
picnic like it's 1999
Some nice shots there, Luke. I especially like the one of the delta chi house- really nice use of the wide angle distortion, as well as leading line. Cool stuff.
Tim Gray
Well-known
True, but the 17-40 (and I'm sure other wide SLR zooms/primes) focus down to a couple inches. And you know you're in focus and framed correctly because you're looking through the lens. Just one of those times that SLRs have an innate advantage.
However, I think I'll enjoy using this lens a lot more.
drewbarb
picnic like it's 1999
True enough. That's why I said above that "close up- even [with] wide [lenses]- is one area where SLR's are easier." That said, the 15mm Heliar is indeed a fun little lens. If you are carrying a small RF kit, it's easy to throw in the bag; it so small and light, I don't mind carrying it even if I don't use it. That's rarely the case with an SLR and a big zoom...
jan normandale
Film is the other way
I don't see the point in using this lens in place of a DSLR lens that close focuses to "a couple of inches" it's not intended to be used for near macro stuff. Luke's shots are what it's all about. Here are a couple using it for effect and in tight quarters to fill a frame with the entire view
for the W/A effect...
For tight quarters
luketrash
Trying to find my range
Jann, I want to LIVE in that 2nd photo
This is what I know about the 15mm.
It's tricky to keep level. Many times when I develop my negs it looks like I was completely drunk when I made the pictures.
The lens tricks your viewer. It compresses a LOT of visual information into a tight space, and since it doesn't suffer from the 'security mirror' look of SLR lenses of this focal length, it is really convincing. The viewer sometimes has no idea just how much they are seeing. see: my photo above of the river & buildings in Chicago. It just looks like a normal shot.
If you get carried away and try to shoot whole rolls of film just using this lens, you'll end up getting a lot of shots that just look downright weird. It's not a good lens to go around photographing people with. Their heads will suck off into oblivion and look distorted. It's also prone to flare obviously, but pointing it at the sun on purpose can be interesting.
It's small enough to pop off and put your 35mm or 50mm on for your normal shots though
None of my friends who shoot digital really understand why I'd like this lens. It's apples and oranges. I don't understand why they want to carry around 7 pounds of glass on their shoebox sized camera that's exposing APS sized digital sensors. I've got my Hasselblad if I want a workout
This is what I know about the 15mm.
It's tricky to keep level. Many times when I develop my negs it looks like I was completely drunk when I made the pictures.
The lens tricks your viewer. It compresses a LOT of visual information into a tight space, and since it doesn't suffer from the 'security mirror' look of SLR lenses of this focal length, it is really convincing. The viewer sometimes has no idea just how much they are seeing. see: my photo above of the river & buildings in Chicago. It just looks like a normal shot.
If you get carried away and try to shoot whole rolls of film just using this lens, you'll end up getting a lot of shots that just look downright weird. It's not a good lens to go around photographing people with. Their heads will suck off into oblivion and look distorted. It's also prone to flare obviously, but pointing it at the sun on purpose can be interesting.
It's small enough to pop off and put your 35mm or 50mm on for your normal shots though
None of my friends who shoot digital really understand why I'd like this lens. It's apples and oranges. I don't understand why they want to carry around 7 pounds of glass on their shoebox sized camera that's exposing APS sized digital sensors. I've got my Hasselblad if I want a workout
jan normandale
Film is the other way
Luke, I agree with everything you've said. I personally like the surprise factor using this lens. Like you noted if you shoot a whole roll it may disappoint. The flip side is you also may get some totally unique shots that really aren't achieved with other cameras. That makes it worthwhile for me.
Tim Gray
Well-known
Oh absolutely, I agree. What's nice about the SLR is that if I want that shot I can take it, but I can easily take other kinds as well. Well, with the exception of the fact that I left the SLR kit at home because its too big to carry around all day
Tim Gray
Well-known
Shot a roll of Kodachrome this morning with the lens, so I should have some results back in a couple of weeks
Actually, I purchased the lens in preparation of a vacation to Paris in two weeks. So I should have a bunch of shots with the lens in about 3-4 weeks. haha.
Actually, I purchased the lens in preparation of a vacation to Paris in two weeks. So I should have a bunch of shots with the lens in about 3-4 weeks. haha.
audible
Member
might i just highjack this thread for a moment...
for those of you who use the 15mm, what do you do with the external viewfinder?
do you just leave it mounted on the camera at all times? i'm a little worried about losing or scratching it, and it doesn't have a cover or pouch...
for those of you who use the 15mm, what do you do with the external viewfinder?
do you just leave it mounted on the camera at all times? i'm a little worried about losing or scratching it, and it doesn't have a cover or pouch...
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
I found a coupe of cheap accessory flash/hot shoes for a buck and pirated the shoe and stuck it to the bottom of the rear cap (either glue or, as in my case, I drilled a couple of holes and tapped them into the base of the shoe. Now you can put the finder on the rear cap and stick the lens in a small bag without fear of having the finder rattling around. Nikon used to have these back caps for their 21's and it did reduce the time spent with your head in the camera bag, rooting through the accumulated debris and swearing!