28mm lens on RD-1

Just had a look on Sean Reid's vignetting test of the CV 28/3.5 here:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/rd-1-lens.shtml
Sounds very close to the CV 21/4 as far as light fall off apparently.
I own the M version of the latter and there is too much noise in the corners with the Epson raw converter for my tastes.
Got less problems with Capture One plus P'shop or Silkypix for vignetting correction.
FWIW
 
Hi I have a Minolta M Rokkor 2.8 28 Great lens But the field is more 35 than 40 or 43 Just fit my VC 35 mm external viewfinder that I use wearing glasses.
 
Your VF is the culprit i guess. Most if not all external viewfinders have a wider FoV to stay more or less accurate at short distance. Same with frame lines of rangefinder cameras BTW.
 
I would have to recommend the Ricoh 28mm f2.8 on the R-D1. It has a different look to the M-hexanon I had but it's definatly worth looking into. This lens is also tiny compared to most 28mm's and has a great retro look 🙂
 
Even though it's off topic, here's something even smaller.

3555123433_903584fc8a.jpg

Nikkor 28mm f/3.5 (converted to M from AF600) on Voigtlander R4A.

It protrudes about 1 cm from the flange.

Of course the Leica Elmarit-M 28mm f/2.8 ASPH is quite a good modern lens and it's great on the R-D1.

Cheers,
 
smallest?

smallest?

Are these smaller than the Canon 28/2.8 ltm?

I think you might like the new Elmarit ASPH 28 if you are shooting color, and want good contrast out of the camera (jpgs).

The CV 3.5 vignetted more than my Canon. the 28/1.9 is good, but vary from sample to sample. The Zeiss is OK, but more CA than the 25mm or a Leitz lens. The old Elmarit V4 or M-Hexnanon, though largish compared to the Elmarit ASPH, are very nice lenses for the 28/2.8 range, imho.

Frankie said:
Thanks everyone for fast input.

I have surveyed all available 28mm and have concluded the Elmarit the smallest, followed by an older LTM CV 28mm/f3.5...often used to illustrate the RD-1. The new CV 28mm f2 is definitely much bigger.

Elsewhere illustrated in Reid Report, lens vignetting in various 28mm lens is observable wide open, but can be processed away. Unfortunately that report did not include the Elmarit nor the Zeiss.

My ZM is a one lens outfit with the CV 40mm/f1.4 (modifed to bring up the 35mm frame line with 95%+ tight framing). I have since grown to like the 40mm look.
Click to expand...
 
bit slow

bit slow

The problem with 3.5 is it's just too slow for me. These were all taken with the 2.8 at 2.8 most all the time, unless the light was so bright, that lowest ISO and fastest shutter made me slow the lens down.



kermaier said:
The Canon 28/3.5 is probably the smallest readily obtainable lens -- even smaller than the Canon 28/2.8. I don't think my Canon 28/3.5 vignettes at all noticeably on the R-D1, and it's really quite sharp for a vintage lens.

::Ari
Click to expand...
 
back alley said:
the zeiss 28 is only ok?

reality check please...
Click to expand...

I'd have to agree, based on what I have seen. Out of all the ZM lineup - thier 28/2.8 is the weakest - there was a lot of discussion on it here before, with examples. Check some earlier 28mm lens threads. Many other lenses seem to outperform Zeiss 28mm 2.8 one. But if you like yours - great! - nobody said it was a bad lens, just not as good as some others.
 
bennyng said:
Even though it's off topic, here's something even smaller.

3555123433_903584fc8a.jpg

Nikkor 28mm f/3.5 (converted to M from AF600) on Voigtlander R4A.

It protrudes about 1 cm from the flange.

Of course the Leica Elmarit-M 28mm f/2.8 ASPH is quite a good modern lens and it's great on the R-D1.

Cheers,
Click to expand...

Thats a cool looking lens there! Do you have any pics from it?
 
ampguy said:
The problem with 3.5 is it's just too slow for me. These were all taken with the 2.8 at 2.8 most all the time, unless the light was so bright, that lowest ISO and fastest shutter made me slow the lens down.
Click to expand...

I've been surprised by how well I can get by with the slower Canon 28/3.5 ltm lens. As is commonly known, it's easier to handhold at slower shutter speeds with a wider angle lens. For example, here's a low res scan of a shot from last week when I was visiting my godson in a dimly lit hospital room. This was taken with the Canon 28/3.5 ltm on my M6 at f3.5 and 1/8 sec:

3708427190_fb970c70c4_b.jpg
 
Hi Randy

Hi Randy

Great photo. You've got a steady hand!

Yes, wider can let you go much slower. Last night at dusk I was struggling with a dslr with 300mm and 5.6, trying to photograph a deer and her cub about 200m away.

4th of July, we did some long expsures, but used tripods. Haven't hand held below 1/30th for awhile.
 
R-D1 and Rokkor 28

R-D1 and Rokkor 28

See my previous reply :
"Hi I have a Minolta M Rokkor 2.8 28 Great lens But the field is more 35 than 40 or 43 Just fit my VC 35 mm external viewfinder that I use wearing glasses."
Great lens even with the white dots. You can see it on my signature. I use it also with my Minolta CLE.
Regards
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom