dumb question about 35mm adapters

All good points Bob although the expense comparison and quality reference is slightly off. There are a few still cam comparisons on the net that show the 17-35 2.8 ED out performing their prime counterparts and so on with the 80-200.

These two lenses can be had in excellent condition for around 1000.00.

So take the 17-35/2.8 which gets you a 17, 20, 24, 28, 35 all in 2.8 flavors and equal to or better performance to their prime counter parts. Even if you wanted a 16, 24, and a 35 prime you would probbly see a 1k expense for glass in excellent condition for hose three. To that effect you get much more mileage out of the extra sick 17-35 than you do primes. The same goes for the 80-200 for telephoto lengths.

The major drawbacks are speed (i personally think that 2 or 2.8 is fast enough) and focal throw distance for this type of work. Also, added weight.

However beyond the dollar amount and actual quality of zooms, a host of tests can be found on the net for various zoom lenses, the rest is preference and there is no right or wrong. Only what works for an individual.

I like my hyper slow Vario Sonnar so much that I am looking into adding one or two of the push pull models to my kit.
 
Indeed. Being that the aperture is already F4 I didn't see it as an issue because you can't get any faster and for anything slower just use ND's or the internal camera iris. Plus m'D70S would enjoy it. :B

If it were faster than that then it might be a no no, but it's already slow so no biggie; at least for me!

Do you happen to have any daylight test shots with it on the Letus? I'd be interested as I have yet to find one for a decent price. Still hunting.

Kholi:

It's not the slow f-stop, did you notice the letters "DX" in my post? That means on your FF 35mm Letus, you will have extreme corner softness and falloff. It may not even fill the frame, as a matter of fact, I know it won't at 12-16mm range. The Tokina (if we are talking about the same recent popular 12-24 and not some older one) is not a full frame lens, it's designed only for DX sensor cameras. So it would be quite a dog for your Ultimate.

Sorry to be the bearer. There is nothing that wide and that cheap in full frame that I can think of.

Dan
 
Dan can you do me a small favor? When you get a chance can you strap your 12-24 on to your hvx+letus and zoom into Z24.9, Z27.3 and 35.2 to see what kinds problem is presented? I only use my ultimate in those ranges and never wider. Is it still a problem?

I always thought FX meant simply auto controls. Thanks for the heads up.
 
Dan can you do me a small favor? When you get a chance can you strap your 12-24 on to your hvx+letus and zoom into Z24.9, Z27.3 and 35.2 to see what kinds problem is presented? I only use my ultimate in those ranges and never wider. Is it still a problem?

I always thought FX meant simply auto controls. Thanks for the heads up.

Hi Kholi:

I will but it may be a while, I am elbow deep in a home repair plumbing thing that will probably kill any free time I have to play with gear this weekend. I do have a question though, what is the point of using a lens this wide if you have to zoom in that far. Kind of robbing Peter to pay Paul isn't it?

Will let you know.

Dan
 
Last edited:
Back
Top