Looking for a simple super wide solution

[Martin Ocando]

I don't really shoot super wide much, and for most purposes the 20mm side of my 20-70mm is more than sufficient, but I want to have wider options but not spending too much. Speed wise f/4 is also enough, although I might shoot the occasional astro, is way too unfrequent to justify a lens for only that so the 16mm f/1.8 while very nice, is not in my budget right now.

So, long story shot, I've been looking into many FF options, but a lens I wasn't expected appeared on a youtube video and the reviewer mentioned that while is for the APS-C format, and shows a prominent vignette on the 10mm side, it almost disappears at 12mm. I can find this lens at around $400 on eBay.

Have anyone had experience on this one?

Any other options you can recommend?

 

[NAwlins Contrarian]

I don't really shoot super wide much, and for most purposes the 20mm side of my 20-70mm is more than sufficient, but I want to have wider options but not spending too much. Speed wise f/4 is also enough, although I might shoot the occasional astro, is way too unfrequent to justify a lens for only that so the 16mm f/1.8 while very nice, is not in my budget right now.

So, long story shot, I've been looking into many FF options, but a lens I wasn't expected appeared on a youtube video and the reviewer mentioned that while is for the APS-C format, and shows a prominent vignette on the 10mm side, it almost disappears at 12mm. I can find this lens at around $400 on eBay.

Have anyone had experience on this one?

Any other options you can recommend?

First, for all that, you didn't identify this mystery lens, apparently an APS-C zoom. Might be easier to get comments in you tell us what you're considering.

Second, also, for $400 you can find a very good condition used Sony FE 16-35mm f/4, the older Zeiss Vario-Tessar lens. It's a pretty decent lens. That's what I did.

Third, how wide do you need or want? Is 16mm wide enough, or do you want to go wider?

Fourth, do you need autofocus? If not, then the least expensive new zoom may be the Venus Laowa 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6. Inexpensive primes include the Samyang /Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 in a couple of versions, which seems to have a decent reputation.

 

[Martin Ocando]

[No message]

 

[Martin Ocando]

I don't really shoot super wide much, and for most purposes the 20mm side of my 20-70mm is more than sufficient, but I want to have wider options but not spending too much. Speed wise f/4 is also enough, although I might shoot the occasional astro, is way too unfrequent to justify a lens for only that so the 16mm f/1.8 while very nice, is not in my budget right now.

So, long story shot, I've been looking into many FF options, but a lens I wasn't expected appeared on a youtube video and the reviewer mentioned that while is for the APS-C format, and shows a prominent vignette on the 10mm side, it almost disappears at 12mm. I can find this lens at around $400 on eBay.

Have anyone had experience on this one?

Any other options you can recommend?

First, for all that, you didn't identify this mystery lens, apparently an APS-C zoom. Might be easier to get comments in you tell us what you're considering.

Ah, sorry. Just realized that and added a reply since I can no longer edit the main thread. Is the Sony E 10-18mm f/4 OSS.

Second, also, for $400 you can find a very good condition used Sony FE 16-35mm f/4, the older Zeiss Vario-Tessar lens. It's a pretty decent lens. That's what I did.

That's a good option, although 12mm, the focal length the vignetting disappears on the 10-18, is quite wider than 16mm

Third, how wide do you need or want? Is 16mm wide enough, or do you want to go wider?

Preferably a bit wider. Ideally 14mm.

Fourth, do you need autofocus? If not, then the least expensive new zoom may be the Venus Laowa 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6. Inexpensive primes include the Samyang /Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 in a couple of versions, which seems to have a decent reputation.

Hmm, that Laowa sounds interesting. I don't think AF is a deal breaker on a superwide, especially since you don't do video, which I'm not.

 

[Jefenator]

I straight up hated the 10-18.

I had been aware of its ability to cover FF at some lengths. But my copy was weak enough on APS-C, I had zero urge to expand beyond that framing. (YMMV; apparently some copies aren't so bad.)

For UWAon FF with a $400 budget I would go 3rd party all day. I haven't scoped out the choices yet, but I would definitely try a prime by Viltrox or Samyang or anyone before rolling the dice on another Sony 10-18.

 

[deednets]

I have been using the Voigtländer 15/4.5 for a few years, why wouldn't you consider that one? Sunstars add some extra magic to all shots when there's some lightbulbs or breaking sun in a forest.

Super small, great quality and contrast and occasionally available at around 350-400 US. I bought mine from Map cameras in Tokyo. Took 36 hours using DHL to New Zealand

Deed

 

[dcstep]

Look for a used Sony FE 12-24mm f/4 G. It's excellent.

--
Dave

 

[MediaArchivist]

I've been using the Viltrox 16/1.8 and Venus 10/2.8. They pack a punch, not even considering their price.

 

[wheresrunnicles]

I have been using the Voigtländer 15/4.5 for a few years, why wouldn't you consider that one? Sunstars add some extra magic to all shots when there's some lightbulbs or breaking sun in a forest.

Super small, great quality and contrast and occasionally available at around 350-400 US. I bought mine from Map cameras in Tokyo. Took 36 hours using DHL to New Zealand

Deed

This is what I do, but it depends what’s important to you. If you’re doing Astro, it’s probably not for you. As an occasional ultra wide that fits in your pocket when you take out a lens like the 20-70 it’s great. Similarly if sunstars are important.

 

[Martin Ocando]

I straight up hated the 10-18.

I had been aware of its ability to cover FF at some lengths. But my copy was weak enough on APS-C, I had zero urge to expand beyond that framing. (YMMV; apparently some copies aren't so bad.)

Good to know about your experience. Apparently sample variation is quite heavy on this one. I think I'll skip it.

For UWAon FF with a $400 budget I would go 3rd party all day. I haven't scoped out the choices yet, but I would definitely try a prime by Viltrox or Samyang or anyone before rolling the dice on another Sony 10-18.

Good call. Will check for options.

 

[Martin Ocando]

I have been using the Voigtländer 15/4.5 for a few years, why wouldn't you consider that one? Sunstars add some extra magic to all shots when there's some lightbulbs or breaking sun in a forest.

Super small, great quality and contrast and occasionally available at around 350-400 US. I bought mine from Map cameras in Tokyo. Took 36 hours using DHL to New Zealand

Deed

Oh wow, that's a very nice option. And it takes filters, so I can sooth water with an ND. And I already have NDs that will easily fit with an adapter. Thanks. Will be in the top of the list.

 

[Martin Ocando]

Look for a used Sony FE 12-24mm f/4 G. It's excellent.

Looks lovely, but way out of my budget.

--
Martin
"One of the biggest mistakes a photographer can make is to look at the real world and cling to the vain hope that next time his film will somehow bear a closer resemblance to it" - Galen Rowell

 

[Martin Ocando]

1. Voightlander 15mm f/4.5
2. Sony Vario-Tessar T* FE 16-35mm f/4

Pros Voightlander:

• About $100 less than the Sony
• Takes 58mm filters (Already have plenty at 62, so only a small adapter will suffice)
• Quite smaller and lighter

Cons:

• MF
• No weather sealing (I think)

Pros Sony:

• Focal range can be more convenient as I tend to shoot with my 35mm quite often
• 72mm filters, same as my 20-70 and 70-200
• AF and OSS
• Weather sealed

Cons:

• Size and weight
• 1mm less wide (might not be an issue)

Anything else I'm missing?

--
Martin
"One of the biggest mistakes a photographer can make is to look at the real world and cling to the vain hope that next time his film will somehow bear a closer resemblance to it" - Galen Rowell

 

[ahaslett]

I have been using the Voigtländer 15/4.5 for a few years, why wouldn't you consider that one? Sunstars add some extra magic to all shots when there's some lightbulbs or breaking sun in a forest.

Super small, great quality and contrast and occasionally available at around 350-400 US. I bought mine from Map cameras in Tokyo. Took 36 hours using DHL to New Zealand

Deed

Oh wow, that's a very nice option. And it takes filters, so I can sooth water with an ND. And I already have NDs that will easily fit with an adapter. Thanks. Will be in the top of the list.

It’s what I have to pair with my 20-70mm G. I really like my 4th copy.

Minton floor, St George’s Hall

Just make sure you buy with a returns policy. There are a lot of bad copies from the first batch. Easy test is to focus to hard stop infinity. If it’s less than 30m away, the corners will never be sharp!

Otherwise, there are wider options to trawl through reviews https://alikgriffin.com/sony-fe-lenses-the-ultimate-list/

A

--
Infinite are the arguments of mages. Truth is a jewel with many facets. Ursula K LeGuin
Please feel free to edit any images that I post

 

[ahaslett]

The 15/4.5 Super Heliar has an integral petal hood which can only be removed by disassembling the lens. Various people have complained that their filters won’t fit inside it but my Hoya 58mm is fine. You can’t fit square filters without some complicated messing around with rings.

The build quality of the CV is great and it handles well.

You get classic Voigtlaender/Zeiss/Laowa type rendering, including sunstars at most apertures.

A

 

[thunder storm]

I've been using the Viltrox 16/1.8 and Venus 10/2.8. They pack a punch, not even considering their price.

I have the Viltrox, and I like it. I'm not a wide angle expert, so I can't compare it to other options.

 

[wheresrunnicles]

I have been using the Voigtländer 15/4.5 for a few years, why wouldn't you consider that one? Sunstars add some extra magic to all shots when there's some lightbulbs or breaking sun in a forest.

Super small, great quality and contrast and occasionally available at around 350-400 US. I bought mine from Map cameras in Tokyo. Took 36 hours using DHL to New Zealand

Deed

Oh wow, that's a very nice option. And it takes filters, so I can sooth water with an ND. And I already have NDs that will easily fit with an adapter. Thanks. Will be in the top of the list.

It does take filters, but it has this weird integrated hood design which might cause trouble if you’re planning to use step down rings (if I have a chance I can test it).

 

[henryk1]

I'm in the same boat. I'd like to have a super wide for very occasional use, such as photographing interiors of homes. I'm not a pro. I'm an old guy. I'm on a budget. Hence I'm thinking about the Rokinon 14mm 2.8 Series II, which is a manual focus lens that costs just $299 at B&H. It gets good reviews for image quality.

 

[Martin Ocando]

I'm in the same boat. I'd like to have a super wide for very occasional use, such as photographing interiors of homes. I'm not a pro. I'm an old guy. I'm on a budget. Hence I'm thinking about the Rokinon 14mm 2.8 Series II, which is a manual focus lens that costs just $299 at B&H. It gets good reviews for image quality.

Hmm, good inexpensive option, but too bulbous to me. I want it to fit filters, especially NDs.

 

[Martin Ocando]

I've been using the Viltrox 16/1.8 and Venus 10/2.8. They pack a punch, not even considering their price.

I have the Viltrox, and I like it. I'm not a wide angle expert, so I can't compare it to other options.

Oh God, now you made me doubt myself. This will be perfect also for Astro, but then again, I might do Astro once maybe twice a year, not worth the investment. So far the Zeiss 16-35 f/4 wins.