Vintage 24mm Lens Comparison - Minolta, Olympus, Pentax, Tokina 24mmLensBattle
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 12 ก.ย. 2020
- In this installment, we take a look at 4 different vintage 24mm camera lenses. These include the Pentax Super Takumar (super tak) 24mm f/3.5, the Minolta Rokkor-X 24mm F/2.8, the Olympus H.Zuiko 24mm F2.8 and a Tokina made Vivitar 24mm f/2.8. These inexpensive legacy glass range from $50 to $200 and are all fairly common. But how do they render? And how do they compare? Enjoy this real world lens review.
![[UNCUT] ลูกหมี-ลิลลี่ เหงียน เปิดใจฟาด ปู มัณฑนา I คนดังนั่งเคลียร์ I 15 ก.ค.67](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/FKQ60Y7bJ6s/mqdefault.jpg)
Great comparison. Very helpful. Most lens review/comparison videos on TH-cam make it difficult to compare the picture quality. You clearly succeeded in making the comparisons work within a video. I subscribed and I am looking forward to watch more upcoming vintage reviews on this channel.
Thanks Harald! Glad it was helpful... next up will be 135’s ... cheap ones compared to a few expensive ones. Then my big project, 50 50’s... a nice comparison of 50 lenses from 45-58mm I’ve been collecting for a while. Hope you are well in this pandemic world.
@@cheapshotslensreviewsandph3559 I’d love to see the Voigtlander Bessamatic 135mm in the mix, (DKL mount) Would really make my day!
Fantastic you must have put so much time and energy into making this detailed video
A very helpful review. Noting the centre sharpness of the Tokina, as you noted, a great but for APSC and M4/3.
Great discussion. Love the 24mm lenses.
Great comparison! Thank you.
Thanks! This was really useful
THANKS BRO AMAZING VIDEOS AND TESTS
So glad you enjoyed it! The encouragement helps keep me shooting and not just collecting lenses on the cheap :-)
I love your review format.. a bit of everything.. and personal feedback.. very informative. totally subscribed. :P my problem is I need to get of my butt and pick up a minolta and olympus adapter.. that minolta was already on my wish list. So a bit of confirmation bias on my part regarding the minolta and this video. however, I was surprised at how soft the pentax was.. also the performance at f8.. it looked like f2. :P Might be worth it to have the pentax.. just for that odd portrait where you can have super sharp subject yet still mysteriously blurry background.
I just got the 24mm Super-Takumar today, and I can say my copy is very sharp. I use mine for video, and it's almost sharper than I like... I may use a diffusion filter sometimes like I do with my 28mm.
Nice comparison! Great vídeo! 🙋🏽♂️🇧🇷
Thanks for watching
Excelent review !🙂
Thanks I’m so glad you got something out of it!!
Interesting comparision, well done !! What do you think about an Olympus OM Auto-W 24mm 1:2 ? I am glad to get one.
I think it’s probably an amazing lens! But pretty pricey, no? If I ever come across one at a good price I’ll certainly test!
Minolta gang
I tested my three vintage 24mm lenses to see which was the sharpest and clearest, using my Sony A7Rii.
This is how they came out. The Olympus was way clearer than the rest.
1) Olympus OM-System H.Zuiko Auto-W 24mm f2.8
2) Canon FD-N 24mm, f2.8
3) Asahi Super Multi Coated Takumar 24mm f3.5
Very nice channel on my favorite subject 👍
Thank you Kim, trying to improve every episode!
This was useful when I was shopping for a 24mm. Do you have a gallery comparing shots by any chance?
Maybe one day I'll do a blog . . . but until then, I would just go with the Sigma/Quantaray or Minolta MD if you can find it! Good luck and thanks for viewing!
Hi. Thanks for your review. You've really overdone it with audio gate, it's biting off ends of words. ))
Nice. I'd love to see a comparison between the Minolta and a Canon FD 24 f2.8 and/or perhaps the f2
I’ve got an FD 24mm 2.8 (and a 28mm as well) now. Plus a Nikkor 24 … just need the time, been a crazy year!!
Thanks for the comparison video.
I have seven Pentax Takumar prime lenses that range from 28mm to 300mm focal lengths. All produce good image quality.
I never bought any Takumar screw-mount lenses wider than 28mm because they were either too expensive or their image quality was not that good. Based on this video, your 24mm definitely did not have good image quality.
Great comparison. I was about to buy the Super Takumar for my Pentax Spotmatic, but now I am in doubt, haha. Although, I think there is no better option on the m42 mount :(
great , well done, regards
Thanks for the video presentation. I think I'll stick with my Nikkor 24mm f/2.8.
Hi, I'm looking forwards to buy nikkor 24mm 2.8, is it sharper than all these lenses
that's like sticking to only one color.. it's not an either or kind of deal. :P
Me favorites are the Canon FD line but thinking about adding a few of these to try out. Kinda obsessed with vintage right now 😂 so much choice at budget prices
I think I acquired an FD - it may be a 28, I forget . . . was planning on a Nikon, Minolta, Canon challenge with the sigma superwide II thrown in for good measure ;)
welcome! I bought a super program in 84.. so I AM vintage.. so of course.. it's a passion of mine as well. :P Canon makes forkin unbelievable glass.. Nikon too.. Pentax.. yup.. don't you feel enthused that we live in a time that 20 bucks adapts any brand to your mirrorless? IT'S LIKE CHRISTMAS!
@@cheapshotslensreviewsandph3559 For the Pentaxian Nation.. perhaps an A series 24mm f2.8? be interesting to see if ANYTHING conquers the Nikon. :)
'm not surprised at the superior performance of the Minola lens. I am surprised at the relatively poor results from the Pentax. I'm guessing that the Pentax lens is a much older optical design Now I'm wondering hjow my 24mm 2.8 Nikkor would fair in this reivew. (On rep alone, probably quite well, but it is more pricy too.) New subscriber here.
In Pentax there is a bit of confusion with the series. This Pentax Takumar series should be cheaper than the Pentax SMC. Thus the Pentax SMC 24mm lens should be significantly better than the Pentax Takumar 24. So you could find: for K mount Pentax SMC 24mm (M,A,AF...) or Pentax Takumar SMC 24mm (or not SMC only manual), Super Takumar 24mm m42 (screw mount and not labeled Pentax).
.
I was surprised level 'maybe this is a jank copy' regarding the pentax.. and I found the amount of background blur at f8.. confusing.. if this is normal performance.. I WANT ONE.. just for doing f8 portraits with a less than blindingly sharp midback zone. likely the close focus distance.. hard to gauge in a single photo.. so yeah.. I'd get it for the blur. :P
I have 28mm (not 24) Albinar f/2.8 that I bought cheap and very sharp.
I love my Nikon 24mm f2. 8 Afd lens.
I have it on my Nikon D300s at the moment. I use it on my Nikon FE as well.
My favorite wides are the nikkor 20mm 3.5 and 28mm 2.8 AIS (just did a similar comparison). I’m dying try a Nikon 24 (and canon). I think a “part 2” is in order soon. Gotta get my hands on one. I’ve got the Vivitar 24 f/2, sigma super wide and a cool no-name 24 that I’d love to test ...
this was exactly what I was looking for, thanks for making.👍 ps: I bought the 24mm super-takumar and the vivitar 24mm yesterday. I already have a takumar 35 f2, and It's a lot sharper and not so hazy than the 24mm in the video. but anyways, I'm fine with it either way, I'm not buying a vintage lens to get a super sharp image. ;)
I'm so glad it was helpful! Equally glad your super tak is sharp - I have a 135 super tak that I wouldn't trade for the world, even though I have really nice alternatives. Maybe I should do a similar video on 135's.
Olimpus, the best color rendering.
@@robertomaas2600 that's why I like to look at them in real life situations. Instead of just using "sharpness" as a guide . . . what's the overall rendering. I like that Olympus a lot.
Also, were you shooting on full frame or aps-c? My apologies if you did mention that. I'd be shooting full frame. Thanks again!
Great question Steven! I use a Sony A7II, full frame 24 megapixels.
@@cheapshotslensreviewsandph3559 thanks again! I'm using the a7r2 right now. This was THE perfect video for what I'm looking for
The Sigma Super Wide II 24mm f/2.8 is my favourite...
Mine too, especially if I'm planning on any close ups!
Thanks for this review and comparison. Always loved Minolta for the very beautiful color reproduction and quality. Olympus surprised me too. I have never owned a single Olympus lens, but judging by various reviews, I had the impression that, in general, Olympus lenses were of average quality. However, in this comparison, the Olympus performed very well, especially in the corners. I also wanted to say that I liked the composition in the photographs themselves (or the cropping applied later). One can immediately say - this is a person who knows a lot about composition. The very first photo is BOOM, you can immediately put it as wallpaper on your desktop :) And that photo with a stone wall is so sharp and colorful. And the picture that was most likely taken from somewhere in the forest (?) and we see a landscape and those biiig columns - a very good composition and the picture itself is very atmospheric, with a beautiful distribution of light. I immediately became interested in what kind of place it was taken. Judging by your pronunciation, you are an American. But the country is pretty big (although somewhat smaller than mine, hehe), so for now it remains a mystery to me, because there were no signatures. Anyways, very interesting comparison and I'm glad I stumbled upon it today (even though it's been 2 years) because today there are so many different kinds of "bloggers" and... to be honest, they show themselves more, rather than their content. Constant jokes, all sorts of video inserts, gestures - all this is annoying. And now, there is a person who just calmly tells and shows things for what they are without all this distracting modern tinsel. Thanks. Now I'm wondering what you think about Minolta zooms (if you like them at all). P.S. although the quality of the microphone is probably worth thinking about. (or maybe the noise reduction was too strong). But... it's been 2 years and it's probably something you've already taken care of :)
Thanks for the comment, it made my day, and will give me the enthusiasm to finish my next review which is 95% complete. I don't matter, it's about the lenses . . . what I get out of Cheap Shots is the excuse to get out and shoot, not just "collect." So I always try to take a photo I would take for myself to share, it that makes sense. I do own a coupe of copies of the highly regarded Miinolta 35-70 f/3.5 macro. I honestly own two copies because the first one had little "magic" that so may claim. Maybe it's a bad copy? But I've been blown away by the 24-35 . . . hard to find, but it's in my OTHER 24mm lens comparison, and it's fantastic. I also have the 70-150, and it seems very sharp though I haven't had a chance to put it through its paces. Thanks for watching, and for the kind words!
Do you know that the Minolta 24mm 2.8 are the same lens construction as the Leica Elmarit-R 24mm 2.8 and made by Minolta but finished by Leica.
I’ve heard that, and there are a couple of others in my collection that are rumored to have been used by Leica, including a 90mm F4 for Leica M Mount and my 35-70mm F/4 macro... that being said, I’ve heard the sigma super-wide 24mm 2.8 was also, and I’m looking forward to maki g another video of that one, a vivitar 24 f/2 and another no-name in a future video! Stay tuned and thanks for watching!
Thank You
Minolta nailed it with 24mm. Surely one of the most successful 24mm of that time
I have tried a lot of lenses in that range, but this one sticks around. Another came pretty close (some would say bested it) in my other review though!
The Sigma Super Wide II showed more even results across the frame.
What was the modern lens which was the first photo berfore the comparisons?
Great question Hans! That was just one of the photos post-processed. The comparisons are straight out of camera. Appreciate the feedback.
@@cheapshotslensreviewsandph3559 ....wanted to know the same thing.... your answer shows,that normally it it more important to do a good post processing then which camera and lens you choose for taking the shot.... Good video,thx.
@@stephanpaier9887 yes . . . 30 seconds of adjustment (levels, contrast, etc.) has way more impact than the lens. Fascinating, right? That's why I end this one with, whatever you've got, just go out and shoot!
Please please fix the audio. Otherwise great comparison!
I own and use a Nikon 24mm f/2 Nikkor lens in a 24/50/105mm or 24/50/135mm lens kit.
Did I miss what camera are you using, full-frame, APS, m4/3? The camera will make a considerable difference in the picture with these lenses.
Yes indeed... my first video and I forgot to mention I used an A7II - so full frame Sony! The videos do get better, lol especially the 28mm comparison... thanks for looking!!
Thank you for replying the reason I asked was if you are using a M4/3 camera the sensor is only viewing the centre portion of the lens, hence the sharpest part of the lens, I remember reading about this several years ago the article was talking about ‘circle of confusion’ I may be wrong but that was what I understood.
I'm extremely happy with my Minolta MD and old Tamron adaptall 2 lenses,
They don't match up to my new Olympus lenses and they aren't the PRO lenses
Vivitar 24mm was made also by Cosina. Cosina made versions are incredibly good lenses in my experience, I suspect way better than Tokina manufactured ones. They were sold also under other brands, as Miranda for example.
Interestingly, not long after I did this comparison I picked up a non-name with a 52mm filter thread, and it seems pretty nifty. I was thinking maybe it was a sigma, but perhaps it’s a Cosina like you say. Interesting...
Cosina version has really 52 mm filter. Minimum focus distance is 19 cm
Did you use the hood with the Takumar?
No hoods on any of these wide angles . . .I do own one on the Minolta but didn't use it for parity's sake.
Nice comparison!
Your audio voice has issues. Might want to look in to until next video.
Thanks! Was first video and I picked up a new Mic and have been working on a new editing app as well. Audio is so important!
Thanks again! I think I’ve got the audio much better now on the 28mm comparison! th-cam.com/video/j7y10XK1TnY/w-d-xo.html
Привет! Отличный ролик! Кроме минолты все пробовал объективы. Все хороши!!
The Minolta 24mm 2.8 is the same Lens design as in the Leica Elmarit-R 24mm 2.8 because it was designed by Minolta for Leica, the differences is the build quality and the coating.
I own all of these in my collection. I like the Olympus 24 among all of them. I won’t say takumar 24/3.5 is the best but not as bad as the one in your review. I guess yours was harshly hit or there is fungus on the glass.
What camera was this shot with?
A7 II
I love old Takumar "color" rendering, not always the sharpest but with a very special character, Zuiko lenses are also very good.I also have MD lenses, often very sharp but MC is, imho not as good as on other lenses, even from Russia or DDR, lots of flare and less contrast.
Thnx for work, but…
It’s a not perfect idea to use large landscapes only for lens comparison. Good to be seen some macros, some patterns, small object focusing etc. I cant make a conclusion about sharpness for example. I would rather a book or newspaper page for sharpness test.
Curious, what do you typically shoot with 24mm lenses if not landscapes?
@@cheapshotslensreviewsandph3559
In addition to landscapes, I use my 24mm for large group portraits, environmental portraits, architecture, room interiors, vehicle interiors, and street photography.
I highly recommend the Tamron Adaptall II 24/2.5. Got it for next to nothing when I got a Yashica FX-3 and it keeps stunning me all the time!
I've got the 28mm version, looking forward to trying it soon!
Tamrom Adaptall II lenses are largely overlooked, which is too bad given that the "SP" line lenses easily run with the major manufacturers' comparable products. If you want a mid-range zoom as a daily user, the 35-80 2.8-4.0 SP is as good as anything out there, a real joy to use. In fairness, when new, the SP lenses were often not super bargain against the name brands. Good just costs some money. Used, they tend to get no respect, and can be super bargains.
@@randallstewart175 I’m kicking myself for not buying the 35-80 at the beginning of the summer. It was only $20 but I didn’t know if it would be worth it. I’ve got a vintage zoom comparison coming up and would have done nicely I’m sure. I do own the 90 f2.5 which I love. Cheers!
@@cheapshotslensreviewsandph3559 Around the time of the 35-80, Tamron introduced its second version of 70-210mm SP lens. In those rare events where I'm concerned about loss to theft or injury to equipment, I downsize to a Nikon FG, and Tamron SP 30/80 and 70/210. A physically light but highly capable package, particularly if I also pocket a Nikkor 24mm 2.8.
Both Tamrons are great performers (in digital too). They are in my shelves since the 90s.
Nice comparision, but horrible Sound.
On Smartphone okay, but on TV with amplifier really hard to listen.
Yeah, was my very first video... definitely learning and hopefully improved on my latest.
your pentax super tak 24 is faulty. mine 24 is very sharp.
Thanks for the feedback! I wonder that myself and firmly believe there is a lot of variation by individual lens… what do others think?
Your Pentax is broken. Something is total wrong. 😢
I did mention in the video I am somewhat concerned as it doesn’t perform anywhere near my super tak 28.. but others have said the 24 is similarly squishy, especially I. The corners. Good perspective, thanks for joining the conversation!
Thanks for the comparisons! What is the software you are using to show side by side?
This one was Lightroom Classic... thanks for the comment!