Need help choosing a wide angle lens

J

JohnJohnson

I am going to be purchasing the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 soon, and am trying to decide on my lens kit. I have decided that I would like to go vintage because I like the look of the lenses as well as the price. I am looking to get three lenses to start with a telephoto, normal, and wide angle.

The GH2 has a focal length multiplier of 2.0 as well as a 1:1 mode which gives a multiplier of 4.0 (2.0 x 2.0). For example, a 50mm lens would have the characteristics of a 100mm lens normally, and a 200mm lens in 1:1 mode. I would write the lens as follows: Brand 50mm (100mm; 1:1 - 200mm) f#.

As of right now, I am looking at the following lenses for my telephoto and normal focal length:

Helios-77M-4 50mm (100mm; 1:1 - 200mm) f1.8
or
Helios-103 53mm (106mm; 1:1 212mm) f1.8

Helios-98 28mm (56mm; 1:1 - 112mm) f2.8

For the above lenses, I only have the multiple options for so I can just check which is a better deal at the time. For wide angle, there are a number of factors that have led me to the following.

Panasonic 14-42mm (28-84mm; 1:1 56-168mm) f3.5-5.6

I am unsure if I should get the kit camera which is easier to find and comes with the Panasonic 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 lens for only $100 more. It is a newer lens, and I worry about its ability to blend with the vintage lenses. I have also heard bad things about the manual focus on these AF lenses. Or I can buy a completely different lens at one of your suggestions.

Thanks for any input you guys have!
 
Last edited:
Sort by date Sort by votes
Aren't the MIR lenses you mention meant for 16mm? I'm not sure you'll get full sensor coverage on the GH2. I always recommend vintage Nikon Nikkor lenses, they have a nice clean look and can be adapted to a wide range of cameras.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
SinEater said:
Aren't the MIR lenses you mention meant for 16mm? I'm not sure you'll get full sensor coverage on the GH2. I always recommend vintage Nikon Nikkor lenses, they have a nice clean look and can be adapted to a wide range of cameras.
Click to expand...

I just looked them up, and you are correct. Thanks for saving me some trouble. I will amend my OP with this information.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
get the kit lens, its good to have on hand, and goes very wide and better for some situations..


Other than that, you still need to adapt lenses to the Micro Four Thirds mount of the GH2. M42 (screw mount) is about the easiest adapter to use and find lenses for. I have like 20 now.. :) For wide, the zenitar 16mm works pretty good, I have a helios m44 (58mm) and it looks really nice..

I mostly rely on my cannon fd lenses (28mm, 50mm, 100mm, etc.. ) which requires a different more complicated adapter but still works and looks fantastic.

I would not worry too much about getting lots of manual lenses until you understand the cam a bit more. The EXE TELE mode is cool, but not good for a lot of situations, but it DOES let you use the ultra wide C mount lenses (16mm film cams) but only in 1080 mode (not really an issue but thought Id mention, also you cant use exe tele mode with an external monitor)

I hunt pawn shops and garage sells for my lenses.... some day Ill do a review of what I have.. but.. Id rather make a movie.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
wheatgrinder said:
get the kit lens, its good to have on hand, and goes very wide and better for some situations..


Other than that, you still need to adapt lenses to the Micro Four Thirds mount of the GH2. M42 (screw mount) is about the easiest adapter to use and find lenses for. I have like 20 now.. :) For wide, the zenitar 16mm works pretty good, I have a helios m44 (58mm) and it looks really nice..
Click to expand...

I checked out the Zenitar 16mm, but realized it was a fish eye. I do not want to deal with that distortion, so that out. I have also taken a look at the Tamron 17-55mm f2.8 (~$300 used) and Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 (~$575 used), but I would probably get the kit lens first, and then wait on either of these two lenses due to the expense.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The kit lens is versatile, I produced an award winning short shot on the GH1 with just the 14-42 kit lens. It's not the fastest lens but it'll work just fine if you're willing to light the scene. Now that I own the GH2 I've been looking to pick one up used. My selection of lenses are mostly old Nikon Nikkor lenses and I have the Panasonic 20mm 1.7. If you can afford it there's a couple great Olympus 4/3 lenses, a 14-35 2.0 and a 35-200 2.0. I think with the m4/3 to 4/3 adaptor you'd get full auto control with them.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I just made the biggest lens purchase yet:

A vintage, chromed out, MIR-1. The 1958 "Grand Prix" model. 37mm f/2.8

A DP on a set I was on last told me this would probably be the smartest lens purchase I could ever do.

Can't wait to get it!

It's a M39 but the DP told me it's made for an SLR and it works on a Canon DSLR perfectly. so...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
ROC said:
I just made the biggest lens purchase yet:

A vintage, chromed out, MIR-1. The 1958 "Grand Prix" model. 37mm f/2.8

A DP on a set I was on last told me this would probably be the smartest lens purchase I could ever do.

Can't wait to get it!

It's a M39 but the DP told me it's made for an SLR and it works on a Canon DSLR perfectly. so...
Click to expand...

Congrats, ROC. Good pick up.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Thanks!

It will work perfectly with my 44-2 I got recently and now I'm on a search for a good deal on a Jupiter-9 and then a Zenitar and my RED Lens (russian) collection will be COMPLETE. MWAHAHAHAHA!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
ROC said:
Thanks!

It will work perfectly with my 44-2 I got recently and now I'm on a search for a good deal on a Jupiter-9 and then a Zenitar and my RED Lens (russian) collection will be COMPLETE. MWAHAHAHAHA!
Click to expand...

Devious, yet diabolical...I see you have been trained in the dark side of the force. Yes...you're insight serves you well. :yes::D
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
ROC said:
I just made the biggest lens purchase yet:

A vintage, chromed out, MIR-1. The 1958 "Grand Prix" model. 37mm f/2.8

A DP on a set I was on last told me this would probably be the smartest lens purchase I could ever do.

Can't wait to get it!

It's a M39 but the DP told me it's made for an SLR and it works on a Canon DSLR perfectly. so...
Click to expand...

That lens is much to large of a focal length for the GH2 since it would act as a 74mm. Do you know if some of the other MIRs work with DSLRs? Maybe the MIR-20 20mm f/3.5?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Hmm - I'd check out on a Pentax forum via a google search about the MIR-20 but my instincts say it would work..

A good rule of thumb is that M42 is good to go on pretty much anything.

I really hope that doesn't change in the future.

I'd like to sell the mint condition MIR-1 I just bought for like 5Gs in the future when I'm 80.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
There is nothing wrong with a virtual 74mm if you need one, understanding you are looking for a wide angle lens. By definition, the crop factor of a micro 4/3 negates wide angle in the first place, so your choices really come down to lens speed and something that will fit. Get the lowest number at the best price and understand that wide shots are deep focus shots that don't require 14 blades.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
ROC, your a complete lens junky, what have I done!

Gimme some prices, you know I love to hear about bargins.

@JohnJohnson, your comments sound acedemic.

EDIT: This is just me talking, it sounds kinda jerky, but I dont mean it that way..

You got the numbers, etc.. but thats not what vintage glass is about..
The joy of vintage glass is the organic, "will it work" discovery. For example, The Zenitar is fisheye, and has hella lens abiration, but it doest look fishy on the crop sensor cams, it looks well, magical.. like this..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=veqicndXuwA

and that was after I fixed the infinity focus issue..

using old glass is not science, its art, and love and pasion.. your taking all the fun out of it.. I mean cmon, a REAL cine lens is on the order of $10K, so dropping $50 on a chance gem is what its all about. Last week I hit a garrage sale, a suitcase with 2 bodies and 5 m42 mount lense, I didnt even look at them before I gave the gent $40! Got em home, most were nothing special, one busted, but a SuperTak 100mm is good addition. I do use the longer focal lenths for some shots..


as for focal lenght and crop, I dont care about the math, I care how it looks, here is what a 28mm and 50mm FD look like on a GH2.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvhWXq5M0GU
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
Dude, Wheatgrinder, you'll be proud of me:

I spent $6 on the Helios 44-2. The shipping was $14. And I was like WTF when I got it because it said it shipped from Santa Cruz on the box and the postage said only $3.20!!! So, I would have only spent $9.20 on a 44-2 but instead that cheapskate made me spend $21 for it!! I left my thoughts on the feedback... MWAHAHAHH! The best part about it is that I found out later that the 44-2 I have is the original all black and white lettering on it - it's not the greenish/yellow lettering like the more recent ones, and thus it's got better IQ and is rarer than the newer ones. I guess no-one did their own research and I made out like a bandit.

Super-Takumar 50 1.4 I spent $50. They are going for $130 and up now.

Pentax-M 135mm f/3.5 - I spent $45. They're usually going for $100 and up now. Beautiful image quality and it's really smooth and nice. It's also a bit smaller than the kit 18-55 and lighter - that's what's so cool about it. It's a 135 but smaller than the kit lens... And it has a built-in flare hood.

Vivitar 28mm f/2.5 - $25. They're easily $80 and up now.

Olympus 50mm f/1.8 - $12, just re-sold it for $23. Didn't need it.

The MIR-1 cost me $130. But it is impeccable. The chrome finish is MINT. The lettering is all perfect. The other MIR-1 original 1958 chrome versions you'll find are all rusted and really dirty looking. This one is a gem and I thought it was worth it - it's a chick magnet, man. Big old chrome lens on my T3i in public - it's like I'm flossin' 25 inch rims.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
What is declicked? If you mean that the aperture ring is stepped on one of the rings and then smooth on the other to go back and forth from stopped down and wide open that's normal. It's like that on the other russian lenses I've used (Jupiter-9 and MIR-1B).

"Flossin on 25 inch rims" means you're showing off your gigantic rims on your car stopped at a stoplight - preferably the spinning ones called "Spreewells". I meant that I would stand out in a crowd of tourists who all have their preppy little 7Ds with the kit 135mm lenses that all look the same, and then there is me with my big ol' MIR-1 which is gleaming in the sunlight in it's chrome grandeur while I twist the focus ring creating hundreds of lens flares.. CACHOW!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
@ROC, where do you buy your stuff from ?

I need a wide angle too.


Oh, and what do you call wide angle . I feel like i've been seeing 50mm listed as wide angle. Isn't that plain wrong ?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
@TheArtist I bought it all from eBay.

I suggest getting a cheap Vivitar 28mm f/2.5 or 2.8.

I call 50mm wide-angles on a full-frame. When they're on a APS-C sensor they're pretty much an 85mm - no longer wide-angle.

For the crop sensors I would consider 11 to 28 a wide-angle. 35mm is cutting it kind of close - but the 37mm I bought will most likely be my "master" lens - it's right there in between.

I really do recommend a Zenitar 16mm like Wheat's - they're beautiful.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top