stefan rohloff - lens test
  Deutsch

Introduction
Doing these tests I was mainly interested to learn, how wide angle lenses behave when a strong light source like the sun is placed in front of the lens. How would the resulting sun star look? What kind of ghosting would occur and how much would the contrast suffer under such circumstances?
Thea reason I chose to test lenses of a 20mm range relates issues with photo composition and use of fliters. I like lenses of 24 mm, 20 mm or even wider and preferr to use polarizing and graduated ND filters. With lenses wider than 20 mm these filters become difficult to use.
I do a lot of mountain photography. So the size of a lens is an important factor minimize the weight of equipment. For this reason I have included a size comparison of tested lenses.
Below you find some informations that was helpful to me in selecting the lenses for my test. Newer lenses are more likely to be state of the art than older ones. It's easier to use a polarizer and a graduated ND filter at the same time on lenses with smaller filter sizes. The number of lenses/groups of a lens determins how many reflecting surfaces are there that might produce ghosting. The number of aperture blades determins how many rays the expected sun star will have.
Aperture blades 4 5 6 7 8 9 ...
Rays 4 10 6 14 8 18 ...
All listed lenses can be mounted on Canon EF by using an adapter or by converting the lens.
Canon
tested design optic blades filter length weight
EF 2.8/20-35 no 1989 15/12 8 72 mm 89 mm 570 g
EF 2.8/20 yes 1992 11/9 6 72 mm 71 mm 405 g
EF 3.5-4.5/20-35 no 1993 12/11 5 77 mm 69 mm 340 g
EF 2.8/17-35 no 1996 15/10 7 77 mm 96 mm 545 g
EF 2.8/16-35 yes 2001 14/10 7 77 mm 103 mm 600 g
EF 4/17-40 yes 2003 12/9 7 77 mm 97 mm 475 g
EF 2.8/16-35 II no 2007 16/12 7 82 mm 112 mm 635 g
The Canon EF 2.8/16-35 II is said to be sharper and has better flare control than its predecessor. Flare control should be comparable to the Canon EF 4/17-40.
Carl Zeiss
tested design optic blades filter length weight
Distagon 4/18 yes 1967 10/9 6 86 mm 60 mm 320 g
Distagon 2.8/21 yes 1993 15/13 6 82 mm 97 mm 530 g
Vario-Sonnar 2.8/17-35 no 2002 15/10 8 95 mm 96 mm 900 g
ZE Distagon 3.5/18 no 2008 13/11 9 82 mm 84 mm 470 g
ZE Distagon 2.8/21 no 2008 16/13 9 82 mm 109 mm 600 g
The Distagon 2.8/21 is a bit heavy and due to this complex optical construction and somewhat prone to flare. Apart from that it is said to be the "king of 20 mm lenses".
The Vario-Sonnar 2.8/17-35 is said to be a very good lens on its wide end and it can be converted to Canon EOS mount. Converted, it even supports autofocus and autoaperture. Unfortunately, it is very heavy and uses very big filters.
The new ZF lenses are said to have very good flare control. They have 9 aperture blades, so the sun star should be similar to the one of the Sigma EX 1.8/20.
Carl Zeiss Jena
tested design optic blades filter length weight
Flektogon 4/20 no 1962 10/6 6 77 mm 59 mm 320 g
Flektogon 2.8/20 yes 1976 9/8 6 67 mm 55 mm 350 g
The Flektogon 4/20 is singel-coated only. Which makes it not worthwhile for my purposes.
There are many differing opinions about the Flektogon 2.8/20. This probably means there is a lot of sample variation.
Leica
tested design optic blades filter length weight
Super Angulon 4/21 no 1968 10/8 4 72 mm 44 mm 420 g
Elmarit 2.8/19 no 1975 9/7 6 - 60 mm 500 g
Elmarit 2.8/19 II no 1990 12/10 6 - 60 mm 560 g
Vario Elmar 3.5-4/21-35 no 2002 9/8 6 67 mm 66 mm 500 g
The Elmarit 2.8/19 II is reported to be an excellent lens. Unfortunately, you can't adapt it to Canon EOS without modifying the lens or shaving the mirror of the body. Furthermore it is difficult to use polarizing and graduated ND filters because there is no filter thread.
The older Elmarit 2.8/19 and the Super Angulon 4/21 can be adapted to Canon EOS without problems. But they are reported to be poorer performers concerning both, sharpness and flare. The Super Angulon 4/21 has four aperture blades only which produces a sun star with only 4 rays.
The Vario-Elmar 3.4-4/21-35 has got 9/8 lenses/groups only. This could mean that flare is well controlled. Also it is not very heavy and takes relatively small filters. It is to said be sharper on its long end than on its wide end. It can be used on an EOS 1Ds with an easy modification. Unfortunately you can get problems if you want use it on an EOS 5D - depending on the thickness of the adapter and mirror variations of the body the mirror might hit the rear element of the lens.
Minolta
tested design optic blades filter length weight
MC Rokkor 2.8/21 no 1971 12/9 6 72 mm 67 mm 515 g
MD Rokkor 2.8/20 no 1977 10/9 6 55 mm 44 mm 240 g
Minolta lenses have to be converted for use on Canon EOS bodies.
Nikon
tested design optic blades filter length weight
Nikkor 3.5/20 UD no 1967 11/9 7 72 mm 58 mm 390 g
Nikkor 4/20 yes 1974 10/8 7 52 mm 36 mm 210 g
Nikkor 3.5/20 yes 1977 11/8 7 52 mm 41 mm 235 g
Nikkor 2.8/20 no 1984 12/9 7 62 mm 43 mm 260 g
The older Nikon 3.5/20 UD is singel-coated only.
According to Bjørn Rørslett the newer 3.5/20 is much more suited for direct sun light than the 2.8/20.
The Nikkor 4/20 was a favorite lens of Galen Rowell. Ken Rockwell is also a fan.
Olympus
tested design optic blades filter length weight
Zuiko 3.5/21 yes 1973 7/7 6 49 mm 31 mm 185 g
Zuiko 2/21 no 1979 11/9 6 55 mm 44 mm 250 g
There is a singel-coated and a multi-coated version of the Olympus Zuiko 3.5/21. For my tests I used the multi-coated copy of this lens. More you can find more about this in the Olympus Zuiko 3.5/21 special.
The Zuiko 3.5/21 has less lenses/groups than the Zuiko 2/21. This probably means that the Zuiko 3.5/21 is less prone to flare than the Zuiko 2/21.
Pentax
tested design optic blades filter length weight
Takumar SMC 4.5/20 no 1971 11/10 5 58 mm 45 mm 246 g
SMC K 4/20 yes 1975 12/10 5 58 mm 57 mm 300 g
SMC M 4/20 yes 1977 8/8 5 49 mm 30 mm 150 g
SMC A 2.8/20 yes 1985 10/9 5 67 mm 44 mm 245 g
The Takumar 4.5/20 is reported to be prone to flare and pretty soft in the corners.
Sigma
tested design optic blades filter length weight
EX 2.8-4/17-35 no 1998 16/13 8 77 mm 89 mm 560 g
EX 1.8/20 yes 2000 13/11 9 82 mm 90 mm 520 g
EX 3.5-4.5/15-30 no 2001 17/13 8 - 133 mm 620 g
EX 2.8/20-40 no 2001 17/13 9 82 mm 108 mm 600 g
EX 4.5-5.6/12-24 yes 2003 16/12 6 - 103 mm 600 g
Tamron
tested design optic blades filter length weight
SP 2.8-4/17-35 no 2003 14/11 7 77 mm 87 mm 440 g
Voigtländer
tested design optic blades filter length weight
Color Skopar SL II 3.5/20 no 2009 9/6 9 52 mm 29 mm 205 g
Yashica
tested design optic blades filter length weight
Yashinon ML 3.3/20 no 11/9 72 mm 56 mm 370 g
Yashinon ML 3.5/21 no 1975 12/8 6 72 mm 54 mm 370 g
The following images of the tested lenses were all taken at the same scale allowing comparison of the lens sizes directly.
back to menu