For a decent 20mm, you could pick up a Carl Zeiss Jena 20/2.8 in M42 mount. I have a Sigma Widerama 18mm in YS mount (basically a T mount) that would work as well. Though I got it in pieces, and I think I put one of the lens elements in backwards. I've got some work to do...
Probably the best bet w/ wide glass on a Canon is to get something in the Canon mount though. Even if it's a sigma/tokina/tamron/etc. I have to wonder how some of the newer digital zooms (18-55, 16-45, etc.) stack up when compared to the older wide glass. I'd be willing to bet they'd be as good as some of those early wide-angles. -Mat On 5/5/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I haven't had much time for PDML or personal photography lately since I'm > in school again as well as working full time. Hopefully I did get a pic > into the May PUG--I haven't checked yet. > > If I did, folks will notice that I now have a Canon 20D. As a digital > sensor system, it's great. As a camera, I hate it. Some of it is just > the way Canons work compared to the way everyone else works, but some of > it is in my opionion just bad design. > > But the acquisition of an expensive Canon doesn't mean I'm ditching > Pentax. On the contrary, I'm looking increasingly seriouly at a new or > used *ist-D (not DS because I've got too many CF cards to consider SD!). > The *ist-D is still as far as I know the only DSLR to allow AA use out of > the box, and I wound up buying expensive battery grips to allow my 20D and > D100 to use AA batteries. Sure, AAs give no battery life, but they are > and probably will continue to be readily availible. I'm betting my > $3500 Nikon D1H becomes a paperweight in about 5 years when Nikon is no longer > required to sell the proprietary batteries. > > For my personal uses, a DSLR has to allow AA battery use and accept M-42 > screw-mount lenses without an optical adapter (I've got almost all of the > Super-Tak and SMC Tak lenses, and they're mighty good). That rules out > Nikon and leaves Canon and Pentax (and maybe Minolta and Sigma, which look > much more like dodos than Nikon and Pentax to me). I got the 20D because > it was (and still is) far and away the most capable camera at its price point. > Pentax isn't really competing for the "$1500" DSLR market. They're > probably right, as Canon and Nikon have both joined Pentax in aiming at > the "$750-1000" DSLR market. > > Neither 20D nor *istD works all that well with the old Takumar lenses, of > course, because there's no mechanical communication. > Ironically, my Nikons work BETTER, because they give me realistic focus > assist and metering, but using an optical adapter to get infinity focus > just kills the image quality. > > I'll probably get my girlfriend one of the new Pentax 12-24s, too, once > Nguyen gets a few put together. I can sympathize with the "full frame > DSLR" crowd because wide-angle options for DSLRs remain expensive, rare, > and generally inferior (same could be said for FF DSLRs, though). > > It's even worse in M-42 of course. Pentax supposedly made fewer than > 1000 15mm SMC Takumars, so the widest screw-mount I've been able to get my > hands on is the mediocre 20/4.5 and a Tamron Adaptall 17mm with no A/M > switch. Pity Pentax didn't come out with the K18/3.5 in 1972! > > DJE > >
