Wide angle lens, manual focus, for Nikon F-mount?

[benveniste]

Interesting. These zooms hadn't crossed my mind. But I'll have to keep an eye out. Unfortunately, they aren't cheap.

The 17-35mm f/2.8D has a known flaw -- the autofocus motor is prone to failure and costs over $400 to replace. As a result, if you only want a manual focus lens you can find "as-is" copies somewhat inexpensively. On the minus side, I think it would be fairly unbalanced on an FM10. My manual focus wide angle is a Zeiss 18mm f/3.5, which is neither fast nor inexpensive. Optically, though, it seems quite nice in the little time I had to use it before the shutdown.

If you can't find a 24mm f/2.0 that you like, two other lenses worth considering are the Sigma 24mm and 20mm f/1.8 lenses. Both of these are "screwdriver" autofocus lenses, but they do have aperture rings and the focus feel is decent. Both can occasionally be found in the $200 price range.

 

[LiamG]

The 17-35mm f/2.8D has a known flaw -- the autofocus motor is prone to failure and costs over $400 to replace. As a result, if you only want a manual focus lens you can find "as-is" copies somewhat inexpensively. On the minus side, I think it would be fairly unbalanced on an FM10. My manual focus wide angle is a Zeiss 18mm f/3.5, which is neither fast nor inexpensive. Optically, though, it seems quite nice in the little time I had to use it before the shutdown.

If you can't find a 24mm f/2.0 that you like, two other lenses worth considering are the Sigma 24mm and 20mm f/1.8 lenses. Both of these are "screwdriver" autofocus lenses, but they do have aperture rings and the focus feel is decent. Both can occasionally be found in the $200 price range.

Speaking of zooms, the o 20-35mm 2.8D recommended earlier in the thread was always a favorite of mine, but like the 17-35, it's old, older, in fact. My personal copy is nearly worn out (zoom cams), and there are literally no spare parts, but if you can purchase a more lightly used example, the wide zooms are a really good value in terms of performance and versatility. Yes, they're heavier, but for me, the extra weight was worth it, and the performance was virtually indistinguishable from the ais or af 2.8 primes.

 

[MFstooges]

Back in the day, rectilinear WA shorter than 24mm is really expensive. Most modern WA now is affordable because they are made for cropped image with smaller elements.
But you still need to include filter cost if you do use it. And filter stacking is also limited due to the size of front element. I used to have Tokina 19mm and could only afford a polarizer,

 

[Gabrielapua]

I have a nikon D3300 and I’m looking for an adapter to fit this rokinon lens, except that i dont know what type of mount it is. Do u guys know if it’s a konica or a Minolta? Thank you for your help

 

[reddesert]

It's for Contax / Yashica. Don't bother trying to adapt it to a Nikon. You wouldn't be able to focus at infinity, or beyond a few meters, because the C/Y flange focal distance is 1 mm shorter than the Nikon. Find a lens that is native to the Nikon mount. I think on the D3300 you won't have any metering with a manual focus lens.