I put just one more close range sample from the MD 35 f2.8 + Oly 0.8x combination. There is little or no ghosting in the ticker and the text. If I tried to use the Pentacon 30 f3.5 for similar image, there might be ghosting in the ticker and the text due to curved focal plane (supposedly). However, the Pentacon does better when distance to the subject grows and pulls ahead of the MD/Oly combo.

If I make a very preliminary summary of the 24 and 28 mm lenses that I know, it would be:

Tokina RMC 24 f2.8 - rather good overall, no major weaknesses. Some barrel distortion and lower contrast at full aperture. Requires hood.

Minolta MD 28 f2.8 - very sharp even at full aperture, good contrast and no distortion. Bokeh questionable. Little or no resistance to flare from point sources.

Yashica ML 28 f2.8 - some lack of sharpness at full aperture. Very high contrast. Bokeh questionable. Strong resistance to flare.

Pentacon 30 f3.5 - supposedly curved focal plane and some ghosting at close range. Strong and strange character otherwise (swirly bokeh etc.).

Minolta MD 35 f2.8 + Oly 0.8x - good close range and little or no ghosting. Some "bokeh loss" and some barrel distortion. May require stopping down for adequate sharpness. Requires hood (needs to be custom made).

Sample variations are always possible at this vintage and inexpensive category. Feel free to add your conclusions.

Because you are interested here is some more test footage from the 21mm.

Tested the wide angle Minolta 21mm from wide open F/2.8 to F/8 on the GH2. Hacked setting used was the 'Apocalypse Now' Nebula 6GOP sharp variation. To my eyes it is quite a low contrast producing image that comes out of the 21mm, coupled with the AN444 it is super flat. So it may be harder to see the sharpness with the lack of contrast between lines. I did a little warm colour grading to match the heat of an Arabian camel :)

Suggest me any tests you would like me to do, also have 28mm F/2 to test next.

Yes, it is certainly worth investigating and I will get to that shortly.

I also seem to have one Kiron made Vivitar 28 mm f2 (serial starts with 22). While it can not be considered very high quality image at wide open, it is atleast bright. The bokeh is "interesting", to put it mildly and out of focus in the front shows ghosting. But even that kind of image may have some limited use. I seem to have no sample images at all, so it looks like I gave up on it. That does not mean it could not be used for something. And it sharpens when stopped down.

The FD version can be stopped down by half aperture and becomes more useful already. MD version does not have half stop between 2 - 2.8.

It would be wider on a full frame. But I see the point and back to the topic (somewhat). I just received a mint Pentacon 30 f3.5. This is very highly regarded by many photographers and is made in East Germany but using the original Meyer-Lydith design. You could read something here: http://www.mflenses.com/pentacon-30mm-f35-lens-review.html

Lens construction is not ideal, every ring seems to have a bit of play and the focus is a bit stiff. This could become a problem with follow focus, but that remains to be seen. It was already getting dark, so no good test images could be made. But I got this one rather filmic contrast for one image using a little bit of curves and levels. It is noisy at high ISO.

I should refrain from posting more comments or images before I know more about this lens, but certainly looks interesting. The angle of view is interesting and price is literally a tenner or two.

That's good to hear, looking forward to acquire some of the mentioned lenses. Recently I discovered that the Minolta Macro Rokkor 50 mm f3.5 belongs to the cinematic class. I read that Minolta did not recommend using other MD close focus lenses for archival purposes, but the Macro Rokkors instead. This has to mean higher optical standards. Macro Rokkor 50 @ f3.5 turns the humble GH1 into a cinematic camera, atleast for suitable scenes.

If it is not out of line, at fourseasonshd.com front page I updated the video and now has several scenes from several of the aforementioned lenses in action. There are both heavily graded and ungraded scenes. Tokina RMC 24 f2.8 is the "lamest", but only by hair. Yashica ML 35 f2.8 and Macro Rokkor 50 f3.5 turn the GH1 into a better camera than intended.

To be able to use these lenses on a wider sensor would open opportunities for cinematic scenes, I'm sure.

i have a Vivitar 28mm f2.0 Its not the Kiron version and it is pretty sharp if you stop it down 1 notch, at f2.0 it blooms a bit. Got it dirt cheap, but its one of my favorite old manual lenses.

@aki_hartikainen I have no experience with 24mm. The shot above was at f2.8 on D700. The drawing at f2 is better.

http://www.flickr.com/groups/ai28mmf20/pool/with/5084987374/#photo_5084987374

I can highly recomend the Nikkor 28/2 AIS - lovely old school glass.

Superb lens. It's AI not AIS, AIS is 2.8. These are legendary lenses.

I have a mint Nikkor 28mm f2. I can let it go for $350 + shipping + paypal if anyone is interested. They go for $400+ on ebay,

I have a Nikkor 24mm AIS that I've yet to find any flaws with. And also a handful of decent 28mm M42 lenses which work fairly well except in some bright high contrast situations.

Thanks for the info. I received a Yashica ML 28 f2.8 in mint condition today and was eager to test it, but from the first moment I could notice that it did not have that great "snap" focus of the Yashica ML 35 f2.8 or even the Yashica ML 35-70 f3.5-4.8 zoom lens.

Everything else is great, contrast is very high and blacks go to black very quickly. Sharpness at full aperture f2.8 falls a bit short. However, it is a 25 year old inexpensive lens and there may be sample variations. Plus I may be demanding too much. Also, to make the bokeh match might mean giving up a little bit of the sharpness. Resistance to flare is a lot better than Minolta MD 28 f2.8. Minolta is sharper but bokeh leaves something to be desired and there is little resistance to flare.

So the ML 28 f2.8 may not be the game changer for me and the search is still on for the perfect 24 and 28 mm lens. Tokina RMC 24 f2.8 is close, though, but falls just a tiny bit short. If this becomes a great challenge, then it might be easier to change the camera to a one with wider sensor. I already have several lenses starting from 35 mm that have made the cut for cinema production, ML 35 f2.8 being one.

One option is to try a slower 28 mm lens for hopefully improved sharpness at full aperture and there are several of them available before going the big buck Leica, Zeiss or Nikon route for sharp 24 and 28 mm.

@LongJohnSilver Can you tell if the ML 24 has similar image to ML 28?

I am eagerly awaiting delivery of a ML 28 f2.8, and if the ML 24 continues the same type of image line as the other lenses, might make me to commit to the much heftier purchase price of the ML 24. These are high contrast lenses that benefit from a little bit of contrast reducing filtering to my experience with ML 35 f2.8 and ML 50 f1.7. Images look similar to comparable Contax Zeiss, other than the lesser coating as was already mentioned.

Speaking of Vivitars and Tokinas, I just tested older Tokina made Vivitar 24 f2.8 (serial starts with 37). It is unfortunately not quite as sharp as a newer Tokina 24 f2.8. This is a pity, because the construction of the Vivitar is really good and solid and feels to the hand like a "real" lens. There are Vivitar 24 and 28 mm lenses labeled as Close Focus, and they are supposedly sharp even wide open. When available their price is the same as comparable Nikkors, though.

Wide rangefinder lenses are a very different construction as opposed to lenses for SLRs, they are not retrofocus.

You can expect them to perform poorly on electronic sensors because of the angle that the light is coming in, even a Leica M-8 has difficulties:

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/34426-wate-pink-corners.html

So, if you want to go Leica, go Leica-R, not -M.

Rangefinder lenses should be good starting from 50mm.