daninjc
Well-known
I have somewhat mixed feelings. I always thought a 28 and a 35 are entirely different beasts. Yet, looking back at my pictures taken with both, often I can't tell the difference. Both seem to deliver the goods. I wouldn't go wider than that for street shooting. Distortion kicks in and the images start screaming trickery. From the times I used a 24 (or a 17) I can save few images where the distortion doesn't bother me.
dogbunny
Registered Boozer
I've been experimenting with 21mm on street stuff lately. Apologies on the last one; I just got my scanner and I am still trying to learn the best way to scan B&W. I am sure the negative is better than the picture I was able to make in PS.
GSNfan
Well-known
You have to conclude for yourself what focal length gives you the ideal covering space and helps to visualise what you want to capture.
Turtle
Veteran
IMO 28 is the nest step. The gulf between 35 and 24 is quite natural for most purposes, but with street it has an effect not only on framing but how close you have to be and the dynamics of how you interact with an often mobile and sometimes sensitive subject. I this regard 35 and 24 are miles apart.
I think 28 is very different to 35 in terms of street use. It is substantially wider the dynamics are very different.
I dont't like 21 for street. Its too wide, leading to compositions that have a slightly forced look IMHO. 24 is much, much less obvious in this regard, 25 a hair better, but 28 is where thing start to look natural again, while still allowing for some really close interactions and dynamic framing. Gary Winogrand thought so too!
Not too long ago I went to do some street work overseas and toggled between 25 and 35. It was not long before I just wished I had brought nothing but my 28 Biogon!
As always, it is personal...
I think 28 is very different to 35 in terms of street use. It is substantially wider the dynamics are very different.
I dont't like 21 for street. Its too wide, leading to compositions that have a slightly forced look IMHO. 24 is much, much less obvious in this regard, 25 a hair better, but 28 is where thing start to look natural again, while still allowing for some really close interactions and dynamic framing. Gary Winogrand thought so too!
Not too long ago I went to do some street work overseas and toggled between 25 and 35. It was not long before I just wished I had brought nothing but my 28 Biogon!
As always, it is personal...
Bob Michaels
nobody special
My thoughts echo many previous posts here:
1) lens choice is a personal decision
2) 28mm and 35mm lenses are very different
3) 28mm is about as wide as one can go without looking too wide-angleish.
4) 28mm is the ideal lens for me. I use it 98% of the time while carrying nothing else
As always, YMMV
1) lens choice is a personal decision
2) 28mm and 35mm lenses are very different
3) 28mm is about as wide as one can go without looking too wide-angleish.
4) 28mm is the ideal lens for me. I use it 98% of the time while carrying nothing else
As always, YMMV
Lauffray
Invisible Cities
Wow I certainly didn't expect this thread to grow so fast, thanks everyone !
The most interesting thing I've gathered is that 28 is very different from 35, that was something I wasn't too sure about.
I understand the choice is personal, but like I said I've never worked with either one before and my store doesn't rent.
The most interesting thing I've gathered is that 28 is very different from 35, that was something I wasn't too sure about.
I understand the choice is personal, but like I said I've never worked with either one before and my store doesn't rent.
randolph45
Well-known
24mm was my everyday carry round.Now I flirt with a 19