25 or 28 ?

Dissenting voice:

Move in small increments. Get the 28mm now. Your camera is framed for it, and it's not a radical difference from a 35. It gives you just that little extra ability to see around corners without looking like a funhouse mirror.

Add the 25mm when finances permit. In my book, that's a "Blue Moon" focal length. But then, I find a 40mm to be shortish.

Please take me with a grain of salt.
 
Why not a 25/40 combo ?

On the other hand, if you are using the Bessa R2 or 2A, 28 will not cost you another viewfinder (viewing the whole viewfinder).
 
all input appreciated.

i'm hoping for a pov different from mine to spark some insight/new thought to help with the decision.

joe
 
Certainly when it comes to camera equipment, nothing has to be forever. As another member pointed out, if you find out that you do not like the 25mm lens or using the auxiliary finder, you could sell it and purchase the 28mm lens. If you were to use zone focusing on the street, by the way, you could simply bring the auxiliary viewfinder to your eye when a picture presents itself, without having to look through the built-in viewfinder on the camera, frame, and shoot.
 
28mm and 35mm are kind of close in my opinion. I would get the 25.
By the way, I have the Voigtlander CV 25mm and it is so easy to zone focus and snap away. I really like this focal lens and think that the 25/35 combo is almost perfect (for my street shooting at least).
 
I find 25 to be a very "natural" focal length. To me, it seems to be about as much of a view as I normally take in with my field of vision, without moving my head. I do wear glasses, so that makes my field a view a bit smaller. That makes the 24/25mm a good fit with interiors and urban areas. I tend to only want to go wider (I've used 21 in RF and 17 in SLR) in architectural situations or to open up very constricted spaces.

There is a noticeable difference between 35-28-25. I think on a Zeiss Ikon it would be pretty easy to frame a 25 without always using a separate finder. If you use the framelines switch to see the difference between 35 and 28, then you can visualize adding about the same amount to the outside of the 28mm frameline.
 
Joe, 21/28/50. That's all I'll say.

Go with your gut/heart. You can't go wrong there. You can always sell the 25 if it is too wide and get the 28.
 
If the choice is between 25 and 28, get the 25. My experience has taught me that doubling the focal length is ideal; i.e.: 21/40/85 or 25/50/100. You get the idea.
 
For me, the 28 is my goldilocks lens. I had a cv 25 (a little too wide) and a cv 35 (not quite wide enough), so I finally bought a cv 28 and it is just what I was looking for. So much, that now I feel like I might need a camera with 28 framelines (like the Ikon!). I'm using it on my Leica iiig with the CV 28/35 minifinder. With both sets of framelines in the same finder, I am constantly reminded why I am glad I have a 28.
 
Joe,

Since you're in a buying mood, why not go really different and try 21, 40, 75? I read
that Puts really liked the Zeiss 21 and you WILL get a 40 for your pristine CL and then go
all out and get the new 75 cron ASPH. Or maybe the CV 75 or the Zeiss 85.

Heh, heh! :D
 
Last edited by a moderator:
And you won't have framelines for any of them (21, 40, 75)! A real test of skill.
 
you guys are gettin' whacky!!

i just sent an email to stephen at cq re getting the 25.
i'll just wait for a reply now...

joe
 
As of late, I've been shooting a 28mm equivalent on a 645 camera and the 28 Hexanon M on a KH rangefinder. Seems significantly different than 35 to me. Never really have to worry about parallax with 35. 35 reads as intimate to me and 28 as expansive. With the 28's I will often correct distracting parallax with photoshop before printing. I love the extra wide view and strong perspective of the 28's and having the built in framelines is sweet. However fixing parallax on exposures with a 25 would be easy enough.

-s-
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom