28mm vs 35mm

28mm vs 35mm

  • 28mm

    Votes: 147 43.8%

  • 35mm

    Votes: 189 56.3%
  • Total voters
    336
For me, 35m = wide standard, 28mm = not really wide enough for a wide angle.

But that's me. I just can't believe the arrogance and stupidity of some people who believe that their choice (regardless of what it is) demonstrates their superior skill, knowledge, "training", whatever.

Cheers,

R.
 
I'd vote 28, especially since you're using it alongside a 50mm, it's a no brainer for me.
It's not so much that there's "overlap" with the 35, but that the 28 is a very different feel to the 50.

Firstly it's handy to have the option of the two different perspectives, and secondly, you could end up finding that there isn't enough of a gap between 50 and 35, and that will ultimately end up with you walking around with a 50 on your camera and a 35 in your bag, and not changing them over.

With that said, I regularly use 28 and 50, and feel very comfortable with both of them, but I'm pretty horrible with 35, I just don't manage to make shots that work for me at that FL so I'm trying to shoot as much at 35 or 40 as I can to try and get past the weakspot
 
28 - fast 50 - 90

28 - fast 50 - 90

PKR said:
Bob and Roger - I'm in complete agreement. It's a personal matter and is tied to how someone sees and processes visual information. Anyone suggesting that their choice is the best for all is at best arrogant.
Click to expand...

I agree that its all a personal choice and one can't sandwich another into their way of thinking.

But the OP mentioned in his first post that the 28 or 35 was go along with a 50.

I myself prefer the 50mm FOV for my primary lens and a fast one at that. I shot for a year with just a 28mm FOV and became very comfortable with that lens.

I've recently upgraded to a Leica M-E and actually sold my Leica v2 35mm Summicron that I shot on a Ricoh GXR-M and Leica 40mm Summicron before that to fund a Leica 50mm Summilux.

I will add a 28mm lens to my bag when funds allow and have already put a Leica 90mm Elmarit-M e46 in my bag for close up work.

Just my personal opinion for all around traveling that I do is to have the 28-50-90 combo.

If I were to someday get paid for work and were asked to do some specific type of work (architecture etc) then that could dictate a whole new look.
 
Duane Pandorf said:
I agree that its all a personal choice and one can't sandwich another into their way of thinking.

But the OP mentioned in his first post that the 28 or 35 was go along with a 50.

I myself prefer the 50mm FOV for my primary lens and a fast one at that. I shot for a year with just a 28mm FOV and became very comfortable with that lens.

I've recently upgraded to a Leica M-E and actually sold my Leica v2 35mm Summicron that I shot on a Ricoh GXR-M and Leica 40mm Summicron before that to fund a Leica 50mm Summilux.

I will add a 28mm lens to my bag when funds allow and have already put a Leica 90mm Elmarit-M e46 in my bag for close up work.

Just my personal opinion for all around traveling that I do is to have the 28-50-90 combo.

If I were to someday get paid for work and were asked to do some specific type of work (architecture etc) then that could dictate a whole new look.
Click to expand...
Hold on. Why? Why is someone going to hire you for work that you haven't already demonstrated you can do, and gamble on your being able to do something with unfamiliar kit?

(Nothing to do with the original question, but still worth pondering).

Cheers,

R.
 
Roger Hicks said:
Hold on. Why? Why is someone going to hire you for work that you haven't already demonstrated you can do, and gamble on your being able to do something with unfamiliar kit?

(Nothing to do with the original question, but still worth pondering).

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

I was thinking of when and where one would use one of the ultra wide lens from 12mm to 21mm.
 
Calzone said:
Not if 28mm FOV is your favored main lens. Please stop promoting rigid thinking here and in other threads. This is suppose to be an open forum.

Cal
Click to expand...

I have merely expressed an opinion that is shared by many, 35mm is the main lens of many famous and no so famous photographers... in an open forum, you should know better not to tell anyone else what they can or cannot say... as long as they respect the forum rules. OK buddy?
 
I agree with above posts that 28/50/85 is a fantastic combination. The only way to really know what you like, though, is to look through the viewfinder and see what you think, or try one out for yourself in certain situations. If you or a friend has an SLR with a 28mm and 35mm lens, you can get the actual perspective. If not, maybe borrow one from someone or go to a store where you can try one out.

Personally, I love 28, though I feel like on a RF the minimum focal distance limits the ability to get close enough sometimes.
 
Here is some food for thought ....

1) Take a Nikon F or Olympus OM1 (SLR with near 100% viewfinder coverage); Put on a 35mm lens. Take an M6 and put on a 28mm lens. Look through the viewfinder of both and compare.

How do the views compare ?

2) Crop your favorite 28mm photo to 8x10 to be able to print it.

What happens to the FOV ?

🙂

Are the two focal lengths really that different ?
 
upceci said:
I have merely expressed an opinion that is shared by many, 35mm is the main lens of many famous and no so famous photographers... in an open forum, you should know better not to tell anyone else what they can or cannot say... as long as they respect the forum rules. OK buddy?
Click to expand...

Congradulations. You are the first to be on my ignore list. Only took 65 posts on your part.

Cal
 
I would rather a 24mm than a 28mm with the 50mm on an SLR but as 28mm is as wide as you can go without a clip-on finder on Leica Ms (maybe 24mm on .58x) I stick with the 28mm.
Nikon F I like 24mm 35mm 50mm etc
Leica M 28mm and a 90mm
 
upceci said:
35mm will get you more keepers than any other focal length. That is if you're only interested in what is in front of you.
Click to expand...

George Bonanno said:
Of course you do... because you have a lazy eye.
Click to expand...

35mm are only for lazy eyes...

Any other FL than 35 is to be used if you are interested by what's behind you....

I learn everyday in this thread...🙄
 
I found with SLR I was shooting almost exclusively 35mm but with my Leica mostly 50mm. No idea why - maybe I just shot different things with different cameras. Anyway, I ended up getting a 28mm for my Leica thinking it'd be good to have something wider and used it no more than a handful of times - it is just too wide for my "vision" of the world. I've now got a 35mm Summicron and use it as much as the 50mm - I don't find too much overlap at all. 35 / 50 / 90 is my ideal rangefinder setup, 35, 85, 135 my SLR set up.
 
segedi said:
35mm. I don't find it too close to 50 at all. And I don't know about 28mm for people shots, a bit too wide IMO.
Click to expand...

I agree. 35 and 50 serve distinct roles for me, and I will always own both focal lengths.

28 is quite a bit wider than 35, and not my favourite. On an SLR, I'd prefer a 24, which is truly wide.

A typical SLR kit for me would be 24/35/50/85/135, and maybe a specialty lens like a 100 Macro or a 45 tilt-shift.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom