best pic - 28 or 35 ?

[back alley]

ok, manny has a poll about which lens to use this weekend - 28 and 35 are at the top of the list, with 28 presently in the lead.

my question is a twist on manny's poll.

between 28 and 35, which focal length has given you your best shots, as in, the pics you like the most?

i assume this poll is more for those of us that prefer the wider end of things normally, that is why there is no 'other' choice.

thanks for taking the time to vote!
joe

 

[childers-jk]

I have always liked my 35. Just a choice. 28 seems too wide for most of my subjects.

 

[rover]

I am just starting to use a 28 with a RF so I voted 35. But that may change.

 

[f/stopblues]

IMO a 35mm is more versitile. I can stick a 35 on a camera and go, but I'd find myself limited if a 28 was all I had with me. I'll plug in a 28 if there's an explicit reason.

 

[Roman]

Well, I voted for 35 - I don't have a 28 for my RFs, did have one for my SLRs, though; 28 to me already belongs into the territory of 'landscape lenses', I don't feel comfortable shooting people/city/street pics with anything wider than 35 (and even prefer my 40mm Rokkor, or a 50 for that...)

Roman

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Well all my 28's are for SLR's. I have 35's for all of my RF's. I have a 28mm and 35mm for the Retina IIIS. The 28mm is RF coupled and works with the SLR. I qualify.

35mm.

 

[Toby]

My hero of the week Garry Winogrand used a canon 28 2.8 for many of his great shots but looking at them you have to be seriously aggressive to get some of his shots with this lens so i'll choose 35 because I'm an abject coward

 

[richard_l]

I voted 35, but I haven't had the 28 Ultron for very long. My 35 Summaron seems to render slightly more pleasing images, but the 28 is a great lens for snapshots. If there's enough light to shoot comfortably at f/8 or smaller aperture, I just set focus at hyperfocal and forget about it. It's very liberating to shoot that way. Only the shutter control needs an occasional tweak.

Richard

 

[Nikon Bob]

Boy, I stalled out on this one. I have no 28 for my RFs but have used it and a 24 on my Nikon SLRs and really like them in a city or inside. This is from a guy who thinks a 50 is a short tele and a 35 is a normal so take it from there. Either will do but the 35 to me is generally more useful overall. I guess that means I vote 35.

Bob

 

[hoot]

The best portrait (and possibly best photo) I ever took was with a 20mm lens... on an SLR... on aperture priority mode... with hotshoe-mounted flash at full power. I took it last winter, when I still knew very little about how cameras worked. It was an unplanned snapshot taken in a speeding and rattling Hungarian train car on FP4+, which I developed myself using far too much agitation and with the light-tight lid not closed properly. The entire roll has a light leak and is extremely grainy and there's practically no shadow and highlight detail. It was one of my first wet prints and I still hadn't gotten the hang of the enlarger. And somehow the photo survived, and everyone absolutely loves it, and politely ignores all of my pristine, carefully-planned work. How sad and pathetic is that?

 

[Alec]

How sad and pathetic is that?

Can't say till you post it ! :-D

 

[peter_n]

I still have my 28mm Nikkor SLR lens and recently acquired a 28 RF lens. I like the 35 a lot but I think I like the results of the in-your-face 28 more.

 

[Trius]

I'm with a lot of people here; more of my best shots have been w/ a 35, partly because for a long time I didn't have a 28. I felt a 28 was too close to a 35, and I liked the 35 better than the 50 for "normal". Now that I have a couple of 28s, I am using them more and have a suspicion they may become my "go to" lens for the wide end.

My absolute favourite photo was taken w/ a 100mm. But the percentage of good ones is higher with the 35.

Trius

 

[wlewisiii]

On this poll I chose the 35, but that has more to do with the 35 feeling very wide to me. I far prefer a longer focal length overall and that has held true across formats. My two favorite lenses are my Sonnar 50/2 and my Jupiter 9 85/2. I have a very good 35 (SC Skopar 35/2.5) for when I want to use it, but I just don't see wide the way many of you folks do. I've tried a 28 in M42 mount and while it was a good quality lens, I just couldn't compose with it to save myself.

William

 

[Kin Lau]

On my 35mm RF's, I don't have any 28mm's but I do have 3 35's (J12, 35mm Elmar & Oly XA) and a few close to 35mm's such as the 40's & 42's (Canonet's & Oly SP).

The widest (only wide) RF lense I have is actually a 3 1/2" for the 4x5 Speed Graphics, a 25mm equiv, but I only just got it and haven't been shooting with it yet.

 

[Todd.Hanz]

the 28 is great, nothing like getting close enough to your subject that they fog your lens 🙂

Todd

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

28mm vs. 35mm in digital (actual FOV), 35mm vs. 28mm in film

 

[kiev4a]

If you can only have one lens , it should be a 35mm. I have no doubt that over the past 40 years I have shot more what I consider "good" pictures with a 35mm than any other lens.

If not a 35 my next choice would be my 24mm Nikkor. The 28mm always has been a odd focal length for me--too close to a 35 and not enough wider to be worth much. Never understood why they still make 'em.

 

[vincentbenoit]

between 28 and 35, which focal length has given you your best shots, as in, the pics you like the most?

Well, I couldn't say I got / get better shots with one or the other. For moving subjects I tend to use the two lenses differently, thus I get different types of images from each: scale- or hyperfocal focussing with the 28mm, sometimes even shooting "from the hip"; framing and focussing through the viewfinder with the 35mm. For static subjects I just use whatever lens gives the most appropriate field-of-view / perspective. Now if I could keep only one lens it'd be the 35mm just because it's more versatile.

 

[back alley]

so far the 35mm is in the lead.

anymore votes?

joe