Buying a 28mm lens when you already own a 35mm lens

I never got along with the 28 FL but I use the one on my Ricoh GR-1 because I like the camera. To me it does not feel different enough from 35 to be worth the trouble (but I think 35 and 50 are totally different beasts, go figure). I often carry an M with 35 and the GR-1 and they really are pretty similar.

If I had a 35 and wanted to go wider I'd get a 24/25, a 21, or a 15. No question. For me 35, 24, and 15 are the sweet spots. YMMV, of course.
 
Thanks all for your input. It gave me a lot of things to think about, including a lot of things I hadn't even thought about when purchasing a wider lens. I enjoyed reading each and every one of your thoughts and I think it makes coming to a decision a lot easier now that I have additional knowledge.

Kind regards,

Ellen
 
i originally started off with a 28mm and 50mm, i figured that would be a good combo and do me for a while. but 28mm for me was always just a bit too wide or not wide enough, so i eventually sold that and now have a 35mm 'lux and love the 35mm FOV. i still wanted wider so got a beater 21mm SA and i think this is my preferred combo, with a 50 and a 90 for the M3.

you really can't tell unless you try out a focal length for a little while if it's for you or not, or you don't care either way. if the $350 is not that big of a deal for you, maybe just buy it use it for a few days/week and see if it's really for you. that's really the best thing to do, try it out for yourself.
 
In 35mm, I have 'crons v3 and v4, plus the Summaron 2.8. These render in a similar way. While 28mm has a related FOV, I decided to get the Elmarit ASPH for its completely different rendition (sharp, high contrast, even smoother bokeh).
 
Dear Ellen,

It sounds as if 28 is really just a compromise for you, and that what you really want is a 21. Personally, I'd go for a Voigtländer 21/4 over the SA: cheaper, and I like the look better. Like you, I always wanted WIDER, and I didn't find the 28 enough of an advantage over the 35.

Michael (Sanmich) is perfectly correct that the only way to find whether a given lens suits you is to try it, but equally, I'd argue that you have a 'feeling' about whether you want something, after which it's a question of trying that and similar focal lengths. For example, I'm (slightly) happier with a 21 than with an 18, but Frances MUCH prefers 18, and the 28 is very much hers: I never use 28s at all.

It's also worth remembering that buying what you 'can afford' is a very good way to ensure that you never have any money for something more expensive, which you 'really want'. Nowadays I buy only stuff that will immediatey earn me money or that I REALLY want -- so I only buy good kit every other year or so.

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited:
ornate_wrasse said:
I'd appreciate hearing from others on why or why not they decided to buy a 28mm lens when they already had a 35mm lens.
Click to expand...

Ellen: frequently when I carry two lenses, one is a 28mm and the other is a 35mm. While there is overlap in functionality, they are different enough to cover different situations.

At times, I have also carried a 50mm, a 25mm, or a 21mm. They seem to get very little use. So I end up carrying the lenses I use most.

Now I am not one of those that will see a photo op and stop to change lenses. My photo ops walk away in that situation. Other people's photo ops stay until the light changes. This important distinction is what keeps me from walking around with too tight (50mm for my taste) or too wide a lens on my camera.

I like the option of having the 35mm lens to cover almost all those open space situations or choosing the 28mm to cover almost all those tight space situations.

It boils down to whatever works for you.
 
ornate_wrasse said:
I am questioning the wisdom and reasoning behind buying a 28mm lens when I already own a 35mm lens. Specifically, I own a 35mm Summicron and am looking at buying a used CV 28mm 1.9 Ultron lens for about $350 from my local camera shop. An adapter is not included but I already own one so would not have to purchase one, at least not right away.

I'd appreciate hearing from others on why or why not they decided to buy a 28mm lens when they already had a 35mm lens.

Thanks.

Ellen
Click to expand...


Hi;

I haven't used Leicas in some time. but maybe some memories will help. Now remember, that this just me and my eyes and my problems. I began with an M4 and 50. about a year later I got a 35. I landed a 18 month project and need gear to deliver the promised photos. I added a second M4 a 28 and a 90 f2. I did almost all of my work with the 50 and 35. i found using the external finder for the 28 a problem (for me - horizon control) and I should have picked a smaller 90 as the f2 weighed so much I didn't carry it. i ended up buying a nikon with 135 and 200 to cover the long stuff. Look at other's photos. If you find you like the look of a wide lens, you may want a 21 as it has much different look than 35 or 28. I found, and still do this a lot, I take a camera with a 50 and put a 35 or 20 in my pocket. i get more done traveling light. The leica days were in the 60s and 70s p.

You know Ellen, unless the picture you're taking is critical, like to pay the rent, you can generally back up a bit and cover what a 28 would see with a 35. If there is a wall behind you and you have rent to pay, you may then want a 28. p.
 
Last edited:
ornate_wrasse said:
...I'd appreciate hearing from others on why or why not they decided to buy a 28mm lens when they already had a 35mm lens.

Thanks.

Ellen
Click to expand...


I have a 21mm Skopar and a 35mm f/2 Canon, but no 28mm.

I have thought about getting a 28mm to "fill a gap" but then I wondered, when I go to my closet to pack a camera bag to take with me, when would I ever chose the 28mm over the 35mm? The 35 is tiny and fast.

So imagine yourself going somewhere. Are you going to take both the 28 and 35, in addition to other lenses? If not, when are you going to take the 28 and leave the 35 behind?
 
I think the way I see scenes, a 28/35 combo is my equivalent of others' carrying a 35/50. I get better results with the wider angle that somehow don't seem as wide to me. If that makes any sense. For truly wide, I go 20mm on my evil SLR. But many times that is just too much of any given "normal" situation.
 
When I can carry a 20mm lens, I may supplement it with a 35mm lens. When I have only one wide angle lens with me, a 28mm lens will be more useful than a 35mm lens. I would then carry a 28mm lens plus a fast 50mm lens. The 28mm lens has hardly any distortion.

Either way, you will have an excellent lens to use.

I stay away from very costly lenses unless it is a "rare event" and a move to a different look. I use a Canon FL 19mm 3.5 SLR lens and a Minolta W-Rokkor 20mm 4.0 SLR lens on LTM/M cameras with adapters. The lenses are very good and I am happy with the results.
 
Last edited:
My main stay is a 35 V4 but I got the 28 2.8 asph for my RD1 meaning my choice of lens was not really the 28 in a FF. Now I'm also beginning to like using the 28 with the M6 and bring with me a fast 50 when I travel. The 35 though still remains my choice if it is a one lens one camera affair.
 
Started out only with a 35, but then got a 28 when I discovered I was shooting in situations where the 35 had too narrow a field of view. On the other hand, there are times when the 35 is just right. So might be a good idea to have both.
 
Can't say I've ever carried the 28 and 35 at the same time, but it's good to be able to select between them in advance.

It's very situation dependent :

For people - friends and family gatherings etc.
I find the 35 and 50 both do a great job - but the 28 is too detached.
For interiors, cityscapes, landscapes and travel the 28/50 combo fairs better.

When it comes to just using a single lens on a single body, it would be the 35mm.
 
Does this help ?

382005008_M3n3F-O.jpg
 
I agree with Roger that lens decisions are a mix of hands-on experimentation (i.e., trying something) and a gut feeling about what is right for me and the way I shoot.

Focal lengths are such a personal thing. For me, 28mm and 35mm would be too close and “unnecessary.” (I have an 18, 28, and 50—and plan to add a 90. While I could see upgrading the 28mm from an Elmarit to Cron someday, I don’t see a need to add more focal lengths.)
 
ornate_wrasse said:
I am questioning the wisdom and reasoning behind buying a 28mm lens when I already own a 35mm lens. Specifically, I own a 35mm Summicron and am looking at buying a used CV 28mm 1.9 Ultron lens for about $350 from my local camera shop. An adapter is not included but I already own one so would not have to purchase one, at least not right away.

I'd appreciate hearing from others on why or why not they decided to buy a 28mm lens when they already had a 35mm lens.

Thanks.

Ellen
Click to expand...

I assume this same shop has two CV 35mm f/2.5 LTM lenses, and some Canon LTM lenses right now? If so have you looked at the 28mm? There is a *lot* of brassing, but it feels pretty good. I didn't take the time to look at the glass all that well, but it seems like a good lens, unlike that 90mm Leica lens they had there recently (I've never seen one that had that much dust in it).

I think you should buy it, so I'm no longer tempted by it! :D I just ordered a brand new CV 35mm f/1.4 this morning, so I really need to resist that 28mm.
 
I sold my 35mm (Cron first, now CV 35/2.5) and getting CV 28/3.5 now. Because I really love 50mm, I often wish I had 50 on me when I'm carrying only 35mm. 28mm is far different enough from 50mm, and I'm hoping that my brain will look for a different look, subject, composition from those that I have in my mind when I'm with 50 and won't regret that I don't have 50 with me. :p
 
ornate_wrasse said:
I'd appreciate hearing from others on why or why not they decided to buy a 28mm lens when they already had a 35mm lens.
Click to expand...

I bought a 28mm lens when I also bought an M8. I needed it for the equivalent FOV of a 35. Every so often I shoot the 28 on an M6 just "for fun". I've shot some nice images with that combo, but mostly it is simply too wide for my taste. The 35 often is too on a FF frame body, but that's just me. Without the crop factor of the digital body, I doubt I would own one.
 
dof said:
I bought a 28mm lens when I also bought an M8. I needed it for the equivalent FOV of a 35. Every so often I shoot the 28 on an M6 just "for fun". I've shot some nice images with that combo, but mostly it is simply too wide for my taste. The 35 often is too on a FF frame body, but that's just me. Without the crop factor of the digital body, I doubt I would own one.
Click to expand...

That's how I got turned onto the 35mm length. I bought a 35mm f/2 for my Nikon D300, and tried it on my Nikon Film bodies and liked it. I like the idea of the 28mm, but think the 35mm will get more use. Besides, my next purchase should be either a Leica 90mm or a 135mm. I am also giving the motor winder some serious thought.
 
To me, a 28mm looks totally different than a 35mm and they are not even close in what they give you. That extra 7mm might not seem huge in number, but it is huge in perspective to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom