Does it make sense to replace single 35 with 28 + 50?

[kennylovrin]

Hey

So currently I only have one lens for my M - a 35mm C Biogon.
For different reasons I'm thinking about expanding with a new lens. So I started thinking what I'd like most, wider or a bit more narrow.

For an upcoming trip I think I'd like wider, but generally I think I prefer 50mm. The thing is on the other hand that I have never owned a lens wider than 35mm, and nowadays I tend to like wider scenes (used to be really into tele before).

So then I started thinking, maybe it would make sense to instead of getting a 28 or a 50, instead I get both, and sell off the 35.

So my question is really, for those of you that own 28, 35 & 50. How much do you really need the 35? I guess it's a matter of taste, so maybe the question doesn't make sense.. I would imagine that some people keep a 28 for those occasions where it's needed, so I guess this question is more for those that actually shoot if fairly often - do you guys need a 35 as well, or you'd move physically, then jump to 50mm directly from 28?

Thanks!

Kenny

 

[KenR]

I find the 35mm neither here nor there. I love the 28mm view of the world, wide but not ultra wide, without much distortion. No problems with the 50 either for details and portraits. So I never really could find a place for the 35.

 

[kennylovrin]

I find the 35mm neither here nor there. I love the 28mm view of the world, wide but not ultra wide, without much distortion. No problems with the 50 either for details and portraits. So I never really could find a place for the 35.

I think I can get behind that description (without really being used to 28), it makes sense to me. I find it wide, but not wide.. 😉

Maybe I should get a 28 first then and see which I prefer, 50mm I know that I like so that is fine, it's more wether I can replace 35 with 28 I guess.

 

[domagojs]

I think of both 28mm and 50mm as analytical focal length, while I see the world in 35mm 🙂 Everytime I use the other two FLs I have to think about my composition, while with 35 I just shoot!

With that being said, lately I'm having problems saying from the negs if it was 28 or 35, so they are not that far away and you just might replace your lens all together. Isn't 2.8 too slow for the only lens anyway?

 

[raid]

I used today the 28 on the M9 and the 50 on the M8. I often use the 50 on the M6 and the 35 on the M3. All three lenses are great for use. Not everyone likes the 28mm perspective. I do. It is the widest lens without distortion.

 

[Rangefinderfreak]

I have 15-21-35, a couple 50 and then 135 googles. In three bodies the combination depends on what I am after: In concerts in is 135-50 and 21. Then I have to be really close of stage or then cramped backstage. Street shooting only 21 and 35mm "intimate reportage/ portraits " it is 35 and a soft ( canon 1,2) 50mm. Normal causual street shooting a sharp 50mm 1,4 Think what you want to say, go from there...

 

[Calzone]

I shoot a lot with both a 28 and a 50 for most of my shooting, but 35 still is a great FOV.

Your 35 Biogon is a great lens. Perhaps selling or trading it might be a mistake. I would be happy with what I have, but experiment by trying or getting a 28mm. Its not for everyone, but I love it, and it pairs nicely with a 50 for a spread.

I still have and use a 35 though.

Cal

 

[Duane Pandorf]

I carry the equivalent 28mm and 50mm FOVs. The 50mm is on the camera most of the time. But sometimes I'd like to have a 35mm for when 28 is just too wide and 50 not quite enough.

But my standard 3 FOV lenses to always have would be 28, 50 & 75.

 

[Jetexas]

28 + 50 for me

28 + 50 for me

I shoot with a 28 f2 and 50 f1.4, but it's on an M8, so I'm not sure if that's a 28 + 50 vote or more of a 35 + 75 vote ...

I do know I get frustrated when shooting indoors that the 28mm isn't as wide as it should be, though.

I have a 35mm f3.5 and have used it all of one time. It just doesn't excite me like the faster lenses, and I can always take a few steps forward for better framing with the 28mm. Indoors I can't often take a few steps back to widen the 35mm.

 

[hausen]

28 & 50mm for me as well a long with 90. Christmas is coming up and might add a 15 to my arsenal.

 

[ottluuk]

Does your camera have frame lines for 28mm? Can you see them well? If 28mm would require an external viewfinder, I would not get rid of 35mm.

I currently have 35, 50 and 90 for the Leica. But I have used a 28 + 50 combo on my film SLR and I have the GRD, so I know and like the 28mm FOV quite well. 28 and 50 is a versatile combination. 35 and 50 would be too close to be interesting - but 35 pairs really well with 90 (or 21?).

It's very easy to make things look "dynamic" with a 28. You have to get close, perspective gets exaggerated, parallel lines converge from the slightest slant, etc. But it's also easy to mess up with empty foregrounds or weirdly distorted objects in the corners. 35 is more subtle and more forgiving. It doesn't scream WIDE ANGLE! the way shorter FL-s do.

 

[back alley]

28/50 is a long standing tradition for some...i prefer a 35 on it's own but then, i am now using 18/35 (28/50) on my x-pro1 and it seems to working just fine.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I find the 35mm neither here nor there. I love the 28mm view of the world, wide but not ultra wide, without much distortion. No problems with the 50 either for details and portraits. So I never really could find a place for the 35.

Then again, I find the 28 neither here nor there: too wide for a standard, not wide enough for a wide-angle.

Until recently: two-lens outfit, 35/75 (Summilux/Summicron)

Now mostly one lens, 50 (C-Sonnar).

Cheers,

R.

 

[jsrockit]

Then again, I find the 28 neither here nor there: too wide for a standard, not wide enough for a wide-angle.

I'm with you here. I prefer 35mm and 50mm lenses in NYC. However, in Japan, I found myself wanting a 28mm or wider lens for some very narrow streets.

To the OP... make sure you have a need for a 28mm. What do you want that your 35mm lens doesn't offer? Does your M have 28mm framelines? If so, can you see them well? If not, have you ever worked with external finders?

 

[Roger Hicks]

I'm with you here. I prefer 35mm and 50mm lenses in NYC. However, in Japan, I found myself wanting a 28mm or wider lens for some very narrow streets.

To the OP... make sure you have a need for a 28mm. What do you want that your 35mm lens doesn't offer? Does your M have 28mm framelines? If so, can you see them well? If not, have you ever worked with external finders?

Sure. Nothing against wides, in the right place: 21 or even 18. Always found 24/25 a bit bland, though not as dull as 28.

Cheers,

R.

 

[ramosa]

it really depends on how you shoot. i tend to use a 35mm as both my main lens and widest lens. i have 35-50-90, but could drop to 35-90 if i needed to make a cut. however, some will swear by a two-lens kit of 28-50.

 

[kennylovrin]

I love this forum, always so many answers. I'm just going to answer generally here, too much quoting. 🙂

The reason I'm considering a 28mm purchase is because lately I've been enjoying shooting wider views. I wouldn't say "i like landscape shots", but rather when I shoot with my 35mm I sometimes thing "It would be nice to be able to fit a little bit more". And by that I don't mean more stuff, but more area, if that makes sense.

I'm not much for this "if the photo is bad you're not close enough", it's not really my thing, but I rather enjoy putting things in a wider context, for lack of a better description. I don't mind small objects far away in the shot, if I can get other stuff in there to give a sense of scale and so on.

Now I feel like i'm talking about it as if I know something, I don't, I'm just enjoying my hobby and that is how I feel.

So yeah, that is what has lead me to believe a 28mm might be nice, and for some upcoming travels I'm pretty sure I will want to get wider views than my 35, but I am not so sure I will need it often enough to warrant an actual purchase.

Same thing goes for a 50mm really.. My problem is that I am a one-lens-kind of guy. Potentially selling the 35mm isn't for financial reasons, it's because I don't want three lenses (that might sound riduculous to some I realize). I guess I could have several lenses if I would find them cheap enough to have them and use them on and off, but generally I prefer one configuration and stick to that for the most part.

It used to be 50mm, now it is 35mm so I wonder if I want to go even wider. One problem I have though with wides is that I really, really don't like distortion, and even if it can be corrected, I find it usually looks slightly strange - and that is the reason talking against a 28mm.

Maybe I should try to find one to borrow or even rent before putting money into it.

I was pretty set on getting the 50 planar, but now that you guys start talking about 75 and 90 maybe I should look into that. Never shot those focal lengths on a range finder, and I'm not sure I could stand the tiny frame lines. Like I said, I used to really like tele, although more extreme than 75/90, but now that I think of it it could be pretty fresh with a 90 maybe, given I can live with the frame lines.

Also, I have 28mm framelines in my M6, they are slightly tricky to see, but not much worse than the 28mm in my R-D1, and I used a 28 there a lot. (I'm talking about the view finder space related to the frame lines now, I realize they are different effective FOV on those cameras). An external viewfinder is never going to happen for me, that much I can say already. 🙂

I'll try to check more frequently with the other framelines when I'm out shooting, to try to get a feel for wether it makes sense to me.

Thanks for all the input!

 

[unixrevolution]

I find 35 to be my favorite focal length and shoot a 35 most of the time. Of course, on my m2, it's the widest lens I have.

In the SLR world I shoot a standard 4-lens kit of 24-35-50-90 and occasionally add zooms for 17-35 and 80-200 coverage. I find a 28 not to be wide enough when I really want wideness, and that the 35 has the minimal distortion that makes it just feel like a "wide fifty".

 

[Godfrey]

28, 35, 40, 50 ... they're all quite different to my eye. This is the range of focal lengths (and equivalent FoVs) that I use the most with any camera.

50mm is long enough to be in a different class of FoV to my eye, it seems quite distinct from 35 (or 40, or 28 mm for that matter). Between 28 and 35 is a little close, but I still find myself preferring the 35 more of the time and considering 28mm to be a hair wider than is useful to me.

Let me put it this way:

- if I'm out and about and will have ONLY one lens available, I want either a 40 or a 35mm most of the time.

- I almost never want just a 28mm, I'd rather have a 50mm alone than a 28mm.

- If I normally have a 35mm on the camera, I'll tend to reach in my bag for a 21 or 24mm if I'm going wider, or a 50 or 90 mm if I'm going tighter.

- If I have a 50 on the camera and I want something very wide right now, for a specfic purpose, that's when I reach for a 28. If I just want something a little wider, I grab the 35mm.​

I hope that helps. 🙂

G

 

[back alley]

25/35 is a pretty good combo as well...i did that for a while.