have a 50 cron, now do I want a 28 or 35?

[JohnTz]

Hi all,

Someone said that when I get my first M, I would immediately catch Equipment Aquisition Syndrom!. Well I got it bad. So the questions is? What should my second lens be. I want something wider than my 50mm cron and was wondering what is more "usuable" the 28 or 35? I would love to hear opinions from those that have both and why you use one or the other.

thanks,
John

 

[Crasis]

Hi all,

Someone said that when I get my first M, I would immediately catch Equipment Aquisition Syndrom!. Well I got it bad. So the questions is? What should my second lens be. I want something wider than my 50mm cron and was wondering what is more "usuable" the 28 or 35? I would love to hear opinions from those that have both and why you use one or the other.

thanks,
John

Can't go wring with a 35. I'd say that if you wanted 28, just go nuts and get a 15 😉
Seriously though, a 35 replaces both the 50 and the 28 for me. One step forward or one step back and it's both.

Just my 2 cents on it.

 

[ghost]

a recent poll showed that an equal percent of people went for the 50/28 combo as the 50/35 combo.

 

[dcsang]

35 Summilux.. ya.. but it's gotta be ASPH.

If you want wide.. then 28 isn't going to satisfy imho. 21mm / 15mm / 12mm Voigtlanders do that in a big way 😀

Dave

 

[ghost]

another way of putting it is, "28mm is wide without the wide-look". i personally can't stand super-wides. ewwww.

 

[Flyfisher Tom]

John,

28 and 35, contrary to some opinion, is really not interchangeable in my book. So the short answer is, you really need to get both 🙂

 

[JohnTz]

Tom, I was worried that someone would say buy both...so now the question becomes which one to buy first?

 

[rover]

John,

28 and 35, contrary to some opinion, is really not interchangeable in my book. So the short answer is, you really need to get both 🙂

Yup, I agree.

Save your wallet and hunt down 35 and 28mm Ultrons to satisfy all of your cravings.

 

[ghost]

if you have a .72 viewfinder, buy the 35mm first. you'd be happier using a 28mm (and probably the 35, for that matter) with a .58, but that's another grand.

 

[telenous]

I find the 35 similar in look to the 50 and I am not surprised that both are being used as normals. The 28 is the first true wide angle in my book. But I would have gone for a 35 first; the choice is greater and the prices not as steep (unless you opt for the Summilux).

 

[Crasis]

Whenever I go out, I go light. I don't see why I should have to carry a camera bag with me if I'm supposed to be using a rangefinder for street shooting, for example. I'm just curious as to how you guys are able to use a 28, 35 and a 50 without extra bodies for each. To me, switching from a 35 to a 28 while out and about is definitely too much of a pain to bother doing. 50 to 28, sure.. but 35 to 28? Eh.

Is it just that you decide to use one lens one day and another the next? If so, why? Just to have another lens to use? I think surprisingly that I may be more old fashioned than you GASers 😉

I haven't shot enough with my 35 to have mastered all the nuances of that field of view. What ever happened to sticking with one lens till every shot you saw was in that focal length?

Hmm.. capitalism happened. I have too much of an urge to buy new lenses like the rest of you 🙁

 

[back alley]

when shooting with one lens, i prefer the 35.
if shooting with 2 lenses, i like the 28/50.

but lately i am using the 21 and 25 most of the time.

 

[Nachkebia]

It is very strange that after using 50mm on my ZI I have hard time using anything else but 35mm to compliment 50mm, I find 25mm and 21mm very wide and unnatural, I have 28mm on my slr and I pritty much love it 🙂

 

[Ronald M]

Plan the whole outfit first. Then buy what you can one order.

50 35 24 is nice. so is 50/28 and 50/35. 50/35/28/21 is too much 50/35/28 I do not like.

Shoot with the fifty and use the built in frame line to see what would be most valuable in the future. Go slow

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

What happened to the 40 and the CL?

 

[Andrew3511]

FWIW. I used to have a 28mm as my wide-angle with my Olympus gear, along with a 21mm. Since the move to Leica last year I am now entirely happy with the 50/35 combination. There's not as much difference between 35 and 28 as between 50 & 35, the 35 is about as wide as you can go without starting to worry about converging verticals and distortion at the edges of the frame starting to look unnatural. Leica 35's are tiny and light and you certainly can take them out as your only lens - not really so with the 28.

I got back from a week in Venice a couple of weeks ago. Knowing that I didnt have a wider Leica lens than 35mm and thinking I would be in a lot of little narrow places I took the OM4Ti and the 28mm and 21mm lenses. Did I use them?

And even if I had had the Leica ones I would have probably only done so for maybe 10 max out of 250+ frames.

But that's me.

 

[sgy1962]

As always, you get good advice, but it varies, because people are different.

If I were you, then I would go for the 35mm focal length. This is because in rangefinder photography both the 50mm and the 35mm lens is considered a standard. Most folks have to use both lenses for awhile before they can determine whether they are a 50mm person or a 35mm person or, like me, use the two equally for the majority of their shots. You yourselfe need to make this journey, because it may turn out that you prefer the versatility and view of the 35mm lens to the exclusion of the 50mm lens. In other words, the 35mm lens becomes your standard and you get rid of the 50mm lens. A lot of folks do that. But the only way to know is to use the two side by side for awhile.

I frankly like having both the 35mm and the 50mm focal lengths. Probably my best shots come with the 50mm lens, but the 35mm lens is so versatile. If I'm limited to one camera and one lens -- which is often the case when I'm traveling where weight is an issue -- then it is always the 35mm lens. And given it's extra depth of field, the 35mm lens is probably faster focusing.

If you're only interested in creating a versatile outfit, then the 28mm lens is an option for that wideangle view.

What are your typical subjects? If it's people, then the 35mm lens would probably be a better choice. But if its architecture or landscape, then maybe the the 28mm lens is the way to go.

And finally do you wear glasses. If you wear glasses and have the standard viewfinder, then the 28mm frame lines will be very difficult to use.

 

[akptc]

This is a no-brainer: sell the M and get a G2 with the 35-70 Vario-Sonnar 😉

 

[Ben Z]

For me a 28mm is what carry if I want to go light and dispense with both a 21 and a 35. That will change if and when I get an M8, as the 28 will become my "new 35". I'll then be using the Voitlander 15 as the "new 21".

 

[Flyfisher Tom]

John,

Tough question.

I think it depends on your personal shooting style, which to get first. I find the 35 to be a great all purpose lens, and can be used as a normal lens along with your 50. It is easier to use as a environmental portrait lens while not betraying the telltale signs of wide angle focal length.

On the other hand, the 28 is a great focal length to use hyperfocus style. Lots of area in focus at this focal length, allows you to basically use it as a P&S if you use 400 or 800 speed film. The nice thing about the 28 is also it is, in my opinion, the last wide angle focal length you can use consistently without exaggerating the wide angle effects too much (skewed, bending verticals etc).

The other consideration is, of course, what did you use more in your SLR days? 28 or 35?