squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
This is why I like having a wider prime for my actual camera—28mm is now literally the most common (equivalent) focal length in the world. And most things I tend to shoot with a 28 on a camera—large-DOF shots in good light—look pretty much as good from an iPhone as they do from a proper camera.
Archiver
Veteran
Six years after my comment in this thread, and it surfaces again. I've come to use 28mm as a general purpose focal length, due to the Ricoh GRD III, GR and GXR 28, as well as Sigma DP1, and 28mm on a rangefinder.
But I've spend a lot of time with 24-21mm, thanks to cameras like the Panasonic LX7 and LX10. 28 is fine for day to day, but I prefer 24, 25 and 21 especially for travel.
For me, I like to include a lot of context in my travel images as they are visual reminders of everything that occurred, and 21mm is great for that. 28 can be quite intimate if you're relatively close to the action.
When it was working properly, I loved using the Zeiss 25 Biogon on the M9 as a general lens. More context-grabbing than 28 but not as hard to manage as 21.
But I've spend a lot of time with 24-21mm, thanks to cameras like the Panasonic LX7 and LX10. 28 is fine for day to day, but I prefer 24, 25 and 21 especially for travel.
For me, I like to include a lot of context in my travel images as they are visual reminders of everything that occurred, and 21mm is great for that. 28 can be quite intimate if you're relatively close to the action.
When it was working properly, I loved using the Zeiss 25 Biogon on the M9 as a general lens. More context-grabbing than 28 but not as hard to manage as 21.
thafred
silver addict
I have always loved and shot the 28mm FL. I sold all of my 28mm lenses years ago and only since buying a M9P last winter I thought I treat myself and bought into the FL again with a Biogon 28mm f2.8.
Problem is, as excellent as the lens is (one of the best lenses I ever owned, technicaly), I cannot enjoy the pictures. Something feels "off" with the 28mm Fl on the M9 and I had to think hard and long about what it is that is bugging me.
Turns out, I still love the FL on Film but on digital every picture LOOKS LIKE AN iPHONE PHOTO!
TLDR: The 28mm FL is taken over by Instagram snap shots, every cell phone uses 28mm FL and is sharp from 10cm to infinity so that is why this Focal length looses its importance. For me at least
OTOH I ordered the 28mm 7Artisans to play with DOF, maybe that is what is missing from the Biogon.
Problem is, as excellent as the lens is (one of the best lenses I ever owned, technicaly), I cannot enjoy the pictures. Something feels "off" with the 28mm Fl on the M9 and I had to think hard and long about what it is that is bugging me.
Turns out, I still love the FL on Film but on digital every picture LOOKS LIKE AN iPHONE PHOTO!
TLDR: The 28mm FL is taken over by Instagram snap shots, every cell phone uses 28mm FL and is sharp from 10cm to infinity so that is why this Focal length looses its importance. For me at least
OTOH I ordered the 28mm 7Artisans to play with DOF, maybe that is what is missing from the Biogon.
Archiver
Veteran
If your iPhone photos have the same depth of field and quality as a Zeiss 28mm on a M9P, I'm gonna switch to iPhone. Because focal length aside, there is no way that 28mm f2.8 on full frame looks anything like a smartphone pic. Some of my favourite digital images have been taken with the 28mm Biogon or 28mm Elmarit, and in no way do they remind me of smartphone images.
It's not even about the kind of images you take, because the M9P sensor gives a very rich, lush, dense image that a smartphone can't touch. Okay, maybe they look like iPhone images to you, but not to me.
Richard G
Veteran
Richard G
Veteran
Inspired by Lukitas above: with 28 you can get all of a person in. Feet are underestimated:
L2009601.jpg by Richard, on Flickr
L2009601.jpg by Richard, on Flickr