thomasw_
Well-known
akiva, in the classifieds there is a zm 28 with hood, caps for 735: go make a deal on it, you won't regret it. i am glad roland, ray and joe convinced me to look at the biogons.
Should I get a 35 or a 28 lens?
- Thread starter kshapero
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 24
- Views 2K
FrankS
Registered User
Akiva, you next need to consider this choice:
best quality, high price, large size, higher speed f2.8 = Zeiss
or
SLIGHTLY lower quality, MUCH lower price, small size, slower speed f3.5 = CV
best quality, high price, large size, higher speed f2.8 = Zeiss
or
SLIGHTLY lower quality, MUCH lower price, small size, slower speed f3.5 = CV
ferider
Veteran
There are many good lenses in that range:
- CV Ultron + Color Skopar
- Summicron + Elmarit (multiple versions)
- ZM Biogon
- M-Rokkor (35mm framelines)
- M-Hexanon
- some classics like the Canon 28/2.8 (Winogrand) - 3.5, and the Nikkor 3.5
- some exotic lenses like the Kobalux and Orion
None of the above lenses is bad.
Like Thomas said, if money and speed would be no issue, I would probably pick the Biogon myself. But I ended up with both Ultron and Color Skopar
instead and don't regret it.
Roland.
- CV Ultron + Color Skopar
- Summicron + Elmarit (multiple versions)
- ZM Biogon
- M-Rokkor (35mm framelines)
- M-Hexanon
- some classics like the Canon 28/2.8 (Winogrand) - 3.5, and the Nikkor 3.5
- some exotic lenses like the Kobalux and Orion
None of the above lenses is bad.
Like Thomas said, if money and speed would be no issue, I would probably pick the Biogon myself. But I ended up with both Ultron and Color Skopar
instead and don't regret it.
Roland.
narsuitus
Well-known
I prefer the 35mm for street shooting. If money were no object, I would get the 35mm f/1.4 Leica.
However, as others have said, the 35mm and the 50mm are too close together in focal length. Therefore, if I planned on keeping the 50mm, I would get the 28mm.
However, as others have said, the 35mm and the 50mm are too close together in focal length. Therefore, if I planned on keeping the 50mm, I would get the 28mm.
thomasw_
Well-known
FrankS said:
frank didn't mention there is the option of spending much, MUCH more on a 28, too. the leica 28/2.8 is similar to the ZM is most respects, except that the leica has a better wide open performance over the biogons and the biogons exhibit less distortion according to puts. and in rendering, the zm design favours a type of tonal resolution that brings rich colours and a smooth gradation over the whole image, "not only from corner to corner, but also into the image from foreground to background." and the leica is slightly more compact as well.
personally i prefer the signature of the ZM 28 over the L 28...as well as it being easier on the wallet. same for the 35 biogon over the L.
if very low light is a consideration for your 28 FL shooting, then i'd get the cv 28/1.9...no matter what erwin puts says about it.