nanthor
Well-known
Mfogiel, I don't think I'd write off that great lens due to those rooftops. The highlights looked fine and the general background was wonderful. You have to be very picky to criticize the finest 28mm made due to the bokeh of those rooftops. It's a very nice shot. Bob.
Avotius
Some guy
Once again, no love for the Zeiss 28mm, but thats ok, I will throw my word in for it because I thinks its a really great lens that has a different feel to the images then the other guys
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=62160
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=62160
Krosya
Konicaze
The current Elmarit 28/2.8 ASPH: sharp wide open, but with ugly bokeh - look at the rim of the rooftops:
Hmmm, I dont know why you dont like it - looks good to me. It's funny how after new CV 28/2 was introduced 28mm lenses got so talked about. I dont use 28mm all that much, but I do like M-Hexanon 28/2.8 - I think it's as good as they get, really. Maybe I'll get it out and use some more
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
Whoa, Colin, I don't see you shooting in color too often, very nice! To be honest, if I had my way, I would get the Zeiss, but it's really expensive, and I just now bought an R-D1 and don't feel so flush. Still, maybe I'll do it. When I first got deeply into RFs about eight months ago, literally the first thing I shot with was a Contax G1 with 28mm Biogon, and while I eventually gave up the G1 (I didn't enjoy using the AF and ended up with an R4A), I still miss the hell out of that glass. My favorite lens I have used so far. So perhaps it's worth the investment.
Someone put one on the classifieds for some insane low price yesterday and it was gone in seconds.
Someone put one on the classifieds for some insane low price yesterday and it was gone in seconds.
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
Hmm there is an EX+ on KEH right now. I just might do it.
fuwen
Well-known
I am having only one M mount 28mm lens, the ZM 28/2.8.
http://www.fuwen.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=81&Itemid=143
http://www.fuwen.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=81&Itemid=143
alien8
Established
Just bought one here yesterday after much agonizing over what 28 to get. To me a 28 is an important focal length to have for my camera because it's as wide as I can go with my M6 without an external viewfinder.
Bingley
Veteran
Nobody has mentioned the CV 28/3.5. Do folks think it is not distinctive?
raid
Dad Photographer
I think that people have been mentioning "good" 28mm lenses that they own.
back alley
IMAGES
it's a great lens, small and sharp and nice contrast to boot, well built too.
i don't find any 28 to be all that distinctive though, they are a normal wide angle lens and that's why i prefer a 25.
cam
the need for speed
hey, joe -- do you have any examples from your 25?
Johann Espiritu
Lawyer / Ninja
I kinda like me ZM 28mm Biogon:
Kinda has a nice "graphic" quality to it....
All of the above shot on Tri-X.
Kinda has a nice "graphic" quality to it....
All of the above shot on Tri-X.
cam
the need for speed
ooh, it does indeed! thank you! i'd kind of stopped looking at this focal length since the only one i found quite sweet was the 28 Cron (which i can in no way afford). when i started looking for a more interesting draw (that i could afford), i was sorely disappointed... this one definitely has something different to it.
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
I did indeed buy the Zeiss from KEH. Should be here tomorrow.
cam
the need for speed
and you have the R-D1 -- sweet! i will eagerly await samples on well these mate.
ferider
Veteran
One of the best 28s, Steve. Not "distinctive" though since it shoots what you see
In contrast to 50 and up, from a 28 I don't expect "character", the less, the better ....Who could honestly distinguish 800x600 output from an Elmarit when compared to Hexanon or Biogon ?
Congrats, Robert !
Roland.
Last edited:
Avotius
Some guy
Very much looking forward to your results from this lens and camera combination. I expect good things
Bingley
Veteran
One of the best 28s, Steve. Not "distinctive" though since it shoots what you see
Roland.
Well, distinctive or not, I certainly like using mine, although I have not pushed the envelope yet to see what it's capable of doing.
Somewhat OT, it does look cool on an M2...
Migracer
"MigRacer&amp ;qu ot; AKA Miguel
I went on the Cheap
I went on the Cheap
When I bought The Focal 1:2.8 30 years ago, it was all I could afford. Some how over the years as other lenses came and went There is some thing about this cheap old lens that has staid in constant use use all these years, now attached to a Rebel 2000. There is no question that the canon 28 is superior technically, but what we do has so much more with artistic interpretation that you need to taste all the bowls of porridge and find out witch is the one that is just eight for you.
I went on the Cheap
When I bought The Focal 1:2.8 30 years ago, it was all I could afford. Some how over the years as other lenses came and went There is some thing about this cheap old lens that has staid in constant use use all these years, now attached to a Rebel 2000. There is no question that the canon 28 is superior technically, but what we do has so much more with artistic interpretation that you need to taste all the bowls of porridge and find out witch is the one that is just eight for you.
Attachments
J J Kapsberger
Well-known
The current Elmarit 28/2.8 ASPH: sharp wide open, but with ugly bokeh - look at the rim of the rooftops:
I've always been pleased by the Elmarit 28 ASPH's bokeh. I'm quite sure that the flaw you refer to is a result of post-processing. Perhaps you employed a bit too much sharpening? Or perhaps Flickr's done a number on it (Flickr's quite good at ****ing up an image).
