What happened to the 'premium' 28mm?

N

nickthetasmaniac

Veteran
Local time
6:21 AM
Joined
Jul 7, 2011
Messages
2,572
G'day everyone, my useless pondering for the day - where'd all the premium 28mm's go?

Back in the SLR days pretty much every manufacturer had a bunch of 28's, including at least one that was a 'bit fancy'. Think Zeiss Distagon/SMC Pentax 28/f2, Nikkor 28/f2.8 AIS, OM Zuiko 28/f2, FD 28/f2 S.S.C etc etc.

As far as I can tell, none of the new mirrorless systems have a high-end 28mm among their offerings. There's a few budget options floating around, but the good stuff is all either 24mm or 35mm.

Leica M still boasts some very nice options (Leica, Zeiss and Voigtlander all have great current 28's), but then lens options for a rangefinder system will always be somewhat dictated by standard framelines.

So what gives? Where'd they go?
 
I know you're not a huge fuji fan, but the 18mm f2 Fujinon is way better than people say it is.
Otherwise, I kind of agree with you - 28 is neglected in the new mirrorless crowd.
 
gavinlg said:
I know you're not a huge fuji fan, but the 18mm f2 Fujinon is way better than people say it is.
Otherwise, I kind of agree with you - 28 is neglected in the new mirrorless crowd.
Click to expand...

fireblade said:
The Panasonic 14/2.8 in M43rds is a super lens.
Click to expand...

The Fuji 18/f2 and Panasonic 14/f2.5 (I owned one for years) might be great performers, but Fuji and Panasonic aren't marketing and selling them as premium lenses. The Pana-Leica 15/f1.7 gets close, but it isn't quite a 28mm equivalent.

Fwiw I don't have any issue with Fuji, they make some pretty cool gear :)
 
Nikon are coming out with a compact 28mm and 40mm for their Z series.

Come to think of it, Nikon are the only company to have come out with an AF 28mm 1.4 in recent years.

I guess it's just an odd focal length for most people since it's not noticeably wide like a 24, but actually a little too wide for general photography like a 35.

28 is my favourite though, it's such a dynamic focal length/FoV to work with but it doesn't really draw attention to itself. I can see why Winogrand liked it so much.
 
Sigma 28mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Lens for Leica L or Sony E

Leica Elmarit-TL 18 mm f/2.8 ASPH. Lens
 
I love the 28mm + 21mm combo for landscapes and agree that the 18mm Fuji is actually very nice. I know it's not critically sharp but it has a nice 'look' and anyway I don't agree with the current obsession with sharpness/pixel count (who ruled that sharpness is mandatory for landscapes anyway?).
 
Totally agree with you, though 28mm was a wasteland at the tail end of the SLR days as well. Canon did have the 28/1.8, and while it was an okay lens, it wasn’t fantastic. I’m sure Nikon had an equivalent.

It’s one of the reasons I’ve stuck with Leica. I do have a 25mm for my Sony, and while it is close enough for the most part, I do find it just a bit wider than I want some times. At least there the minimum focus distance is much shorter than on RF, so you can move in a little bit more for tighter framing.
 
Nikon had a 28/1.4D as I recall. It was very expensive. You still see them used...still very expensive.

I don't have much use for the 28mm focal length. Oh, I have owned a few and I still own the Fuji 18mm and a Ricoh GRII with its very nice 18mm lens. But the focal length just doesn't do much for me. Back in the dark ages someone gave me a 28/3.5 Nikkor lens but I don't think I ever used it. It sat unused for years until someone stole it and other, more used and valuable gear.

The 24mm has always been my favorite wide angle lens. It fits perfectly with my wide view of the world. Twenty-eight has been for me the stepchild lens, unloved and only occasionally given any consideration.
 
Canon EF system is still very common, if not dominant and I can't recall Canon making 28L lenses.
Those are the only special grade lenses I'm aware of.
 
I still have my lovely Nikkor 28mm f/2 AI as well as an Elmarit-R 28mm f/2.8 and a Color Skopar 28mm f/3.5. They're all as good as it gets, for me, and I use/used them on Nikon F, Leica R6.2, Leicaflex SL, Sony A7, Leica M9/M-P240/M-D262, Leica SL, and now Leica CL bodies. I should try them on my Hasselblad 907x now too ... maybe later today.

I don't need to buy a new, premium-priced 28mm lens... Of course, if that were my priority desire, I'd just buy a Leica Q2. :)

G
 
Tim Gray said:
28mm was a wasteland at the tail end of the SLR days as well. Canon did have the 28/1.8, and while it was an okay lens, it wasn’t fantastic. I’m sure Nikon had an equivalent.
Click to expand...
Have to disagree - there were loads of manual 28mm in the 70s-80s, the heyday of the SLR. Every major camera brand had at least one, and lots of add-brand ones too: Tamron, Sigma, Tokina... Many were, and are, excellent.

Ultrawide lenses were expensive rarities then, and 24mm/28mm was considered "wide". Today, lenses wider than 24mm are cheap and used widely: I wonder if 28mm became unloved because it became an unused focal length, neither wide (below 20mm) nor normal-ish (above 35mm)?
 
RichC said:
Have to disagree - there were loads of manual 28mm in the 70s-80s, the heyday of the SLR. Every major camera brand had at least one, and lots of add-brand ones too: Tamron, Sigma, Tokina... Many were, and are, excellent.

Ultrawide lenses were expensive rarities then, and 24mm/28mm was considered "wide". Today, lenses wider than 24mm are cheap and used widely: I wonder if 28mm became unloved because it became an unused focal length, neither wide (below 20mm) nor normal-ish (above 35mm)?
Click to expand...

I have 19 and 20 F mount lenses from 70-80. Both are Vivitar and both are fine lenses. I doubt they were expensive back then. So is F mount 24 2.4 F mount Tokina I also have.
 
Ko.Fe. said:
I have 19 and 20 F mount lenses from 70-80. Both are Vivitar and both are fine lenses. I doubt they were expensive back then. So is F mount 24 2.4 F mount Tokina I also have.
Click to expand...
Yes, 20mm lenses were fairly common, but by "ultrawide" I meant wider such as 16mm and below, which would have been fisheyes in the 70s-80s (or very expensive if not distorting) but are now very commonplace and cheap.
 
I'd wager that the proliferation of standard zoom lenses starting at 28mm led to many consumers wanting a prime that offered something wider than what came with their camera. We would all mostly agree that a prime and a zoom can have a place in someones kit regardless of overlapping focal lengths, but the mass market might not see the logic in it.

In the heydey of aps-c dslr's I remember being frustrated in the lack of both 28 and 24mm equivalent primes. Fuji and Oly have since gotten that squared away, but the big 3 all went full frame. What I would have given for a small 16mm(or 17 or 18) prime for my Pentax DSLRs a decade ago.
 
RichC said:
Have to disagree - there were loads of manual 28mm in the 70s-80s, the heyday of the SLR. Every major camera brand had at least one, and lots of add-brand ones too: Tamron, Sigma, Tokina... Many were, and are, excellent.
Click to expand...

That’s why I said the end of the SLR days. Late 90’s to 2000’s.
 
I don't keep up on new equipment, but 28mm is a favorite of mine. It was the first non-normal lens I bought; 28mm f3.5 Super Takumar. When I finally came into the SLR bayonet world, 28 mm was the first and only lens I used for years: 28mm Pentax f2.8 'A.' I still have both and used them both yesterday. I love it: f8.0 set distance 10 feet and shoot away.
 
During the AF SLR era, the only "premium" 28mm had been the Nikon 28/1.4D for like 25 years. Canon had been concentrating on high-end 24mm (with the FD24/1.4 L) since 1979, and with their ascension to the throne (plus the standard zoom getting wider), everyone else chose to prioritize on 24mm as well.

I believe this is still the case even today. Fuji has a 18/2 but for the 24mm focal length, the 16/1.4 which is obviously a tier higher. Sony has a bunch of 24 and 25mm lenses, just one 28/2. It's safe to say Canon and Nikon will both make bright 24 first instead of a 28 one. Nikon has a 28mm pancake on their Z lens road map - which I believe will be the only 28mm we'd got for the system for quite a while.
 
I think it's as simple as this. If you have a 35mm, you're likely to want something wider. If you have a 24mm, you'll likely want something narrower but still wider than 50mm. A 28mm covers pretty much all of the wide angle bases. So the manufacturers market the 24mms and 35mms so they can sell you two lenses instead of one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom